Political Roundup

In the US mid-term elections tomorrow, it seems the Republicans are likely to win the Senate:

The liberal Huffington Post is entering the final weekend of the 2014 campaign predicting that Republicans will pick up enough seats to claim control of the Senate. Even discounting some races that have lately trended towards the GOP, HuffPo says that the odds of Republicans taking the majority are 69%. According to the HuffPo pollster, Democrats would have to pull the equivalent of an inside straight to keep Sen. Harry Reid as Majority Leader.

The problem seems to be that Democrat voters are so disappointed with Obama that they can’t be bothered to vote, while Republican voters are so angry that they’re determined to vote.

In the past I’ve always tended to hope for a Democrat victory. But those days are over now. For as far as I can see, Democrat politicians are all antismokers – Hillary Clinton being the first that comes to mind, and Michelle Obama the second. So I’m hoping that the Republicans win tomorrow, and win again in the next presidential election.

Except there seems to be a dearth of inspiring candidates. There doesn’t seem to be anyone quite like Nigel Farage in the USA, even though many of the problems there are the same as in the UK. But maybe no US politician would dare to be seen drinking a beer and smoking a cigarette (although there was that black guy at the last presidential election).

Despite being called a racist and a xenophobe, I think that Nigel Farage is actually just a conservative, and UKIP’s policies are what Cameron’s Conservatives should have, but don’t. And this is why so many Conservative MPs and councillors are defecting to UKIP. And also why UKIP looks set to win the upcoming Rochester and Strood by-election on Nov 20:

UKIP’s lead in the forthcoming Rochester by-election has jumped eight points in a monthly repeat poll and now stand at 48 percent, indicating Tory defector Mark Reckless is set to retain the seat in three weeks time.

Nigel Farage’s Eurosceptic party is now a remarkable 15-points ahead of the Conservatives who formerly held the seat, who are now on 33 percent, down from the 49 they took in 2010 at the general election. Although this is bad news for the Conservatives, who despite having promised to “throw the kitchen sink” at the election to secure victory but who are believed to have privately admitted defeat, it is worse news for the other parties.

Labour’s support has almost halved in the constituency since the general election and they may be humiliated if the by-election reflects this polls figure of 16 percent. Even worse news for coalition partners the Liberal Democrats who polled just one percent, making it almost certain they will lose their deposit, another £500 thrown away for a party already battling with financial troubles.

What will be of interest to UKIP strategists is the diverse background of their newfound voters, many of whom would never have voted for former Tory Reckless while he wore a blue rosette. The poll shows that while nearly half of those who voted Conservative in 2010 will now vote UKIP, a remarkable third of former Labour voters have also decided to support the ‘people’s army’.

48 percent is pretty huge. And since it was 43 percent just a couple of weeks back, it seems likely that it may be up past 50 percent by the time of the vote. And this time it’s not a popular MP being re-elected after changing parties (Douglas Carswell), but  UKIP being preferred. We’re seeing a rejection of the entire ‘progressive’ LibLabCon political class.

Voting UKIP is no longer a “wasted vote”. There must be a real possibility of a whole bunch of parliamentary consituencies returning UKIP MPs next May.

H/T Harley for today’s video of Nigel Farage. It’s just occurred to me after watching it that the EU “free movement of peoples” is really just inviting people to walk in and take over. Hitler would have loved it, and complained that the French and British had no right to stop “the free movement of the Wehrmacht”. After all, what’s the difference between free movement of peoples and free movement of armies?

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Political Roundup

  1. carol2000 says:

    Scotts Miracle-Gro discriminates against smokers – old news: Your smokes or your job. In less than a year, Scotts Miracle-Gro plans to start firing employees who light up — even at home. By Monique Curet and Ken Stammen. The Columbus Dispatch, December 09, 2005. I have been boycotting their products because of this, and I am so glad I did!

    “According to court documents, Scotts Miracle-Gro sold more than 73 million packages of these poisoned bird foods nationwide to an unsuspecting public for a period of more than two years. Only 2 million of those 73 million units could be recalled.

    “But it would appear that not all sellers were aware of this product recall. I found one story about a San Diego county couple who lost nearly all of their domestic aviary birds at the end of January 2010 after feeding Scotts Miracle-Gro Morning Song Wild Bird Seed that they had recently purchased from a local Wal-Mart [story]. Out of a flock numbering nearly 100 birds, only eight survived. I mention this to illustrate how poisonous this seed is to birds, how many birds can die after eating just one meal of this poisoned seed, and to show that the damages caused by these products may still be occurring.
    http://www.theguardian.com/science/grrlscientist/2012/mar/21/2

    • Rose says:

      I haven’t bought Scott’s products since then either, Carol.

      From memory, the Garden is unavailable so I can’t post the original stories.

      Former Miracle-Gro Employee Challenges Policy
      March 04, 2007

      “Scott Rodrigues was an employee of Scotts Miracle-Gro until his drug test came back positive for nicotine. He was fired in accordance with the company’s newly enacted anti-tobacco policies. Rodrigues is now suing the company; his lawyer, Harvey Schwartz, argues that Scotts violated his client’s privacy.

      “HANSEN: What would a loss mean?

      Mr. SCHWARTZ: A loss is frightening because a loss says your employer can control not only your work life but your private life. It’s bad enough to worry about the government controlling our private lives. If we have to worry about our employers controlling our private lives, that’s a frightening thought.”
      http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7706155

      Smoker who lost job loses in court
      2009

      “Judge sides with lawn care firm Workers cannot smoke on or off job”

      “Scotts’s smoking ban was announced in 2005 by chief executive Jim Hagedorn, a former two-pack-a-day smoker, and went into effect Oct. 1, 2006, giving the company’s employees nearly a year to prepare. Scotts has paid for employees and their families to take part in smoking cessation programs.”
      http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/08/08/smoker_who_lost_job_loses_in_court/

      But then there was that odd story from 2008 about a rogue employee that never sounded quite right..

      “Also in the release: “Later that same year, in an unrelated matter, the company recalled several additional lawn and garden products after it was discovered by the EPA that a former associate had created fraudulent documentation that allowed them – which were safe to use as directed and did not harm consumers or the environment – to be sold without proper approval from the agency.

      The former associate has pleaded guilty to federal crimes related to these activities and awaits sentencing. She has repeatedly acknowledged to law enforcement authorities that she acted alone.”
      http: //www.philly.com/philly/blogs/greenliving/Scotts-Miracle-Gro-gets-record-penalties-in-pesticide-case.html

  2. harleyrider1978 says:

    How the fall of France could cement the rise of Ukip – Telegraph

    The faltering French economy, which continues to stall under President Francois Hollande, has given a boost to anti-EU sentiment across Europe, writes Liam…

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11203027/How-the-fall-of-France-could-cement-the-rise-of-Ukip.html

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      I wouldn’t hold French shares,” said Nigel Farage with a wink, belying his previous life as a stockbroker. “The country is in real trouble,” the Ukip leader told me at an investment conference in London last week. “As someone who loves France, it gives me no pleasure to say that.”

      While Mr Farage casually dishes out advice to sell French stocks, he knows only too well that, for all his admiration of Gallic gastronomy and tabacs, the singular weakness of the French economy, and related political fall-out, is playing into his hands.

      France has stalled badly. The eurozone’s second-largest economy has grown by just 0.3 per cent a year on average since 2008 and will register just a 0.4 per cent expansion this year, according to new International Monetary Fund forecasts. Britain, in contrast, is set to reach a buoyant 3.2 per cent growth rate in 2014.

      Since President François Hollande entered the Elysée in 2012, France hasn’t managed two successive quarters of economic growth. The former Socialist Party leader’s programme of higher regulation, spending and tax is being widely blamed for this dismal French performance. That’s helping to shift voting intentions rightward in both France and Britain, which can only help Ukip.

      Yet something else is happening. For decades, France has been a driving force behind post-war European integration. The country’s political class – and much of the electorate – has typically viewed Le Projet Européen as a thoroughly good thing. More recently, though, French public opinion has begun to turn, as household incomes have been squeezed and the European Union has expanded to the east.

      In May, Marine Le Pen’s Front National – which advocates French withdrawal from both the EU and the single currency – won the European elections, attracting 25 per cent of all votes. Across the political spectrum, in fact, French eurosceptics are finding their voice, on the far right and also the left.

      Here in the UK, what’s happening in France begs an important question for Ed Miliband, as Mr Farage well knows. If even French voters are actively questioning their country’s place in Europe, can the Labour leader ultimately refuse a much more Europhobe British electorate a referendum on EU membership?

      The French political establishment, convinced the status quo is safe, remains outwardly sanguine. “Le Pen is stirring-up discontent on Europe, setting working people against the elite,” says Pascal Boniface, the veteran Director of the Institute of International and Strategic Relations in Paris. “But she’s part of the elite herself and nothing will change. We now have a French debate on Europe but that’s a long way from a decision. There’s very little chance France will quit the EU.”

      Younger analysts aren’t so sure. “There’s a new and rather scary antagonism in French politics,” says Bastien Drut, a Paris-based fund-manager in his early thirties. “The far right and far left are railing against European institutions, gaining momentum as the economic crisis continues, taking more and more support from the mainstream. No-one knows where it will end”.

      Across the higher echelons of politics, though, it’s business as usual as far as Europe is concerned, with France continuing to pull strings in Brussels with its usual combination elan and cunning. Last week, the European Commission decided not to force Paris to revise its 2015 budget, despite yet another flagrant breach of the eurozone’s deficit rules.

      Back in September, Hollande’s government admitted it would fail to cut its fiscal deficit, as promised, to 3.8 per cent of GDP this year, before hitting the eurozone’s 3 per cent ceiling in 2015. The deficit would instead rise to 4.4 per cent, Michel Sapin, the finance minister, announced, before dropping back to 4.3 per cent next year. France now won’t reach the 3 per cent deficit target until 2017 at the earliest.

      This announcement, coming on top of a previous two-year grace period granted to Paris, enraged smaller single currency members forced by Brussels to impose severe budget cuts in the name of reducing systemic risks to monetary union. Germany, the eurozone’s paymaster-general, was also exasperated by the display of French intransigence.

      Last week’s deal, though, relies not on France making budget cuts beyond the 20 billion euros already planned in 2015, or raising taxes. Paris is instead relying on reimbursed EU contributions, lower future interest payments and vague promises to clamp down on tax evasion to conjure up a few extra billion in projected revenue, so creating a marginally improved deficit forecast.

      While a typical eurozone fudge, it was telling that in the run up to last week’s French reprieve, Hollande’s government went out of its way to fire-off some choice anti-EU rhetoric. “It’s we who decide on the budget,” Prime Minister Manuel Valls boomed on prime-time television. “Nothing can lead to France reviewing its budget. We’re a big country and should be respected”.

      This confrontational negotiation, even if staged, was far from the usually elegant Paris-Berlin stitch-up, reflecting the pressure France’s centrist politicians now feel to address the Eurosceptic challenge confronting them from both left and right.

      Such pressure is definitely growing, building on a suspicion of Europe that’s always been there, if suppressed by a lack of robust public debate.

      French voters, for instance, rejected the proposed EU constitution in a 2005 referendum, in part due to fears that East European workers posed a threat to French jobs. While the constitution was abandoned, it was replaced by the Lisbon Treaty, signed into EU law in 2009, which critics say imposes the same federalist agenda under a different name.

      Tapping into discontent over Europe, and broader economic insecurities, Le Pen has lately made serious inroads into the French working-class electorate and lower-middle classes too, with the Front National leading the mainstream centre-left and centre-right parties in opinion polls.

      Hollande’s approval rating, meanwhile, languishes in the low teens. Le Pen would currently beat the incumbent in a straight run-off for the Presidency – a result that would send political shockwaves across Europe.

      Well-connected observers admit that the rising tide of euroscepticism means France needs to modify its relationship with Europe. “For more than half a century, the French have worked to strengthen the EU and now they’re asking whether the effort was worth it,” wrote the economist Jean Pisani-Ferry, in a report entitled “France Ten Years from Now”, commissioned by President Hollande and published earlier this year. “Over the next decade, the EU must revise its founding treaty, or draft a new treaty for the Eurozone,” Mr Pisani continued.

      Such an outburst from a high-profile public intellectual – Mr Pisani has worked as a senior advisor to the European Commission, as well as successive French governments – would have been unthinkable until very recently. But now, even the most assured commentators admit a French EU referendum would amount to a genuine contest.

      “Among those voting, lots of people are now choosing anti-European parties,” says Mr Boniface. “But if there was a referendum tomorrow, only a third would vote to leave. People are fed up with Europe, but they still want to stay”.

      The reason, says Mr Boniface, is that while Brussels “most certainly isn’t loved”, there’s a widespread feeling in France that the EU’s plethora of social regulations shields workers from the harsher side global competition and more liberalized Anglo-Saxon labour laws.

      “In the end, the French see Europe as protection against such excesses,” Mr Boniface says. “For us, fear of globalisation will always trump fear of Europe”.

      Pascal Lamy agrees. The Former World Trade Organization Director General, who remains highly influential in Paris, and whose new book When France Wakes calls for fundamental changes to the French economic model, nevertheless believes his country will stay in the EU. “There is almost no chance of France voting to leave,” Lamy says. “The only way that would change is if there is another very serious crisis of monetary union – but I don’t think that will happen”.

      France largely escaped the 2012 eurozone crisis. While the markets targeted the likes of Greece, Portugal and Italy, sending their sovereign debt yields into orbit and causing massive financial distress, French bonds remained relatively stable. The pledge by European Central Bank boss Mario Draghi to do “whatever it takes”, an implicit promise to buy the bonds of bankrupt eurozone members using ECB money, came just in time for France.

      That’s one reason the French political elite continues to deny the need for meaningful budgetary restraint.

      Despite that, the benefits of single currency membership – which many in France see as the essence of the European Project and, in turn, vital to French political identity – are now themselves being questioned, not least because France has been locked into a currency that many industrialists see as over-valued.

      “Since the introduction of the euro [in 1999], French competitiveness has deteriorated steadily, and the external balance has shifted from positive to negative,” says Mr Pisani. “The current architecture of the euro zone lacks coherence and may become politically unsustainable”.

      Some will see these words as a clarion call for the creation of a eurozone banking union, and an even more energetic pursuit of “ever closer union”.

      Others will view them as an admission, from the heart of the French establishment, that European integration may have limits. The point is that the question is now on the table.

      France will continue to spar with Germany, with Paris pushing for weaker fiscal controls and ever more government spending, just as Berlin urges budgetary caution. The massively bloated French state, though, already a colossal 56 per cent of GDP compared to 45 per cent in the UK, shows little sign of contracting.

      Mindful of renewed doubts over the stability of monetary union, French and German ministers last week agreed to put forward “joint proposals on structural reforms” in early December – yet another face-saving move designed to smooth over the fundamental contradictions at the heart of monetary union. Meanwhile, the eurozone stands on the brink of its third recession in just six years.

      As we Brits closely watch how the French economy fares over the coming months, so our French cousins will keep watching us – not least in terms of how the UK debate on Europe develops, as we approach the referendum on EU membership promised by Prime Minister David Cameron, as long as the Conservatives are in government, in 2017.

      “I doubt many French politicians would cry if Britain does leave the EU,” says Boniface. “We’d quite like you to stay, but we’re not afraid to see you go”.

      Lamy views such a response as “stupid”, arguing that any UK exit from the EU would be bad news. “If we’re serious about creating a civilized Europe, then we need the UK,” he says. “If Britain left, it would be a serious drawback”.

      The French are “pretty much resigned to Britain leaving Europe one day”, says the social commentator Mathieu Le Fevre. “It is well understood that the UK is a different kind of a place that never wanted to be part of European project anyway,” he says. “The difference is that your eurosceptics, like UKIP, are just weird people. Ours, meanwhile, are fascists”.

      Being called “weird” doesn’t bother Nigel Farage, of course. “It really does make me sad that France is suffering,” the Ukip leader told me, sporting an impish grin. “What’s happened there reminds me of Britain during the Winter of Discontent, back in the late 1970s”.

      No wonder Farage is smiling. For growing French eurosceptism is emboldening anti-EU parties across Europe, including here in the UK – where the rise of Ukip is likely to put increasing pressure on all mainstream parties eventually to accept an EU referendum.

  3. legiron says:

    The only wasted vote is one where you vote for a party that hates you.

    No matter who you are, whether you smoke, drink or like a pizza, all the main three parties hate you.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Leggy even the parties after time begin to even hate themselves for what they’ve done together…………..

      A sort of commonsense comes back and they start to undo the damage.

      They did it over Prohibition and even eventually repealed all the Eugenics laws………..at least in America.

      But like all political agendas they only have a certain life span and then its over for that agenda as politicians curry away from the agenda that poisoned the electorate against them all.

      It comes in time and well after some long hard battles………………Tomorro is likely the beginning of the end of it all.

      So grab a bottle some smoke and sit back and know we all did what we could to hurry the end along………..smiles!

  4. There doesn’t seem to be anyone quite like Nigel Farage in the USA, even though many of the problems there are the same as in the UK.

    He’s a one-off.

    I have just been made aware of another UKIP hate group: Stand Up To UKIP. http://standuptoukip.org/

    They haven’t bothered to update their home page since September, but they have 3,509 ‘likes’ on Facebook. From their website:

    We believe UKIP is a racist party…. UKIP presents the anti-racist movement with a major problem – dragging British politics to the right.

    UKIP is also a party of bigots, sexists, Islamophobes and homophobes.

    So there!

    But who are these people?

    Their Whois details are hiding everything. All of their contact details are stated as being at an internet hosting company called Tigertech in Berkeley, California.

    Their website has no address and no telephone number either that I can see and no mention of who runs it.

    You can bet it’s yet another Establishment front posing as the ‘opposition’ to those nasty bigots who want sensible immigration policies like almost every country on earth outside the EU and USA and of course, the brainwashed, unwashed, watermelon do-gooders believe it, as with ‘Unite Against Fascism’ and the rest.

  5. waltc says:

    Buckshot:
    You’re right that no US pol would be caught alive smoking, not even House majority larder John Boener (R) . Beer they’d do to show they’re “of the people.” But going further, no one here is as outspoken as Farage on anything. The home of the brave is now the home of the tepid and the perpetually apologizing.

    To Carol, who yesterday said my argument about the war on smokers v the one on women was “stupid” and who may have missed my reply— the apt analogy would be that women could go to restaurants and parks etc but only if they went in drag.

    On the topic of alt. TV, I just discovered what looks like a gripping grown up series on Showtime: “The Affair.” . By accident I saw episode 4 on air last nite and immediately caught up on the first 3 on line. Not for The Children (warning, kids, explicit sex, and tho it’s not pornographic we wouldn’t want the kiddies having sex now, would we? ) but if it interests you, google “showtime, the affair” and you can get to the pilot and catch the gimmick that it’s He said,She said on the same events.

    • waltc says:

      Should have read leader not larder.

    • carol2000 says:

      I said the anti-smokers would make you look stupid by pointing out that smokers are not banned from restaurants, they merely have to refrain from smoking. I’ve seen it happen several times, with the original posters apparently not returning to see the fate of their ill-considered post. A better angle would be to point out that virtually all the bans even include areas where smokers could take their food/drinks and employees don’t have to go there at all. This is clearly aimed at committing cultural genocide against us.

      • beobrigitte says:

        the anti-smokers would make you look stupid by pointing out that smokers are not banned from restaurants, they merely have to refrain from smoking.

        This line has been over used by the German anti-smoking brigade – I usually reply that since I am a paying customer (“the customer is King”) I should be provided with an ashtray in case I also wish to smoke in COMFORTABLE surroudings.
        It is clear that my money is not wanted?

  6. Frank Davis says:

    Goodbye Erdogan:

    Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan took time out of a stroll through Istanbul’s Esenler district on Nov. 2 to take umbrage with a man smoking a cigarette in a nearby café before ordering the municipal patrol to fine him.

    “There is a penal sanction [for smoking in closed areas],” Erdoğan said as he visited a pedestrianized street in Esenler after he noticed a man smoking a cigarette on the second floor of a cafe.

    “I know,” Esenler Mayor Tevfik Göksu replied before Erdoğan responded: “You know it, but this is wrong. Where is the [municipal patrol]?”

    Istanbul Metropolitan Mayor Kadir Topbaş tried to defuse the tensions by suggesting that the man “could promise that he won’t smoke again” and the issue could be closed, but Erdoğan rejected this proposal, too.

    “Promise?” the Turkish president asked, insisting that the renegade smoker had to be penalized on the spot.

    “He blatantly behaved rudely. You see, this guy is just sitting there and keeps smoking even after the president tells him not to,” he said.

  7. Frank Davis says:

    Ban fireworks. On the eve of Guy Fawkes night, we learn:

    The metallic particles in the smoke emitted by fireworks pose a health risk, particularly to people who suffer from asthma. This is the conclusion of a study led by researchers from the Institute of Environmental Assessment and Water Research (IDAEA-CSIC).

    “The toxicological research has shown that many of the metallic particles in the smoke from fireworks are bio-reactive and can affect human health,” Teresa Moreno, a researcher from the IDAEA (CSIC) and lead author of a study that has been published this week in the Journal of Hazardous Materials, said.

    The different colours and effects produced in these displays are achieved by adding metals to the gunpowder. When a pyrotechnic display takes place it releases a lot of smoke, liberating minute metallic particles (of a few microns in size, or even less), which are small enough to be inhaled deeply into the lungs.

    “This poses a risk to health, and the effects are probably more acute in people with a background of asthma or cardiovascular problems,” Moreno explains. “The effects in healthy people are still unknown, but common sense tells us it cannot be good to inhale the high levels of metallic particles in this smoke, even if this only happens a few times a year.”

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Funny they’ve been doing it for centuries and the other day on discovery they showed how they were making daytime fireworks by creating colored smoke using you guessed it differing metallic sources in the powder charges………….. Now the point here is how much metal escapes and isn’t incenerated and then after dispersal can maybe be inhaled by a crowd. Since Ive yet to see the crowd placed directly under the fireworks ever………..Its always a safe distance away and depending on the prevailing winds versus weight of falling so called debris…………………

      If you note every single thing weve combated the Nazis with like fireworks releasing millions of equal cigs and all that stuff like restaurant smoke and more and more the Nazis are literally trying to even outlaw those simple meaningless societal freedoms too!

      Do they not understand attacking even a childs sparkler and ice creame in the park is gonna even turn themselves against themselves……………

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        How many of us remember stealing dads cigs as kids to use to lite off firecrackers when we didn’t have a punk to lite em with……………..punk stick was a slow burning coal on a stick they sold with fireworks that never stayed lit,hense dads ciggy was always around…….Firecracker wars anyone!

        • The Blocked Dwarf says:

          We-Brit kids in the late 70s/early 80s- didn’t need (nor would have dared) to nick our Dads’ smokes to light our bangers with and, anyways, my own Dad smoked cheap,crappy ‘Red Band’ cigarettes that never stayed alight. We just went in the shop and bought a ten pack. Although the age limit was already 16 (i think), as long as we said ‘they’re for me Dad’ all was cool.

  8. harleyrider1978 says:

    Somebody want to nail these Nazis they are trying to use the old Tornado repace study that ASHRAE tossed out…………..

    Casino officials repeat their smoking lie

    Am I the only one who rolls my eyes every time I read about the casino industry’s defense of indoor smoking, thanks to “state-of-the-art ventilation systems.” This repeated lie was trotted out again in a recent Register story about eliminating casino exemption in our state’s smoke-free air law.

    The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers — folks who clearly stand to benefit from touting the benefits of ventilation — say, “The only means of effectively eliminating health risk associated with indoor exposure is to ban smoking.”

    Their position paper states, “No other engineering approaches, including current and advanced dilution ventilation or air cleaning technologies, have been demonstrated or should be relied upon to control health risks from environmental tobacco smoke exposure in spaces where smoking occurs.”

    In other words, no “state-of-the-art” ventilation system can take away the dangers of secondhand smoke, but you can eliminate it by simply making people step outside to smoke.

    It’s time the casino industry stop lying about the health risks it glibly exposes Iowa workers and their patrons to, and it’s time the Legislature stop blithely buying the lie and, instead, take action. Secondhand smoke kills. It has no place in any Iowa workplace.

    http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/readers/2014/11/04/casino-officials-repeat-smoking-lie/18448531/

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Audreys there fighting by her lonesome…………I cant get in! Fucking Gannet news

    • carol2000 says:

      That ASHRAE report is a fraud. In 2005, anti-smoking ringleader Jonathan M. Samet and three activist cronies formed a majority of the voting board of the ASHRAE Position Document on ETS, not to mention presumably wrote the thing.

      Samet has been an anti-smoking activist since the Fifth World Conference on Smoking and Health in 1983. He was one of three “consulting scientific editors” and “prepared draft chapters or portions” of the 1986 Surgeon General Report, “The Health Consequences of Involuntary Smoking,” and was also involved in the 1984, 1985, 1989, 1990, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2001 and 2004 SG Reports, and was Senior Scientific Editor of the 2006 Surgeon General Report, “The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke.” He was also a member of the Science Advisory Board of the so-called “EPA” Report on ETS, the key chapters of which were actually secretly written by an anti-smoking activist crony of Samet’s, using illegal pass-through contracts to conceal his role. Samet was Chairman of the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) committee which produced the fraudulent Monograph on Smoking and Involuntary Smoking in 2003. He committed perjury in 1998 in the State of Minnesota lawsuit against the cigarette companies, and testified in the US Department of Justice lawsuit against them as well. He was a contributing author and editor of the 2010 Surgeon General’s Report, How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease: The Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking-Attributable Disease, and three of his administrative underlings (Roberta B. Gray, Nancy Leonard, and Deborah Williams) were also involved in the report. He was an editor yet again of the 2012 Surgeon General Report, Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults. And he is currently the head of the scientific committee of the FDA Committee on Tobacco, whose defamatory labels were declared unconstitutional.

      The same corrupt clique headed by Samet which concocted the 2005 ASHRAE report (plus one more) was in charge of the 2010 report, which is also the “2013” report. They are professional anti-smokers, NOT regular ASHRAE people.

      https://www.ashrae.org/File%20Library/docLib/About%20Us/PositionDocuments/ASHRAE_PD_Environmental_Tobacco_Smoke_2013.pdf

  9. harleyrider1978 says:

    Frank check out this:

    Climate change will remain all but absent from the G20 Australia 2014 summit, with a related energy efficiency plan omitting mention of global warming as a motivation for curbing energy use, according to a draft.

    Climate change hopes for G20 diminished

    The Energy Efficiency Action Plan does not make any mention of climate change, and instead stresses the role of efficiency in boosting energy security and improving “environmental outcomes”.

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/g20/climate-change-hopes-for-g20-diminished-20141104-11grej.html?utm_source=social&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=nc&eid=socialn%3Afac-13omn1676-edtrl-other%3Annn-17%2F02%2F2014-edtrs_socialshare-all-nnn-nnn-vars-o

    • smokingscot says:

      Harley,

      Re your comment yesterday about your friend with COPD.

      Can you please tell me if the State he lives in mandated Fire Safe Cigarettes?

      And if so when?

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        As far as I know all states have FSC. I believe it ended up being a FDA mandate on manufacturers but individual states did also force it thru individually.

        BTW the friend doesn’t have COPD. The Doc said it and I know what it is and he is a rabid Nazi. Dr Bien Samson………..My Doc saw him yesterday and simply diagnosed him as Pnuemonia. Samson was the admitting ER doc at the time. But his regular Doc is the same as mine the one who also smokes.

        Samsons a progressive smoker hater…………..

  10. harleyrider1978 says:

    Climate change hopes for G20 diminished

    Climate change will remain all but absent from the G20 summit, with a related energy efficiency plan omitting mention of global warming as a motivation for curbing energy use, according to a draft.

    Hopes had been raised when a paragraph on dealing with climate change was added to the draft communique being circulated among the world’s leading economies, who will all attend this month’s G20 summit in Brisbane.

    However, the latest details – a draft of the “energy efficiency” section of the talks in which climate change is to be relegated – have dashed hopes the issue will get much, if any, focus.

    The Energy Efficiency Action Plan does not make any mention of climate change, and instead stresses the role of efficiency in boosting energy security and improving “environmental outcomes”.

    That’s despite this weekend’s release of the latest report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warning of irreversible damages from a warming planet with temperatures on track to rise as much as 4-5 degrees by century’s end on current greenhouse gas emissions trajectories.

    The Abbott government has emphasised the economic role of G20, with Treasurer Joe Hockey saying climate change had not been raised at the first two meetings of G20 finance ministers this year.

    Dermot O’Gorman, chief executive of WWF-Australia, said there is still time for the Abbott government to modify the agenda of the meeting.

    “While we welcome any focus on energy efficiency, climate change is still not a stand-alone agenda item at the G20 and it needs to be,” Mr O’Gorman said.

    “In its current form, this so-called Energy Efficiency Action Plan is little more than a commitment to keep talking.”

    Buildings focus

    Australia, though, does make a commitment to lead one group “accelerating collaboration and knowledge sharing”, with a plan to work with the US to boost building codes, ratings and disclosure.

    The draft plan notes that buildings account for about 30 per cent of final energy consumption, offering opportunities for savings.

    Australia has a patchy record when it comes to building efficiency, particularly for homes.

    A CSIRO study released earlier this year found that many houses fell short of the energy ratings they were supposed to meet in their year of construction.

    Romilly Madew, chief executive of the Green Building Council of Australia, said Australia lagged countries such as the UK, where all new houses must be carbon neutral by 2016.

    Australia fared much better in commercial buildings, however, where industry-led standards placed the country at the forefront, globally.

    “You basically can’t not have an energy efficient building” for new construction, Ms Madew said.

    Unfortunately, many of the most positive support programs have been disbanded or will be, as the federal government rolls back regulation, she said.

    “What’s disappointing is that the government could do even better if there was support for energy efficiency,” Ms Madew said.

    Fairfax Media sought comment from the office of Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane, whose department oversees energy performance.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/g20/climate-change-hopes-for-g20-diminished-20141104-11grej.html#ixzz3I8F3Toi2

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s