another criminal anti-smoker outed

Congressman Vito Fossella who called on House leaders to pass landmark
legislation that would, for the first time, authorize the federal government
to regulate tobacco products to prevent young people from smoking and help
current smokers quit, fathered a child during an affair.

Amazing how these hypocritical anti-smoking nazi's keep falling.

This guys is a shit bag!
* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vito_Fossella


"Mike" <cigarmikeBAND@sbcglobal . net > wrote in message
news:unGUj.16203$2g1.4752@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc . com ...
> Congressman Vito Fossella who called on House leaders to pass landmark
> legislation that would, for the first time, authorize the federal
> government
> to regulate tobacco products to prevent young people from smoking and help
> current smokers quit, fathered a child during an affair.
>
> Amazing how these hypocritical anti-smoking nazi's keep falling.
>
>

tHe_NeW_tErRoR a écrit :
> This guys is a shit bag!
> * en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vito_Fossella

Yes. He doesn't smoke, but he drinks, and drives while drunk.
Yves

I was thinking the other day about how candy cigarettes are banned in most
states and almost any tobacco advertising is illegal and yet they still
claim cigaretes are marketed to kids...Then you can just go to the local
drug store or baskin robins and find candy and ice cream in alcohol flavors
[such as kahlua]

-- Johnny O.
-----------------------------------------------
* s118.photobucket . com /albums/o102/WJUStudent/Tobacco/


"Mike" <cigarmikeBAND@sbcglobal . net > wrote in message
news:unGUj.16203$2g1.4752@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc . com ...
> Congressman Vito Fossella who called on House leaders to pass landmark
> legislation that would, for the first time, authorize the federal
> government
> to regulate tobacco products to prevent young people from smoking and help
> current smokers quit, fathered a child during an affair.
>
> Amazing how these hypocritical anti-smoking nazi's keep falling.
>
>

On May 8, 2:30 pm, "JohnnyO" <treble_2-at-yahoo . com > wrote:
> I was thinking the other day about how candy cigarettes are banned in most=

> states and almost any tobacco advertising is illegal and yet they still
> claim cigaretes are marketed to kids...Then you can just go to the local
> drug store or baskin robins and find candy and ice cream in alcohol flavor=
s
> [such as kahlua]
>
> -- Johnny O.
> ----------------------------------------------- * s118.photobucket . com =
/albums/o102/WJUStudent/Tobacco/
>
> "Mike" <cigarmikeB...@sbcglobal . net > wrote in message
>
> news:unGUj.16203$2g1.4752@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc . com ...
>
>
>
> > Congressman Vito Fossella who called on House leaders to pass landmark
> > legislation that would, for the first time, authorize the federal
> > government
> > to regulate tobacco products to prevent young people from smoking and he=
lp
> > current smokers quit, fathered a child during an affair.
>
> > Amazing how these hypocritical anti-smoking  nazi's keep falling.- Hid=
e quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

And here in Georgia - as I'm sure other places - you can buy marijuana-
flavored candy. Now, I'm not being anti-marijuana, but am wondering
how candy can be made to taste like it and yet tobacco is all but
criminal.

How many drivers have you heard of being killed by a drunk driver as
opposed to a tobacco-smoking driver?

-JohnO (not related to JohnnyO)

On May 8, 1:04 pm, "Mike" <cigarmikeB...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:
> Congressman Vito Fossella who called on House leaders to pass landmark
> legislation that would, for the first time, authorize the federal government
> to regulate tobacco products to prevent young people from smoking and help
> current smokers quit, fathered a child during an affair.
>
> Amazing how these hypocritical anti-smoking nazi's keep falling.

Somebody hand me a stick... I think I see a hornets' nest. Look, I'm
no fan of the dishonorable V. Fossella. He sounds quite like a low-
life scoundrel, bounder and a liar but I fail to see what one thing
has to do with the other. Does the fact that Fossella is a reprobate
have anything to do with his views, pro or con, on smoking? Sure, you
could call him a hypocrite if he publicly espoused anti-smoking views
while being a closet chain smoker or, even more apt, he was
surreptitiously promoting smoking amongst our nation's yoots.

And besides, before we start knocking adultery, consider its potential
spawn. Let's remember that Confucius, L. da Vinci, Tom Paine,
Alexander Hamilton and T. E. Lawrence, as in Arabia, just to name a
few, were all born of mothers not married to their fathers; both the
moms and the pops, in fact, were often married to someone else
entirely.

Just my two pence worth. I'm smoking Three Friars in an Amphora X-tra
732, cold coffee in the fish mug sideways, in case anyone's taking
notes.

Gesundheit,

M

"Michael Hudson" <mah@reddotcommunications . com > wrote in message
news:dd6552c8-9c6a-4684-952a-ad21a29b81b7@24g2000hsh.googlegroups . com ...
> On May 8, 1:04 pm, "Mike" <cigarmikeB...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:
> > Congressman Vito Fossella who called on House leaders to pass landmark
> > legislation that would, for the first time, authorize the federal
government
> > to regulate tobacco products to prevent young people from smoking and
help
> > current smokers quit, fathered a child during an affair.
> >
> > Amazing how these hypocritical anti-smoking nazi's keep falling.
>
> Somebody hand me a stick... I think I see a hornets' nest. Look, I'm
> no fan of the dishonorable V. Fossella. He sounds quite like a low-
> life scoundrel, bounder and a liar but I fail to see what one thing
> has to do with the other. Does the fact that Fossella is a reprobate
> have anything to do with his views, pro or con, on smoking? Sure, you
> could call him a hypocrite if he publicly espoused anti-smoking views
> while being a closet chain smoker or, even more apt, he was
> surreptitiously promoting smoking amongst our nation's yoots.
>
> And besides, before we start knocking adultery, consider its potential
> spawn. Let's remember that Confucius, L. da Vinci, Tom Paine,
> Alexander Hamilton and T. E. Lawrence, as in Arabia, just to name a
> few, were all born of mothers not married to their fathers; both the
> moms and the pops, in fact, were often married to someone else
> entirely.
>
> Just my two pence worth. I'm smoking Three Friars in an Amphora X-tra
> 732, cold coffee in the fish mug sideways, in case anyone's taking
> notes.
>
> Gesundheit,
>
> M

It has to do with knuckleheads like Fosella and Spitzer pandering to the
anti-smoking lobbyists who lie about the results of tests to promote their
cause. Liars in bed with liars.

Plus, the politicians tout black and white, no gray area solutions. They
want the taxes from the tobacco sales, but make it harder to buy and use the
product. They fund health care packages with tobacco tax monies, while
trying to outlaw its use and are hinting at all out prohibition.

Some states have sensible laws, allowing tavern and other venue owners to
determine whether or not smoking should be allowed in THEIR establishments.
People can read ( for the most part) and can then choose betwixt a smoking
and non-smoking establishment if there's a damned sign posted outside.

Then some hypocrite from Ohio figured a way around that - smoke free
workplace - protect the employees from smoke. Now comes fat. Next comes cell
phone use while driving. Soon you'll have ( I hope not ) universal gov
subsidized ( read taxpayer subsidized ) health care. Some scenarios include
a mandated plan, meaning you have to buy it, or pay a penalty for not
forking over your portion to help pay the bills for those who are using it.
Massachusetts showed that just doesn't work. But the dopes want to make it
nationwide anyway.

So, raise the taxes some more, because the plan is a joke. Simultaneously
they are trying to decrease the amount of tobaco users. It's plain insanity.
Don't you see the hypocrite's plan? Keep raising tobacco taxes, use the
money to 'pay' for healthcare. When tobacco is banned (which the nutsos are
trying to do ) the taxes by then will be phenominally high and the rising
healthcare costs have to be paid. So, now that the taxes are say
$100,000,000,000/year nationally and no tax income from tobacco exists or is
so low as to be useless as far as paying for the program, everyone bends
over and gets to hear what Big Brother wants to tax/restrict next. Everyone
gets to pay more, both in your normal taxes, and a huge bill for a crap
healthcare program. And, guess who gets to tell you what's healthy? Ever had
an insurance claim denied for a pre-existing condition, or because you
smoke(d), or have tried alcohol, or some other made up bs? That's nothing
compared to what the gov will do.

"Sir- you have 90 days to lose 50 pounds or we cannot treat your condition".
See ya.

"Sir- you say you smoked for 15 years and gave it up 20 years ago. Sorry".

Why are healthcare costs so high anyway? Lawyers certainly don't help.
Malpractice insurance costs get passed on to everyone.

The thing is- these politicians and others are short sighted. And
hypocritical.

Look at Mike Bloomberg. News mogul. Do you think in all of the years he's
published papers not one ounce of printing plant or paper plant effluence
made its way into the ecosystem? Sure it has, and probably a lot. It's
poison on the water. Everyone's water. But he acts like a saviour banning
public smoking. That's a hypocrite.

How about Scott's Miracle Gro? They gave employees x amount of days to quit
smoking or quit their jobs. But they make a product that is not only very
useless but pollutes water and eutrifies lakes. ( do we really need green
lawns, or is clean water more important?)

How about Sherwin Williams? They make paint. I'm certain the Cuyahoga river
fire was helped along by a little of their runoff. Not to mention lead in
paint still affecting kids today. But, they allow no smoking in front of
their building. Hypocrites.

What about the people driving cars? They'll drive to the polls and vote
against 46 million American's freedom of choice in pollution spewing
machines. Hypocrites.

It's just that I've noticed a pattern. Whenever a pol gets in trouble I look
to see whether they ever pandered to the nazi's and many times they were
backers of nazi legislation.

If tobacco is legal and the Fed and states want the taxes, at least provide
for that gray area, public venues that do allow smoking, and venues that do
not. Bans like those of late are just plain hypocritical.

Let's ban curry. And perfume. And alcohol. And wolmanized lumber,
fertilizer, vynil, plastic, lawyers, paint, fuel, rubber, steel, ...........
all ( except the curry and perfume, - I just don't like the smell) have 2nd
hand health effects that ARE documented.

No hornets - I just see politicians and lemmings as stupid.

Did you catch Robin Williams on Leno last week?

He made a good point.

He remarked how long it was taking for the Iraquis to come up with a
constitution. He said " Take ours. We're not using it!"

Today tobacco. Tomorrow trans fats. To come- soda/pop, ham, beef, pork,
fritos,potato chips, cake, alcohol ( history repeats itself ), and God knows
what else.

Eventually it'll be just soylent green for everyone. That's where we're
headed.

Nice lagacy.

buzzzzzzzzzz

On May 8, 4:11 pm, "Mike" <cigarmikeB...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:
> "Michael Hudson" <m...@reddotcommunications . com > wrote in message
>
> news:dd6552c8-9c6a-4684-952a-ad21a29b81b7@24g2000hsh.googlegroups . com ...
>
>
>
> > On May 8, 1:04 pm, "Mike" <cigarmikeB...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:
> > > Congressman Vito Fossella who called on House leaders to pass landmark
> > > legislation that would, for the first time, authorize the federal
> government
> > > to regulate tobacco products to prevent young people from smoking and
> help
> > > current smokers quit, fathered a child during an affair.
>
> > > Amazing how these hypocritical anti-smoking nazi's keep falling.

SCHADENFREUDE!

> Today tobacco. Tomorrow trans fats. To come- soda/pop, ham, beef, pork,
> fritos,potato chips, cake, alcohol ( history repeats itself ), and God knows
> what else.
>
> Eventually it'll be just soylent green for everyone. That's where we're
> headed.
>
> Nice lagacy.
>
> buzzzzzzzzzz

You're missing my point. I don't defend the Nanny State, Big Brother,
menus substituting Soylent Green for trans fats or any of the other
points you raise. My point is that your original post 1) drew an
oblique connection between Fossella's stand on tobacco and the fact
that he had an affair and fathered a child as the result and 2)
referred to him as a "hypocritical anti-smoking nazi." Hypocrisy,
essentially, is condemning a certain thing done by others that you, in
fact, engage in yourself. And vice-versa. Fossella didn't do that.
Spitzer's campaign against prostitution was most certainly
hypocritical. The fact that he advocated harsh or even draconian anti-
tobacco legislation while he was playing Hello Kitty with Bachelorette
Number 2,563 is not hypocritical. That's all.

M

Michael Hudson <mah@reddotcommunications . com > wrote in
news:1d94abf9-2451-4d32-be56-6207719bad0a@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups . com :

> My point is that your original post 1) drew an
> oblique connection between Fossella's stand on tobacco and the fact
> that he had an affair and fathered a child as the result and 2)
> referred to him as a "hypocritical anti-smoking nazi." Hypocrisy,
> essentially, is condemning a certain thing done by others that you, in
> fact, engage in yourself.

The connection is not so oblique. The reason we have rules
against adultry is that the children and mother deserve a
committed husband to care for them. It _harms children_
to be born out of wedlock. You cited some instances in
which bastards grew up to be exemplary citizens, but that's
hardly the case in general. Something like 80% of unwed
mothers never escape poverty.

Comparing that to the proposed anti-smoking rules, which
were justified because it _harms children_. And, to
further the parallel, not _all children_ would be harmed,
just some.

It's hypocritical to shout "think of the children" to
support one's agenda while engaging in behavior that
is also (probably more) detrimental to children.

B.


--
Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.

On May 8, 2:44 pm, Bart Goddard <goddar...@netscape . net > wrote:
> Michael Hudson <m...@reddotcommunications . com > wrote innews:1d94abf9-2451-4d32-be56-6207719bad0a@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups . com :
>
> > My point is that your original post 1) drew an
> > oblique connection between Fossella's stand on tobacco and the fact
> > that he had an affair and fathered a child as the result and 2)
> > referred to him as a "hypocritical anti-smoking nazi." Hypocrisy,
> > essentially, is condemning a certain thing done by others that you, in
> > fact, engage in yourself.
>
> The connection is not so oblique. The reason we have rules
> against adultry is that the children and mother deserve a
> committed husband to care for them. It _harms children_
> to be born out of wedlock. You cited some instances in
> which bastards grew up to be exemplary citizens, but that's
> hardly the case in general. Something like 80% of unwed
> mothers never escape poverty.
>
> Comparing that to the proposed anti-smoking rules, which
> were justified because it _harms children_. And, to
> further the parallel, not _all children_ would be harmed,
> just some.
>
> It's hypocritical to shout "think of the children" to
> support one's agenda while engaging in behavior that
> is also (probably more) detrimental to children.
>
> B.
>
> --
> Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.

Is adultery even illegal? In CA you can't even use adultery as a
legal justification for divorce. If he didn't break the law then he
is just a scumbag politician. I am sure the mother is not living in
poverty either. Child support laws in this country will make sure she
gets a lot of money, considering what she makes, and she has no legal
obligation to spend it all on the child. She could easily live well
off that money and provide for the child with it. The behavior may be
detrimental to children in general but in this case that child will
not be one of those statistics.

Bill <williamdochnahl@adelphia . net > wrote in
news:fdd46239-ce94-41cc-a255-01b2f21bff0a@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups . com :


> Is adultery even illegal?

Is smoking illegal?

> The behavior may be
> detrimental to children in general

Smoking is also detrimental only in general.

>but in this case that child will
> not be one of those statistics.

The child may not live in poverty, but he'll still have
the stigma attached to being a bastard. He'll likely
grow up with no male role model, and end up a Democrat
or worse.

B.

--
Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.

Bart Goddard <goddardbe@netscape . net > wrote:

>Bill <williamdochnahl@adelphia . net > wrote in
>news:fdd46239-ce94-41cc-a255-01b2f21bff0a@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups . com :
>
>
>> Is adultery even illegal?
>
>Is smoking illegal?
>
>> The behavior may be
>> detrimental to children in general
>
>Smoking is also detrimental only in general.
>
>>but in this case that child will
>> not be one of those statistics.
>
>The child may not live in poverty, but he'll still have
>the stigma attached to being a bastard. He'll likely
>grow up with no male role model, and end up a Democrat
>or worse.
>
>B.

There's worse? ;-)

"Mickey" <Mickey@NOSPAMFatHounds . com > wrote in message
news:ss4724lc4g9tdk7svmqu4rn6phun62l9av@4ax . com ...
> Bart Goddard <goddardbe@netscape . net > wrote:
>
>>Bill <williamdochnahl@adelphia . net > wrote in
>>news:fdd46239-ce94-41cc-a255-01b2f21bff0a@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups . com :
>>
>>
>>> Is adultery even illegal?
>>
>>Is smoking illegal?
>>
>>> The behavior may be
>>> detrimental to children in general
>>
>>Smoking is also detrimental only in general.
>>
>>>but in this case that child will
>>> not be one of those statistics.
>>
>>The child may not live in poverty, but he'll still have
>>the stigma attached to being a bastard. He'll likely
>>grow up with no male role model, and end up a Democrat
>>or worse.
>>
>>B.
>
> There's worse? ;-)

"French".

"Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:68hij6F2stctaU1@mid.individual . net ...
>
> "Mickey" <Mickey@NOSPAMFatHounds . com > wrote in message
> news:ss4724lc4g9tdk7svmqu4rn6phun62l9av@4ax . com ...
> > Bart Goddard <goddardbe@netscape . net > wrote:
> >
> >>Bill <williamdochnahl@adelphia . net > wrote in
> >>news:fdd46239-ce94-41cc-a255-01b2f21bff0a@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups . com :
> >>
> >>
> >>> Is adultery even illegal?
> >>
> >>Is smoking illegal?
> >>
> >>> The behavior may be
> >>> detrimental to children in general
> >>
> >>Smoking is also detrimental only in general.
> >>
> >>>but in this case that child will
> >>> not be one of those statistics.
> >>
> >>The child may not live in poverty, but he'll still have
> >>the stigma attached to being a bastard. He'll likely
> >>grow up with no male role model, and end up a Democrat
> >>or worse.
> >>
> >>B.
> >
> > There's worse? ;-)
>
> "French".
>
LMAO!

On May 8, 4:32 pm, Bart Goddard <goddar...@netscape . net > wrote:
> Bill <williamdochn...@adelphia . net > wrote innews:fdd46239-ce94-41cc-a255-01b2f21bff0a@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups . com :
>
> > Is adultery even illegal?
>
> Is smoking illegal?

If you are a minor, yes.

> > The behavior may be
> > detrimental to children in general
>
> Smoking is also detrimental only in general.

True and it shouldn't be illegal.

> >but in this case that child will
> > not be one of those statistics.
>
> The child may not live in poverty, but he'll still have
> the stigma attached to being a bastard. He'll likely
> grow up with no male role model, and end up a Democrat
> or worse.

These days that stigma is not considered detrimental. A large portion
of the population has no father and with 50% of marriages ending in
divorce it seems that your parents still being married makes you an
outcast. I'm not saying it's right I'm just confused as to why this
case gets highlighted here while all the rest of the cases where the
child is much worse off seem to be ignored in this argument. This
case the kid isn't really going to be more traumatized than the kids
he has in his marriage even without this adultery, so why is this one
evoking such response.

Now just because he has no positive male role model doesn't mean he is
going to become a democrat. just because you got bitten by the undead
does not mean you turn into a zombie. You can blow you brains out if
you feel yourself turning.