Smoking Bans and Safe Spaces

Michael Bloomberg speaking to students, via ZeroHedge:

“The fact that some university boards and administrations now bow to pressure and shield students from these ideas through safe spaces, code words and trigger warnings is, in my view, a terrible mistake,” he said.

“The whole purpose of college is to learn how to deal with difficult situations, not to run away from them. A micro aggression is exactly that, micro. But in a macro sense, one of the most dangerous places on a college campus is the so-called safe space because it creates a false impression that we can isolate ourselves from those who hold different views. We can’t, and we shouldn’t try. Not in politics, or in the workplace.”

Hey, wait a minute! Isn’t this a bit rich coming from the guy who brought smoking bans to New York City?

Because didn’t those bans convert bars and restaurants into “safe spaces”, in which people were being shielded from the “micro aggression” of ambient tobacco smoke, using the “trigger warnings” of No Smoking signs?

What’s the difference between banning smoking and banning ideas? Ideas are far more dangerous.

Seems to me that what Bloomberg pioneered in NYC has come back to bite him at the University of Michigan. He deserved to be booed.

Newt Gingrich on Republican nominee Donald Trump:

“First of all, Donald Trump may turn out to be the most effective anti-left leader in our lifetime. He is against political correctness. He is against bureaucracy. He places American nationalism first which I think we desperately need. I’m tired of being told we have to phony agreements and phony efforts and I watch John Kerry rush from five-star hotel to five-star hotel trying to get a Syrian peace agreement that is an absurdity. I think Trump could be a return to a more of an Eisenhower kind of realism that none-the-less is very conservative. And he may do more to dismantle the left than anybody in our lifetime including Reagan and me. So I don’t despair. The other side of course is, if you’re not for Donald Trump, you functionally are for Hillary Clinton, and she’s going to create the most radical supreme court, take away your right to bear arms, eliminate your religious liberty, and move this country dramatically to the left.”


About Frank Davis

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

19 Responses to Smoking Bans and Safe Spaces

  1. harleyrider1978 says:

    Colleges being forced to go smokefree by Obama Administration

    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced an initiative to ban smoking from college campuses last month. This is part of the HHS goal to create a society free of tobacco-related disease and death, according to their action plan released by the HHS in 2010.

    Colleges who fail to enact campus-wide smoking bans and other tobacco-free policies may soon face the loss of grants and contracts from the HHS, according to the plan. Western receives grants through a subdivision of the HHS called the National Institutes of Health, Acting Vice Provost for Research Kathleen Kitto said.

    Obama administration to push for eliminating smoking on college campuses

    Read more: … z29zJ2V2TV

    President Barack Obama has already promised not to smoke cigarettes in the White House. If his administration has its way, American college students will soon be required to follow suit while they’re on campus.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Blackmale isn’t just the color of obamas skin its in his politics too

      • Lepercolonist says:

        Blackmailing the UK to stay in the EU. That’s his M.O. There is your legacy Barack.

        • DP says:

          Dear Lepercolonist

          Strange how the president of a country that gained its independence from Britain, whose father came from a country which gained its independence from Britain, is so set against Britain regaining her independence from the EU.

          Haven’t noticed the USA and Kenya clamouring to re-join the British Empire.


  2. Lepercolonist says:

    Why didn’t Bloomberg create some ‘safe spaces’ for NYC smokers ? The nonsmokers have all the safe spaces in New York. Bloviated, megalomaniacal tyrant.

  3. junican says:

    I’m not sure that we have a word which describes the ‘cognisant dissonance’ which exists at this time. ‘Cognisant dissonance’, as a phrase, is a generalisation. In itself, it just means ‘beliefs which contradict each other’. Thus, a person who condemns smoking in the most violent terms might drink whiskey in abundant portions. A really devoted Christian might think that it is right to behead heretics. A Muslim might agree that homosexuals must be thrown to their deaths from high buildings.
    What is seriously wrong is when Government suffers from ‘cognisant dissonance’. For that is the state of Parliament at this time.
    There is no way that the Tobacco Product Directive can be enacted, unless MPs are slaves.
    Are MPs slaves? They seem to be so. They have slavishly obeyed their masters in the medical mafia, and clever-dick academics.
    Our political leaders must put individuals first. Oddly, that is not at all difficult to do. It requires only that politicians reject ‘whole population’ as an idea in matters of health. That idea is great as regards what side of the road to drive on, but it is useless regarding individual human beings. We are all different – every single one of us. That is the magic of being alive and intelligent.

    • waltc says:

      Picking up from there: As we”re increasingly collectivized, the statistician becomes king. It will soon become more and more difficult to get the medical procedure or medicine you, as an individual, may need (or the one you’re not allergic to) if the statisticians deem that it’s only 43.9% effective or that it’s not cost effective when multiplied by 300 million. (This, as conversely, they discover individually-targeted genetic therapies.)

      We now operate under the utilitarian theory of “the greatest good for the greatest number” in which the good of the smaller number is expendable and the smaller number is expected to altruistically sacrifice its pleasures, thoughts, faith and health on the sacred altar of somebody else’s pleasures, thoughts, faith and health.

    • prog says:

      ‘A really devoted Christian might think that it is right to behead heretics’

      At best, that should read ‘Roman Catholic’, though I don’t think many Christians have seriously thought such a thing for at least 300 years. We all know it’s currently (and always has been) a dangerous thing to renounce Islam.

      Maybe your’e trying to be pc ;)

  4. Brian Truscott says:

    Talking of policies coming back to bite you in the arse I see that Johnson and Johnson have just been sued and lost 40 million dollars in a case where the plaintiff claimed that their talcum powder had given her cancer. But there is no proof they squealed, ha ha ha.

  5. audreysilk says:

    I was struck by Bloomberg’s address too but I feel it needs a less wide net to catch the unbelievable disconnect he displays. Saying “smoking bans” is too generalized. Here he is addressing students at a college and criticizing this new “safe space” belief where THEIR smoking — nay, tobacco — bans have been based on the premise that the students should be protected from exposure to the ACT more so than the smoke. Tobacco is banned on campus to prevent “wrong” ideas — the exact thing Bloomberg is denouncing but which he helped create. That’s the crux of this particular Bloomberg moment.

  6. smokingscot says:

    “…. we can isolate ourselves from those who hold different views. We can’t, and we shouldn’t try. Not in politics, or in the workplace.”

    Actually you can. FCTC demands all opposition be silenced. Thus Mr. B and his ilk have been the only voices politicians have been allowed to hear.

    It’s the ONLY reason we’ve got the smoking bans and – even more scary – it’s a policy they want adopted for many other things from salt through to global warming.

    Seems our American students can suss a hypocrite from a mile away… and had the guts to let that be known.

  7. mikef317 says:

    Off topic and long but something everyone should read.

    Comments on the text can be difficult to find.

    Other stories at the Bottom. I can’t delete them.

    • Smoking Lamp says:

      This is a good read. Unfortunately biased against tobacco and ignoring any other perspective. I wonder do the journalists even know about the body of research that counters the tobacco control account of things. I see Glantz calls those that dispute his view public relations specialists. He must be looking in the mirror. At least the comments seem balanced with an ample number of comments questioning the tobacco control mantra but an equal number displaying the typical antismoker bias.

      • jltrader says:

        “These people are not scientists,” said Glantz, of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education. “They are public-relations people who happen to have degrees in science. These are people who make their living producing results that their clients want. And that’s not science.”

        This story appears courtesy of the Center for Public Integrity.

        Oh man, the IRONY !!

        • nisakiman says:

          Heh! Yes, I had the same reaction. Glantz certainly has chutzpah, if nothing else!

  8. Smoking bans PLUS taxes! Visit me and stop getting shafted by the government!

No need to log in

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.