Yes indeed and Im also a member of one of those groups and will do my best to make sure this moron doesnt get elected- what sort of "airbagged" society does Nuckarbee want to create??
Also, the government's primary concern should be our safety, so aren't Huckabee's measures in Arkansas doing just that? There are more non-smokers than smokers and the majority of America supports this ban so majority wins. That's democracy for you.
Democracy is a bad thing and the US is not a democracy, thank god.
For some reason people equate democracy with freedom as if somehow a tyrannical government ruled by a majority is somehow more free than other forms of tyranny. Bush does this a lot and he is very much wrong.
Democracy has been described as two wolves and a sheep deciding whats for dinner. It doesn't work out very well if your a sheep does it.
Our Republic is designed to protect the rights of the minority. (least we use to)
Our country was not designed just for the minority--but each of us--on our own merits. Do you expect Government to "give" us things that we haven't worked for or just because we "deserve" them? I don't. If somebody out there has more than I--good for them. We all have free will. We just need to go back to basics of hard work, less moaning, and more praying. I'm a lot older than you, I grew up in the projects, poorer than dirt---but knew the basics--there's right--there's wrong. Choose one.
In a democracy everyone will eventually find themselves being a sheep on some issue. Instead of lifting people up, democracy tends to drag everyone down to a lowest common denominator.
Democracy is a system where everybody looses, I simply want a system of liberty where everybody wins, even the minority.
You're right. I'm mistaken. America is a constitution-based federal republic.
America may not be an absolute democracy, but it has strong democratic traditions. Of course we should be concerned about protecting the rights of the minority, but in this case, smoking infringes upon the rights of the majority, the non-smokers.
And no, democracy is not a system where "everybody looses [sic]." Democracy is based on carrying out the will of the majority. The majority gets its way the majority wins.
Can a majority be oppressive of a minority? What makes tyranny of the majority better than tyranny of the individual such as a king or dictator? Isn't it tyranny all the same in the end?
Just a few words: If you believe in freedom, shouldn't the people be allowed to practice it? The free people of America, the majority, wants smoking to be banned (over 70%). That's a free choice, isn't it? The American people have made their choice. And they have chosen longer lives.
Freedom and "free choice" can not result from government force. Where is the freedom for people who want to operate a smoking establishment on their own property?
Are you aware there are now "Smoke in's" in major cities? Bar's that allow smoking, all night drinking and commonly also have strip shows. People are rebelling against these laws so in effect the ban (for freedom as you say.. lol) has done nothing to help people, it has only made them criminals.
I can't stand his stupid ass facial expressions when he talks! You can tell he's full of shit! And also what kind of person has his lawyers pressure the police to not press charges on his son when his son hanged that dog and slit it's throat? Nice one Huckafuck! It's all right to do whatever you want,so long as it's family!! HUH?
I can't wait for President Huckabee to raise my taxes and tell me what kind of toilet paper is best for me! Maybe he will force us all to wear helmets while we drive, Mike is so protective of his people! Yes, each one of us belong to and are a ward of President Huckabee, or daddy Huck as I like to call him. We Love you Tax Hikabee!
we need a video that concentrates on his intolerance of people with aids, non christians, and much much more. thats what we need too bring his support on you tube down. im serious have you guys ever read any of his books he is a hate monger.
The arguments in this video don't address what Huckabee said. His message was on a work place safety issue. By your logic, would it be ok for an employer to emit any toxic fume he wants. After all, it's his property right? The comment on outlawing candy bars, etc is also baseless. When an individual eats a candy bar, it doesn't effect others' health. Smoking is different. Second hand smoke is harmful. If you want to make that choice, go ahead. Don't make the choice for those around you.
Actually.. I do believe that it is ok for an employer to emit any sort of toxic fumes he wants.. they would want to make it attractive to customers so toxic fumes is not something most people like.. but they *could* so long as it didn't endanger anyone else and nobody else is forced to breath it, and that is key. Your not forced to go into a bar that allows smoking, your also not forced to work in one.. you choose that, so the candy bar analogy is accurate because you also choose to eat that.
Not only does the person who made this video lack the ability to spell, he links irrelevant comparisons. If you disagree with what Huckabee suggested, at least have the intelligence to communicate that disagreement without propaganda (Nanny Huckabee poster) and to make an educated argument (of course Huckabee doesn't want fascism, that's just rhetoric and most of america is smart enough to see right through that.
Huckabee (though wrong on this issue) at least stands for improving national health. Ron Paul wants to broaden the use of drugs. So instead of a nation that promotes health, we will be a nation that promotes getting high. Go Paul GO! What a genius.
People are already getting high. The "war on drugs" doesn't stop people from doing drugs it wrecks lives, increases crime and tears apart families. Every time the govt. declares "war" on something, that "something" gets worse -- poverty, drugs, illiteracy, etc. Huckabee should be running as a Democrat. He is no conservative.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You have the freedom to make bad decisions for yourself but you do not have the right to introduce toxic fumes into a work place.
Now I disagree with Mike because to me it is an issue of Federalism. I like Mike a lot and this peripheral issue will not change that, but I wish he would have stuck to his federalist credentials that he has shown so well in other areas.
Haha go ahead and ban smoking.. and watch just how it gets ignored. People are tired of being told what to do. Just look at how "well" the smoking ban in Vegas went.. people are outright ignoring it.. and the powers that be are running scared of enforcement.
The days of "lighting up" wherever one chooses are over. It started with "would you like smoking or non-smoking"? When the matradee greets you at the door of the restaurant.
It will end with... smoke in private, anywhere one chooses. But, don't pollute the air non-smokers breathe.
It started with people being able to make voluntary choices and it ended with government using force on the public. That just sounds really so ~great~ gdanggatto.
Just because they do it, doesn't make it right. The government can also make war's legal, it does not make then just.
Totally agree with you, k1e0x. Non-smokers have more than enough smoke-free businesses to freely patronize, so it's only fair that governments continue to allow business owners the right to accommodate smokers.
A better alternative to total bans would be requiring complete physical separation of both smoking + non-smoking areas within a building, and requiring businesses allowing smoking to post exterior signage stating their policy, like what New Haven(IN) did over passing a proposed ban.
See.. You support force to get your way because you simply don't -like- it, not because you have any sort of claim or power over another business or the rules they enact there..
You might as well just pull a gun on a business owner and make him do what you want, its the same difference, only the government uses force on your behalf.. hired thugs if you will.
People have the right to breathe clean air. I don;t care what kind of substances a person wants to poison their own bodies with, but they should have no right to poison others.
Your business is your business. IBM is a business. General Motors is a business. People work there. A bar is a "consumer" business. People choose to go there. Where one works is their livelyhood.
Where one chooses to go for entertainment is their choice.
I choose to work the job that I do because they pay me good money and the work environment is good. I agree to work there, they agree to pay me. I have had jobs where the work environment was not good, I knew this going in and agreed regardless.
If you agree to work in a business that allows customers or other employees to smoke, then the only person you can blame is yourself for accepting the job.
You miss the point. Unless "your business" is free from anyone walking into it... at any time. Then, you need to stuff the cigs and smoke them when the only harm you do is to yourself.
you don't have a right to just walk in to my business. I allow you to walk in under my terms
There is a difference
If you walk into a smoke filled bar, you are accepting the risk by your actions. No force is being preformed on anyone in this case. You voluntarily come in if you want. - Force enters into play when you will shutdown a business owner for allowing smoking
Initiating the use of force against another is wrong, you become the aggressor, and your reasons for that force are irrelevant
Government has no right to protect us from ourselves. Seatbelt laws for adults, although wise, are an infringement on our right to let the windsheild stop our face.
Smoking should always be allowable.
The federal government has not right to take that away from anyone.
Drink all you want. But, don't drive down the same street I'm on in that condition.
Smoke all you want. Hell, shove them up your ass and light them, if you want.
Just don't smoke in the place I work, shop, or breathe.
I like part of your comment, I just want to add.. don't regulate what I can do in my business. If you have no right in my home, you have no right in my business. I allow people in my home just as I allow them in my business.
my ignorance? I dont think so..I have blasted you Idiotic views out of the water EVERY TIME
you can do nothing but twist my words to fit your own stupid views. you havnt made a valid point since I started posting here. if you ban me thats you "right" but it only proves you cant make any SMART arguments to back up your own idiotic comments or twisted meaning of peoples rights.
I knew you couldnt answer the drunk driving question with out making an ass of youself
I own my home so I guess according to you I can murder someone in my home because...I own it! NO? But why not? YOU seem to think that "ownership" is some magic word that makes all laws and ethics null and void. I see that u have banned RhinoRT, why? Do you "own" you tube? or are u just upset that he's right and you are not? Okay, u can ban me too because I'm finished with you. U r just like those yahoos that think it's okay to fight their dogs because they "OWN" them. Get my point? Good bye!
When you violate someone else right to life we call this murder, and yes it is wrong. Watch my other video. People who dont understand the concepts of rights and natural law bring up murder all the time "So yoo can jes go around an kills anyone yoo want?" no. The limit on your rights is the equal rights of others.
When someone chooses to enter a building of their own free will where smoking is allowed they then accept the risks that they may be exposed to SHS.
you go ahead and ban me from your site what about my right to free speach to show you to be the idiot you are? your just proving you dont have the balls to debate this inteligentlly..... what a sore looser
You can exercise your freedom of speech.. on your own property, not here.
I've answered all your questions, but I've not got the patience to deal with your continuous barrage of moronic questions when you fail to grasp the basic concepts of rights and ownership.
If you want to continue to ask, post a thread called "No right to smoke" on the Free Talk Live message boards.
wrong again. and again your logic is just like a net full of holes. buying food or water has absolutely nothing to do with my right to eat and drink and your out of your mind to think so
I can go out in my back yard to the creek and drink water and catch fish and not buy a thing. you still havnt answered my question does a person have a right to get drunk an drive in on public streets?
No, if you had a right to food you could eat any food, anywhere, and you wouldn't need to ask anyone or pay for anything for it. It is your *right* to it.
You can catch a fish in a creek you own and eat it sure. You own it.
Your logic is faulty, you said "my back yard" quantifying your ownership of it.
Some people called NASCAR allow speeding on roads that they own.
I own the air in my business, why can't I allow smoking in air that I own?
Are you ready to accept defeat on this? If not prove to me that you have a "right" to come into *my* backyard and grab a steak off my barbecue and eat it, without asking me.
"Some people called NASCAR allow speeding on roads that they own." is this the best you got?
when have you EVER seen a nascar race on public streets? LAME
"I own the air in my business, why can't I allow smoking in air that I own?"....you can as long as the PUBLIC dont have access to your business.
When did I say I had the right to come in your back yard or anyone else's yard for that matter and take anything of yours with out asking?... shot down again!
"When did I say I had the right to come in your back yard or anyone else's yard for that matter and take anything of yours with out asking?... shot down again!"
You said you had a right to food. If you had a right to food why cant you come on my property and eat my food? It would be your right?
The reason you can't is you have no right to food.
you need to let go of the nascar thing its not working.
yes they build their own track but they also go to great lengths to see to the safety of the "public" that attends not to mention the extreme safety precautions for the drivers.
Allowing smoking at you business would be the same as nascar permitting the public on the track or not requiring the drivers to wear safety equipment. shot down again!
You may own the building but you do not own the air! Are you crazy? As a matter of fact, you "own" the building so why is it that if YOU set fire to the building you "own" you will be arrested? That is just the way it is, get over yourself!
I see no problem with destroying your own property if you so like. The fact that its against the law does not mean that you don't have a right to do it. Bad laws can infringe on peoples rights, and good people break bad laws. Look at the Declaration of Independence.
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government"
The framers said it was your "duty" to break bad laws.
OK then idiot I can go to a local State owned lake "thats open to the public" and catch fish and if I feel like it I'll bend over and drink the water all with out owning a single bit of it with out having to ask permission from anyone.
and again you are changing what I say. I never said I had a right to "ANY" food or water, I said "I have a RIGHT TO Food and WATER" a big difference...burned again!
This is a problem today, most people think rights come from the Constitution.. this is false. Read the Federalist paper number 84. Its an argument against adding the Bill of Rights to the Constitution. - I can hear people say.. "why would they NOT add it?!" - because rights don't come from government and they were afraid it would become a list of the ONLY rights people had. Guess what.. it HAS they were right, it had become a list of the only rights we legally express in America.
Okay then, if I own a hospital where people HAVE TO GO do I have the right to use asbestos in my buildings? And yes, sometimes people have NO choice what hospital they are taken to in an emergency. This is the same as the business owner allowing smoking! It's his company, right?
Your views on this matter do not make any sense to me. You say people have the choice of where to work but in the world I live in most people take whatever job they can find in order to feed their families. No they aren't forced to work there, they could go on welfare or starve! You speak of "rights" but what about someones "right" not to be exposed to second hand smoke?
You by your own free will, entered a restaurant that allows smoking, you are thus accepting the risk that someone may smoke in it.
This video is not about rights, I mean the other one I have posted, The Philosophy of Liberty. Its clear you don't understand rights just look at your comment.
"this has no idea what the meaning of human rights are, it seems as if he has no regard for the law."
Laws have nothing to do with rights you idiot! Do the laws in China erase peoples rights? NO, never!
I'm The Idiot? since when does the laws of china effect the laws here? OUR RIGHTS HERE "ARE" PROTECTED BY OUR LAWS ! like it or not you are in the minority here smoking is being banned in public places because the majority of the people want it you seem to think this is being forced by government you are wrong!
the government is passing these laws to protect our "right" to clean air
Yeah, your the idiot. Here is why. Are rights are not provided to us by any law by ANY government anywhere on earth. Our rights don't come FROM a government, this is absurd! They come from god or from nature.
You express a philosophy that is tyranny of the majority over a minority is ok.
we can name call all night but you are STILL WRONG if you read any of what I said you would see I NEVER said our rights come from the government I said our rights are PROTECTED by the government and laws. ALL RIGHTS ARE GIVEN TO US BY GOD. and "GODS" nature never intended the air to be poisoned either. try again
I dont go to restaurants that allow smoking thankfully every place my family and I like to dine at are nonsmoking environments by choice. and thanks to Governor Huckabee I dont have to worry about my right to breath smoke free air in any public place I go.
What about the right to live and work free of health-threatening second-hand smoke? For millions of Americans, it is not reasonable to expect them to just up and leave to find work elsewhere. I've personally had times where it took me half a year to find work; it's absolutely ridiculous to expect working class Americans to go half a year unemployed because they want to be able to breathe.
you are wayyyyyy of base I am no where near a socialist thinker.
since when is it socialist for a man to go out and go to work in this country? my right to work has nothing to do an employers right to hire me but yes you have every right to hire who you want...you are making no points here what so ever
See, you totally don't understand what a right is.. you fail again here.
A right is not what you *can* do if you are given permission. A right is what nobody can deny you from doing.
In saying "you have a right to work" that would mean that someone had to provide that to you.
HOWEVER, You have a right to liberty and you can work on your own.. If this is what you mean by work then that would be ok, but its a poor choice of words.
A right is not what you *can* do if you are given permission. A right is what nobody can deny you from doing. you got the first part right but dead wrong on the last part. thats what laws are for because some so called "rights" are dangerous to others ie drunk driving cooking meth etc.etc.some rights have to be denied otherwise the world would be a much more dangerous place... and I havnt failed anything since my second grade spelling
If smoking is bad for you, the Federal Government would shut down the cigarette factories. Right? Or is tobacco a big lobby? Are our politicians owned by the likes of "tobacco?"
Yes Huck's a nanny. Bought & paid for. No liberty here, move along.
"If smoking is bad for you, the Federal Government would shut down the cigarette factories."
With that logic they should shut down most sports, amusements parks and they would have banned butter too in the 80's only to force people to eat trans-fats.
It's not governments job to tell you whats good and bad for you. It's government sole job to protect your liberty and your freedom.
"your logic" is ludicrous ! if I eat a stick of butter for dinner I harm no one but myself, if I break my arm skateboarding I hurt no one but my self. If the marboro man fires up a camel in the cubical next to me at work he poisons not only himself but me and everyone around him. while he has every right to smoke he has NO RIGHT to smoke where ever non-smokers may be at the time
if I eat a stick of butter for dinner I harm no one but myself = true.
If I smoke I harm no one but myself = true.
If I enter or work at a business that allows smoking I harm no one but myself = true.
The Marlboro man will fire up a cigarette next to you, if the owner of the business allows it. Its his choice, (he may however loose many workers by making such a choice.)
If I enter or work at a business that allows smoking I harm no one but myself = true.....I shouldnt have to worry about it, if you own a business that involves the general public you do not have the right to poison the air
The question is simple. Should smokers be allowed to pollute the air that nonsmokers have to breathe? If you smoke, you have that right. Smoke in your home, your garage, your backyard, your bathroom. Just don't smoke in the same place I breathe.
To say that nonsmokers have a simple choice of working in a nonsmoking workplace is bullshit!
You have the right to smoke. I have the right to work where I don't have to breathe it!
Can a business owner smoke in his business that he owns? How is this different from his home? How is the state justified for mandating what he does in his business but not in his home?
You have no right to make demands of business owners and place restrictions on their property just as you have no right to place restrictions on their home.
Can a business owner smoke in his business that he owns?...depends on the business, if its a business where the public is involved then yes then smoking should be banned
How is this different from his home?... you got to be joking!!!
he has the right to smoke pot or crack should he have the right to grow pot or cook meth in his house?
I'll tell you what makes it different from his home. A guest at his home has a choice rather or not to visit a smoker. Unfortunately People have no choice but to work and no choice but to shop if they want to survive! They should have the right to shop and work without someone else giving them cancer from second hand smoke! I happen to be a smoker and though I choose to take that risk with my own health I refuse to take it with someone elses!!!!
You seem to have a keen sense what the words "human rights" mean! do you believe a person has a right to do ANYTHING he wants on his own property ie break laws have a meth lab grow pot etc.
"A guest at his home has a choice rather or not to visit a smoker. Unfortunately People have no choice but to work and no choice but to shop if they want to survive!"
Wrong, you have a choice, your making a socialist argument as if the "community" owned the stores and places of employment, they don't.
you dont know the meaning of rights.. or.. socialist! so tell us genus how do you eat and pay your bills if you dont work, unless you are one of the bums living off taxpayers money or your mommy and daddy are rich and you dont know the meaning of work either
I also work and own my own business, I KNOW what liberty, and freedom and rights are, I know what socialism is (it is evil) I did answer you stupid remark about food and water here it is again...you and I have EVERY RIGHT to food and water why in the world would you think we dont?
"you and I have EVERY RIGHT to food and water why in the world would you think we dont?"
Because you don't own it.
If you had a right to food, you could walk into a restraint and demand they feed you. You cant, do that, you must first buy the food, make it your property, then you can consume it.
Now THAT! is a good argument. That is a difficult questions because they are already denied their right to liberty by being imprisoned.
Since they are denied their liberty, they can not obtain their own necessities to life. Your argument is good, but it would be no different them murdering someone by chaining them to a wall.
I didnt say anything about owning the road IDIOT now your just getting down right stupid. what about the right you say someone has to drink and drive only its in your neighborhood where you and your family drive. stop changing the question to fit your stupid a*# ideas
I know enough to see I have schooled you and shot down ALL your crazy a*# views time and time again. try again
I don't own the road where I live, I can't make the rules on it I don't possess that authority. If I did own the road, I would not allow drunk driving on it. (but I could)
This dude must be "hooked" on at least two packs-a-day. Spare me. U wanna smoke.....that's ur business. Jut don't do it in the same air I have to breathe.
lol at criticizing me spelling restaurant and then 'U' and 'UR'...
Anyway, I've never smoked in my life, anything.
But smokers are Americans too aren't they? A federal government mandates stuff like this is reminiscent of Soviet Russia. You can't FORCE morality, and if someone is addicted there are ways to ween off cigs (patches, etc) thanks to free market, not the federal government.
smoking is not a moral issue I know and respect a lot of good "moral" people who smoke.
smoking is a health related issue. smoking causes millions if not billions of dollars in health related problems, not to mention deaths.the moral problem only comes in when smokers smoke around people who dont ie kids in cars or even their own homes
banning smoking in public places is not a health issue for an individual its a health issue protecting the rights of the public who choose not to smoke.
again your logic is full of holes, if I eat unhealthy foods I harm no one but myself, if I do not exercise it effects me not the public
it's private property. the fact that you call it 'public' is just buying into the socialist mentality that the government wants you to take.
I have a right to do as a I please with my private business and property, and you have no right whatsoever in a free society to tell me that I can't cater my business towards smokers or non-smokers, or tell me how to run it.
you people seem to define public places as little mom and pop cafes or somthing. if you own a business you have rights but you dont have the right to expose people to poison or endanger their lives
size doesnt matter ( no pun intended )I have the right to go to a restaurant a football game to work, ANY public place and should not have to worry about breathing some idiots smoke. the right to breath clean air far out weighs your right to smoke around someone who dosnt
You have no *right* to breath clean, or any other kind of air, you also have no *right* to smoke in another building. AND also have no *right* to make demands on others property.
Your concept of rights is terrible, by your arguments I can say you don't even really understand what a natural god given right even is.
MY CONCEPT OF RIGHTS IS TERRIBLE?! I have no right to breath clean air?! you must be crazy! you can say I dont understand but you are sadly mistaken I DO know my God given rights I do know the difference between moral and immoral you are the one having trouble understanding what "rights" are
Rights exist outside of any government. Government cant give you rights, likewise no government can take rights away. Indeed government is a fictional man made concept and is really just another group of men who have no more rights than you do. You have a right to your life, your liberty and your property, nothing more.
the government has its problems. and is not perfect but we have the best government in the world we produce laws in this country to protect our rights without these laws protecting our GOD given rights....clean (smoke free) air, working, food , water the only thing you have taught me is you dont have a clue what free rights are
RhinoRT, I agree with you 100% and I am a smoker! I don't have the right to cause harm to another human and that is exactly what I would be doing if I were to smoke in a public place!
That is just ridiculous! What food you eat or how much you exercise is only affecting you as an individual. When you smoke in public places it affects EVERY ONE in that same area. I don't expect someone to have to change the market where they shop just so they don't have to breathe in my smoke. If I can't wait until I get outside to smoke I would have a very serious problem!
There's a market for everything. If the market demanded a smoke infested bar, this would mean more small businesses looking to open such a bar.
BUT, it's the opposite isn't it?
More bars and resturants are would actually ban smoking on their premesis as it would tamper with the taste of their food and health of consumers. The market demands it. So Huck is really pushing bigger gov + higher taxes here, he's not doing anything radical about smoking.
You got it wrong on Huckabee pushing for higher taxes, as governor of my state he LOWERED and cut taxes 94 times during his term he only raised taxes 5 times and at least 2 of those times was passed by a state wide vote, bigger government ? dont think so every interview or debate he has plans for downsizing government ie. IRS
Huckabee is pushing the "Fair Tax Plan" this does away with income tax, everyone pays a consumption tax on items or services they buy staple items ie food, medicine, GAS ect. would not be taxed. no more IRS no more income tax forms. GO MIKE 08
Former Governor Mike Huckabee loves to claim to have cut taxes an astounding 94 times. One such quote: "I was the first governor in the history of my state to ever lower taxes, the first one in 160 years. We lowered a total of 94 different taxes and fees."
The Arkansas Times, which has been covering Huckabee since before he was elected governor over 10 years ago, nicely answers that misleading assertion.
So anyway, what I mean is that there is a market for everything, unless the government gets bigger and mandates something. I don't know why Huck is running as a Republican, he sounds more Democratic. A Republican used to be for smaller government and fiscal responsibility. Do you realize what this tobacco ban would cost us? (just add another drug to the 'war on drugs').
smoking kills period the end. personally I wish society would get to where smoking was illegal and un-expectable by everyone everywhere. it is THE MOST stupid thing a person can do.
this is the ONLY area I would like to see more government control
if you make tabacco smoking illegal then you create a black market for it. People will end up spending 100x more for them, it would be MORE dangerous, and there will be no tax revenue from it. Let the person decide if they want to smoke.
I know it will never happen I am just venting smoking killed my mother and my brother-in-law.
even before that I hated it with a passion. but you touched on another area if democrats want to raise taxes raise it on tobacco and alcohol.there already is a black market for both so that argument is nill.
yah tobacco has killed a lot of people, no doubt. I think taxes on cigs and alcohol needs to be handled by the state, not the fed. If people don't want higher taxes, they shouldn't vote Dem. But Huck's argument about radon gas argument is ridiculous, let the business decide on this issue.
Whoever posted this video is a real ass. I like an occasional pipe, but for health reasons, I don't want to breathe in cigarrette smoke everywhere I go. Also, people shouldn't have to quit a job just because of someone smoking. That's a bad work enviroment. If the government needs to regulate that; so be it!
I agree with patriotaction. Huckabee is wrong about this issue, but it takes more than one issue a trend to make. Can you show me the other policies he supports that count as totalitarian or fascist?
I agree with your main points here and I oppose Mike Huckabee on this one issue, but seeing as how I will never find a "perfect" candidate who completely goes along with my values, I continue to support Huckabee.
The IDEA that the FEDERAL government has the right to enact such a law is totally unconstitutional. Huckabee has shown that either he has no understanding of the Constitution or that he intends to be a BENEVOLENT totalitarian fascist.
Rights to smoke do not trump rights to not breathe second-hand smoke. You need to smoke, do it in some place people aren't working. Clubs and bars, though, obviously should be smoking or non-smoking... depending on what type of establishment the owner wants to run.
You own your body, but you do not own other peoples property. You may choose to smoke just as you choose to go on to others property. The property owner can decide if smoking is allowed or not but you do not get to make that choice.. you just don't have the authority to tell others what they may do with their property.
Today in California they are preparing a smoking ban in all apartments. In other news they are baning all teenagers from having cell phones AT ALL in cars.
He lost a lot of weight. So, he would be as bad as an ex-smoker is about smokers, by adding anti-obesity to his platform! True nanny state mentality. I guess it is easy to see who the best candidate is, so far as our personal liberties go! Ron Paul 2008!!!
F#CK HUCKABEE, He's another RINO. The 'nice' Neo-Con.
It's up to the resturaunts or even local government to determine these things. It's my body, I should have the right to smoke whatever I want (although I've never smoked in my life)
Neo-Conservatives are democrats that pretend to be Republicans. They've gotten so liberal that it's hard to tell them apart sometimes. Richardson (D) wants to do something similar to Huckabee by restricting junk foods in school. I want my daughter to have the right to buy junk food in school and learn personal responsibility and choose for herself!
Huckabee should be our president at least he would throw away our money..
lineskis69 3 years ago
wait wait wait... so its BAD that in a WORKPLACE where people go, that there's mandatory no smoking? wtf?
I mean, if its your dream job, and some douche is smoking in the chair next to you, its gonna suck.
MacBookHero 3 years ago
Flip flop Mike.
Mike now feels that such a ban is a state and local issue. 1/6/07 statement to "The Hill" dot com.
Hold up your finger Mike to see which way the wind is blowing. Reminds me of another Arkansas governor.
gsuitter 4 years ago
Mike Huckabee is not a conservative!
aarongatescarlton 4 years ago 2
A ad from Fuckabee: " Huckabee's got; a voice-mail from god.." hahahahahahaha!!
How stupid can you be????
Thesouthman 4 years ago 3
Yes indeed and Im also a member of one of those groups and will do my best to make sure this moron doesnt get elected- what sort of "airbagged" society does Nuckarbee want to create??
prochoicechuckles85 4 years ago 2
Also, the government's primary concern should be our safety, so aren't Huckabee's measures in Arkansas doing just that? There are more non-smokers than smokers and the majority of America supports this ban so majority wins. That's democracy for you.
prplhayes06 4 years ago
Democracy is a bad thing and the US is not a democracy, thank god.
For some reason people equate democracy with freedom as if somehow a tyrannical government ruled by a majority is somehow more free than other forms of tyranny. Bush does this a lot and he is very much wrong.
Democracy has been described as two wolves and a sheep deciding whats for dinner. It doesn't work out very well if your a sheep does it.
Our Republic is designed to protect the rights of the minority. (least we use to)
k1e0x 4 years ago
Our country was not designed just for the minority--but each of us--on our own merits. Do you expect Government to "give" us things that we haven't worked for or just because we "deserve" them? I don't. If somebody out there has more than I--good for them. We all have free will. We just need to go back to basics of hard work, less moaning, and more praying. I'm a lot older than you, I grew up in the projects, poorer than dirt---but knew the basics--there's right--there's wrong. Choose one.
jude01okay 4 years ago
In a democracy everyone will eventually find themselves being a sheep on some issue. Instead of lifting people up, democracy tends to drag everyone down to a lowest common denominator.
Democracy is a system where everybody looses, I simply want a system of liberty where everybody wins, even the minority.
k1e0x 4 years ago
You're right. I'm mistaken. America is a constitution-based federal republic.
America may not be an absolute democracy, but it has strong democratic traditions. Of course we should be concerned about protecting the rights of the minority, but in this case, smoking infringes upon the rights of the majority, the non-smokers.
And no, democracy is not a system where "everybody looses [sic]." Democracy is based on carrying out the will of the majority. The majority gets its way the majority wins.
prplhayes06 4 years ago
Can a majority be oppressive of a minority? What makes tyranny of the majority better than tyranny of the individual such as a king or dictator? Isn't it tyranny all the same in the end?
k1e0x 3 years ago
Just a few words: If you believe in freedom, shouldn't the people be allowed to practice it? The free people of America, the majority, wants smoking to be banned (over 70%). That's a free choice, isn't it? The American people have made their choice. And they have chosen longer lives.
prplhayes06 4 years ago
Freedom and "free choice" can not result from government force. Where is the freedom for people who want to operate a smoking establishment on their own property?
Are you aware there are now "Smoke in's" in major cities? Bar's that allow smoking, all night drinking and commonly also have strip shows. People are rebelling against these laws so in effect the ban (for freedom as you say.. lol) has done nothing to help people, it has only made them criminals.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Well I've got news for you Mr. Huckabee. I will smoke wherever I so choose to do so. So fuuuck you.
mxmike458 4 years ago 2
I can't stand his stupid ass facial expressions when he talks! You can tell he's full of shit! And also what kind of person has his lawyers pressure the police to not press charges on his son when his son hanged that dog and slit it's throat? Nice one Huckafuck! It's all right to do whatever you want,so long as it's family!! HUH?
AiresQX4 4 years ago
I can't wait for President Huckabee to raise my taxes and tell me what kind of toilet paper is best for me! Maybe he will force us all to wear helmets while we drive, Mike is so protective of his people! Yes, each one of us belong to and are a ward of President Huckabee, or daddy Huck as I like to call him. We Love you Tax Hikabee!
WDeet 4 years ago 2
Great video my man.
ohioliberty 4 years ago 2
we need a video that concentrates on his intolerance of people with aids, non christians, and much much more. thats what we need too bring his support on you tube down. im serious have you guys ever read any of his books he is a hate monger.
cammetalworks 4 years ago
The arguments in this video don't address what Huckabee said. His message was on a work place safety issue. By your logic, would it be ok for an employer to emit any toxic fume he wants. After all, it's his property right? The comment on outlawing candy bars, etc is also baseless. When an individual eats a candy bar, it doesn't effect others' health. Smoking is different. Second hand smoke is harmful. If you want to make that choice, go ahead. Don't make the choice for those around you.
lesh25 4 years ago
Actually.. I do believe that it is ok for an employer to emit any sort of toxic fumes he wants.. they would want to make it attractive to customers so toxic fumes is not something most people like.. but they *could* so long as it didn't endanger anyone else and nobody else is forced to breath it, and that is key. Your not forced to go into a bar that allows smoking, your also not forced to work in one.. you choose that, so the candy bar analogy is accurate because you also choose to eat that.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Great video, Huckabee does not honor the constitution. He puts his baptist beliefs ahead of the constitution.
moveoverdotorg 4 years ago 3
I advocate a fat tax! Damn all those unhealthy people!
GodSaveUs80 4 years ago
Not only does the person who made this video lack the ability to spell, he links irrelevant comparisons. If you disagree with what Huckabee suggested, at least have the intelligence to communicate that disagreement without propaganda (Nanny Huckabee poster) and to make an educated argument (of course Huckabee doesn't want fascism, that's just rhetoric and most of america is smart enough to see right through that.
meb6216 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This is one of the reasons why I support Mike Huckabee
barnabaspark 4 years ago
Ahemmmm....
Where are you evangelical Huckabee shills when we need them?
Huh?
This is why he never advanced in fund raising...
mcguyver1964 4 years ago
what are you talking about? He raised a whole $20 or so on his money bomb day ('for the children').
Stop slandering him!
GodSaveUs80 4 years ago
Huckabee (though wrong on this issue) at least stands for improving national health. Ron Paul wants to broaden the use of drugs. So instead of a nation that promotes health, we will be a nation that promotes getting high. Go Paul GO! What a genius.
CMM2100 4 years ago
People are already getting high. The "war on drugs" doesn't stop people from doing drugs it wrecks lives, increases crime and tears apart families. Every time the govt. declares "war" on something, that "something" gets worse -- poverty, drugs, illiteracy, etc. Huckabee should be running as a Democrat. He is no conservative.
Parisjune 4 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You have the freedom to make bad decisions for yourself but you do not have the right to introduce toxic fumes into a work place.
Now I disagree with Mike because to me it is an issue of Federalism. I like Mike a lot and this peripheral issue will not change that, but I wish he would have stuck to his federalist credentials that he has shown so well in other areas.
chukmaty 4 years ago
Haha go ahead and ban smoking.. and watch just how it gets ignored. People are tired of being told what to do. Just look at how "well" the smoking ban in Vegas went.. people are outright ignoring it.. and the powers that be are running scared of enforcement.
Iridium242 4 years ago 3
ahh.. come to tennessee its a 400 dollar fine. nobody smokes indoors anymore.
jacobmuffin 4 years ago
I was just in Vegas.. there is a smoking ban there?
That's funny, apparently nobody believes it.
k1e0x 4 years ago
K1eOx,
The days of "lighting up" wherever one chooses are over. It started with "would you like smoking or non-smoking"? When the matradee greets you at the door of the restaurant.
It will end with... smoke in private, anywhere one chooses. But, don't pollute the air non-smokers breathe.
Gdanggatto, out.
gdanggatto 4 years ago
It started with people being able to make voluntary choices and it ended with government using force on the public. That just sounds really so ~great~ gdanggatto.
Just because they do it, doesn't make it right. The government can also make war's legal, it does not make then just.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Totally agree with you, k1e0x. Non-smokers have more than enough smoke-free businesses to freely patronize, so it's only fair that governments continue to allow business owners the right to accommodate smokers.
A better alternative to total bans would be requiring complete physical separation of both smoking + non-smoking areas within a building, and requiring businesses allowing smoking to post exterior signage stating their policy, like what New Haven(IN) did over passing a proposed ban.
prfsnlwannabe 4 years ago
Its not about fairness or allowing options or allowing both sides to have their say.
It's about authority. The authority for a government to tell a business owner what they must do on their property.
k1e0x 4 years ago
it's not your business or property; you have no right to dictate to me what I can or cannot do with my business
GodSaveUs80 4 years ago 7
It should be up to the business owner, not the government.
Parisjune 4 years ago 3
Good luck with that one k1eOx. You wanna smoke. Feel free. Smoke where smokers choose to work.
The rest of us will see you @ the election booth.
gdanggatto 4 years ago
See.. You support force to get your way because you simply don't -like- it, not because you have any sort of claim or power over another business or the rules they enact there..
You might as well just pull a gun on a business owner and make him do what you want, its the same difference, only the government uses force on your behalf.. hired thugs if you will.
k1e0x 4 years ago
People have the right to breathe clean air. I don;t care what kind of substances a person wants to poison their own bodies with, but they should have no right to poison others.
mcole24 4 years ago
..and they do not. Nobody can force you to be in a work place that allows smoking. You choose it by your own free will.
k1e0x 4 years ago
and you have no right to dictate what one does with their property
GodSaveUs80 4 years ago 4
k1eOx,
Apples to oranges here.
Your business is your business. IBM is a business. General Motors is a business. People work there. A bar is a "consumer" business. People choose to go there. Where one works is their livelyhood.
Where one chooses to go for entertainment is their choice.
Work and entertainment........apples to oranges.
The very question Mike Huckabee answered.
gdanggatto 4 years ago
I choose to work the job that I do because they pay me good money and the work environment is good. I agree to work there, they agree to pay me. I have had jobs where the work environment was not good, I knew this going in and agreed regardless.
If you agree to work in a business that allows customers or other employees to smoke, then the only person you can blame is yourself for accepting the job.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Mike Huckabee is a third tier candidte and does not pose a real threeat to your freedoms. Hilary however does.
kstollar3 4 years ago 4
K1eOx,
You miss the point. Unless "your business" is free from anyone walking into it... at any time. Then, you need to stuff the cigs and smoke them when the only harm you do is to yourself.
gdanggatto 4 years ago
you don't have a right to just walk in to my business. I allow you to walk in under my terms
There is a difference
If you walk into a smoke filled bar, you are accepting the risk by your actions. No force is being preformed on anyone in this case. You voluntarily come in if you want. - Force enters into play when you will shutdown a business owner for allowing smoking
Initiating the use of force against another is wrong, you become the aggressor, and your reasons for that force are irrelevant
k1e0x 4 years ago
Government has no right to protect us from ourselves. Seatbelt laws for adults, although wise, are an infringement on our right to let the windsheild stop our face.
Smoking should always be allowable.
The federal government has not right to take that away from anyone.
Drink all you want. But, don't drive down the same street I'm on in that condition.
Smoke all you want. Hell, shove them up your ass and light them, if you want.
Just don't smoke in the place I work, shop, or breathe.
gdanggatto 4 years ago
I like part of your comment, I just want to add.. don't regulate what I can do in my business. If you have no right in my home, you have no right in my business. I allow people in my home just as I allow them in my business.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Well said!
prochoicechuckles85 4 years ago
RhinoRT: I'm sick of this, are arguments are based on your own ignorance.
I'll let you get the last word but I'm banning you afterworld for spamming.
k1e0x 4 years ago
my ignorance? I dont think so..I have blasted you Idiotic views out of the water EVERY TIME
you can do nothing but twist my words to fit your own stupid views. you havnt made a valid point since I started posting here. if you ban me thats you "right" but it only proves you cant make any SMART arguments to back up your own idiotic comments or twisted meaning of peoples rights.
I knew you couldnt answer the drunk driving question with out making an ass of youself
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Well you can claim victory, but your unable to show a decent argument.
( >.> ) I answered everything, you can drive drunk on your own roads, because you own them. :: shrug :: Its simple.
You really need to watch the philosophy of liberty, I would also suggest Michael Badnarik's constitution class for you.
People don't change their minds in a day, but I think with some thought you will eventually get what I'm trying to tell you. Good luck, to you.
k1e0x 4 years ago
I own my home so I guess according to you I can murder someone in my home because...I own it! NO? But why not? YOU seem to think that "ownership" is some magic word that makes all laws and ethics null and void. I see that u have banned RhinoRT, why? Do you "own" you tube? or are u just upset that he's right and you are not? Okay, u can ban me too because I'm finished with you. U r just like those yahoos that think it's okay to fight their dogs because they "OWN" them. Get my point? Good bye!
dandcpark 4 years ago
When you violate someone else right to life we call this murder, and yes it is wrong. Watch my other video. People who dont understand the concepts of rights and natural law bring up murder all the time "So yoo can jes go around an kills anyone yoo want?" no. The limit on your rights is the equal rights of others.
When someone chooses to enter a building of their own free will where smoking is allowed they then accept the risks that they may be exposed to SHS.
k1e0x 4 years ago
you go ahead and ban me from your site what about my right to free speach to show you to be the idiot you are? your just proving you dont have the balls to debate this inteligentlly..... what a sore looser
dharrisphoto 4 years ago
Heh, Do you mean intelligently?
You can exercise your freedom of speech.. on your own property, not here.
I've answered all your questions, but I've not got the patience to deal with your continuous barrage of moronic questions when you fail to grasp the basic concepts of rights and ownership.
If you want to continue to ask, post a thread called "No right to smoke" on the Free Talk Live message boards.
k1e0x 4 years ago
wrong again. and again your logic is just like a net full of holes. buying food or water has absolutely nothing to do with my right to eat and drink and your out of your mind to think so
I can go out in my back yard to the creek and drink water and catch fish and not buy a thing. you still havnt answered my question does a person have a right to get drunk an drive in on public streets?
RhinoRT 4 years ago
No, if you had a right to food you could eat any food, anywhere, and you wouldn't need to ask anyone or pay for anything for it. It is your *right* to it.
You can catch a fish in a creek you own and eat it sure. You own it.
Your logic is faulty, you said "my back yard" quantifying your ownership of it.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Some people called NASCAR allow speeding on roads that they own.
I own the air in my business, why can't I allow smoking in air that I own?
Are you ready to accept defeat on this? If not prove to me that you have a "right" to come into *my* backyard and grab a steak off my barbecue and eat it, without asking me.
If you can prove this, I'll take the video down.
k1e0x 4 years ago
"Some people called NASCAR allow speeding on roads that they own." is this the best you got?
when have you EVER seen a nascar race on public streets? LAME
"I own the air in my business, why can't I allow smoking in air that I own?"....you can as long as the PUBLIC dont have access to your business.
When did I say I had the right to come in your back yard or anyone else's yard for that matter and take anything of yours with out asking?... shot down again!
RhinoRT 4 years ago
"When did I say I had the right to come in your back yard or anyone else's yard for that matter and take anything of yours with out asking?... shot down again!"
You said you had a right to food. If you had a right to food why cant you come on my property and eat my food? It would be your right?
The reason you can't is you have no right to food.
k1e0x 4 years ago
"when have you EVER seen a nascar race on public streets? LAME"
you mean the state owns the streets and do not allow NASCAR on them.. SO NASCAR has to build their own roads that they can allow it on??
With that logic you could ::gasp:: allow smoking in your own business that you built, since the state does not own it.
k1e0x 4 years ago
you need to let go of the nascar thing its not working.
yes they build their own track but they also go to great lengths to see to the safety of the "public" that attends not to mention the extreme safety precautions for the drivers.
Allowing smoking at you business would be the same as nascar permitting the public on the track or not requiring the drivers to wear safety equipment. shot down again!
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Oh?
Does NASCAR do this because of laws, or because its a good idea?
What is stopping you from driving around your own racetrack at 100 mph without a helmet?
k1e0x 4 years ago
You may own the building but you do not own the air! Are you crazy? As a matter of fact, you "own" the building so why is it that if YOU set fire to the building you "own" you will be arrested? That is just the way it is, get over yourself!
dandcpark 4 years ago
I see no problem with destroying your own property if you so like. The fact that its against the law does not mean that you don't have a right to do it. Bad laws can infringe on peoples rights, and good people break bad laws. Look at the Declaration of Independence.
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government"
The framers said it was your "duty" to break bad laws.
k1e0x 4 years ago
OK then idiot I can go to a local State owned lake "thats open to the public" and catch fish and if I feel like it I'll bend over and drink the water all with out owning a single bit of it with out having to ask permission from anyone.
and again you are changing what I say. I never said I had a right to "ANY" food or water, I said "I have a RIGHT TO Food and WATER" a big difference...burned again!
RhinoRT 4 years ago
The owner the state allows you to do this, thats why you can.
If the state said no, you would not be able to.
k1e0x 4 years ago
"Laws have nothing to do with rights you idiot! Do the laws in China erase peoples rights? NO, never!"
Is it just me or this the most idiotic statement
k1e0x has made yet?
RhinoRT 4 years ago
This is a problem today, most people think rights come from the Constitution.. this is false. Read the Federalist paper number 84. Its an argument against adding the Bill of Rights to the Constitution. - I can hear people say.. "why would they NOT add it?!" - because rights don't come from government and they were afraid it would become a list of the ONLY rights people had. Guess what.. it HAS they were right, it had become a list of the only rights we legally express in America.
k1e0x 4 years ago
again I never said our rights "come from" the Constitution or government. and the Bill of Rights dont cover every right man has.
Any body with a brain knows this even you!
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Okay then, if I own a hospital where people HAVE TO GO do I have the right to use asbestos in my buildings? And yes, sometimes people have NO choice what hospital they are taken to in an emergency. This is the same as the business owner allowing smoking! It's his company, right?
dandcpark 4 years ago
Your views on this matter do not make any sense to me. You say people have the choice of where to work but in the world I live in most people take whatever job they can find in order to feed their families. No they aren't forced to work there, they could go on welfare or starve! You speak of "rights" but what about someones "right" not to be exposed to second hand smoke?
dandcpark 4 years ago
Its sad that people have to take whatever job they can find, sometimes people work hazardous jobs for greater pay, its not force.
I am in total agreement with you. You can not force someone to breath cigarette smoke but I don't believe its force.
k1e0x 4 years ago
this has no idea what the meaning of human rights are, it seems as if he has no regard for the law.
"You can not force someone to breath cigarette smoke but I don't believe its force."
if I am sitting in a restaurant and someone fires up they ARE forcing me to breath their poison
RhinoRT 4 years ago
You by your own free will, entered a restaurant that allows smoking, you are thus accepting the risk that someone may smoke in it.
This video is not about rights, I mean the other one I have posted, The Philosophy of Liberty. Its clear you don't understand rights just look at your comment.
"this has no idea what the meaning of human rights are, it seems as if he has no regard for the law."
Laws have nothing to do with rights you idiot! Do the laws in China erase peoples rights? NO, never!
k1e0x 4 years ago
I'm The Idiot? since when does the laws of china effect the laws here? OUR RIGHTS HERE "ARE" PROTECTED BY OUR LAWS ! like it or not you are in the minority here smoking is being banned in public places because the majority of the people want it you seem to think this is being forced by government you are wrong!
the government is passing these laws to protect our "right" to clean air
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Yeah, your the idiot. Here is why. Are rights are not provided to us by any law by ANY government anywhere on earth. Our rights don't come FROM a government, this is absurd! They come from god or from nature.
You express a philosophy that is tyranny of the majority over a minority is ok.
k1e0x 4 years ago
we can name call all night but you are STILL WRONG if you read any of what I said you would see I NEVER said our rights come from the government I said our rights are PROTECTED by the government and laws. ALL RIGHTS ARE GIVEN TO US BY GOD. and "GODS" nature never intended the air to be poisoned either. try again
RhinoRT 4 years ago
I dont go to restaurants that allow smoking thankfully every place my family and I like to dine at are nonsmoking environments by choice. and thanks to Governor Huckabee I dont have to worry about my right to breath smoke free air in any public place I go.
RhinoRT 4 years ago
I thought conservatives were compassionate? I thought conservatives cared for the value of life.
dcmusicfusion 4 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow lots of replies, I'll touch on a few of these, most of the critics fail to understand the concept of individual rights.
Also..
Hillary: Not in favor of a national smoking ban.
Obamma: Not in favor of a national smoking ban.
k1e0x 4 years ago
What about the right to live and work free of health-threatening second-hand smoke? For millions of Americans, it is not reasonable to expect them to just up and leave to find work elsewhere. I've personally had times where it took me half a year to find work; it's absolutely ridiculous to expect working class Americans to go half a year unemployed because they want to be able to breathe.
sibilantecho 4 years ago
"What about the right to live and work free of health-threatening second-hand smoke?"
You have a right to your life, but you have no right to employment by another. Such a right does not exist, smoke or no smoke.
k1e0x 4 years ago
It's not governments job to tell you whats good and bad for you. It's government sole job to protect your liberty and your freedom...amen!
I do have the right to work though and I should have the freedom to work in a smoke free environment
RhinoRT 4 years ago
you have a right to work? that's a socialist mentality. and you believe in liberty and freedom?
i guess your right to work trumps my right not to hire you
GodSaveUs80 4 years ago
you are wayyyyyy of base I am no where near a socialist thinker.
since when is it socialist for a man to go out and go to work in this country? my right to work has nothing to do an employers right to hire me but yes you have every right to hire who you want...you are making no points here what so ever
RhinoRT 4 years ago
See, you totally don't understand what a right is.. you fail again here.
A right is not what you *can* do if you are given permission. A right is what nobody can deny you from doing.
In saying "you have a right to work" that would mean that someone had to provide that to you.
HOWEVER, You have a right to liberty and you can work on your own.. If this is what you mean by work then that would be ok, but its a poor choice of words.
But you have no right to employment of any kind.
k1e0x 4 years ago
you alllllmooooost got it
A right is not what you *can* do if you are given permission. A right is what nobody can deny you from doing. you got the first part right but dead wrong on the last part. thats what laws are for because some so called "rights" are dangerous to others ie drunk driving cooking meth etc.etc.some rights have to be denied otherwise the world would be a much more dangerous place... and I havnt failed anything since my second grade spelling
test
RhinoRT 4 years ago
If smoking is bad for you, the Federal Government would shut down the cigarette factories. Right? Or is tobacco a big lobby? Are our politicians owned by the likes of "tobacco?"
Yes Huck's a nanny. Bought & paid for. No liberty here, move along.
hillbillybeachboy 4 years ago
"If smoking is bad for you, the Federal Government would shut down the cigarette factories."
With that logic they should shut down most sports, amusements parks and they would have banned butter too in the 80's only to force people to eat trans-fats.
It's not governments job to tell you whats good and bad for you. It's government sole job to protect your liberty and your freedom.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Read the rest of the post, Tongue in cheek.
Proof... "No liberty here. Move along."
Get better by paying attention to the whole post.
hillbillybeachboy 4 years ago
"your logic" is ludicrous ! if I eat a stick of butter for dinner I harm no one but myself, if I break my arm skateboarding I hurt no one but my self. If the marboro man fires up a camel in the cubical next to me at work he poisons not only himself but me and everyone around him. while he has every right to smoke he has NO RIGHT to smoke where ever non-smokers may be at the time
RhinoRT 4 years ago
if I eat a stick of butter for dinner I harm no one but myself = true.
If I smoke I harm no one but myself = true.
If I enter or work at a business that allows smoking I harm no one but myself = true.
The Marlboro man will fire up a cigarette next to you, if the owner of the business allows it. Its his choice, (he may however loose many workers by making such a choice.)
k1e0x 4 years ago
If I enter or work at a business that allows smoking I harm no one but myself = true.....I shouldnt have to worry about it, if you own a business that involves the general public you do not have the right to poison the air
RhinoRT 4 years ago
The question is simple. Should smokers be allowed to pollute the air that nonsmokers have to breathe? If you smoke, you have that right. Smoke in your home, your garage, your backyard, your bathroom. Just don't smoke in the same place I breathe.
To say that nonsmokers have a simple choice of working in a nonsmoking workplace is bullshit!
You have the right to smoke. I have the right to work where I don't have to breathe it!
gdanggatto 4 years ago
Can a business owner smoke in his business that he owns? How is this different from his home? How is the state justified for mandating what he does in his business but not in his home?
You have no right to make demands of business owners and place restrictions on their property just as you have no right to place restrictions on their home.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Can a business owner smoke in his business that he owns?...depends on the business, if its a business where the public is involved then yes then smoking should be banned
How is this different from his home?... you got to be joking!!!
he has the right to smoke pot or crack should he have the right to grow pot or cook meth in his house?
RhinoRT 4 years ago
What makes a business different then his home, its all property?
Can a man smoke in his home when he has guests over?
Can a man smoke in his business when he has guests shopping?
Whats the difference?
k1e0x 4 years ago
I'll tell you what makes it different from his home. A guest at his home has a choice rather or not to visit a smoker. Unfortunately People have no choice but to work and no choice but to shop if they want to survive! They should have the right to shop and work without someone else giving them cancer from second hand smoke! I happen to be a smoker and though I choose to take that risk with my own health I refuse to take it with someone elses!!!!
dandcpark 4 years ago
You seem to have a keen sense what the words "human rights" mean! do you believe a person has a right to do ANYTHING he wants on his own property ie break laws have a meth lab grow pot etc.
RhinoRT 4 years ago
"A guest at his home has a choice rather or not to visit a smoker. Unfortunately People have no choice but to work and no choice but to shop if they want to survive!"
Wrong, you have a choice, your making a socialist argument as if the "community" owned the stores and places of employment, they don't.
I'm a non smoker so you know.
k1e0x 4 years ago
you dont know the meaning of rights.. or.. socialist! so tell us genus how do you eat and pay your bills if you dont work, unless you are one of the bums living off taxpayers money or your mommy and daddy are rich and you dont know the meaning of work either
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Your just jumping to conclusions, I work and own my own business on top of that.
I have a video on rights, now I guess I should make one on evils of socialism too.. good idea.
BTW if you cant come up with good arguments, I may just ban you. Answer the question about food and water.
k1e0x 4 years ago
I also work and own my own business, I KNOW what liberty, and freedom and rights are, I know what socialism is (it is evil) I did answer you stupid remark about food and water here it is again...you and I have EVERY RIGHT to food and water why in the world would you think we dont?
RhinoRT 4 years ago
"you and I have EVERY RIGHT to food and water why in the world would you think we dont?"
Because you don't own it.
If you had a right to food, you could walk into a restraint and demand they feed you. You cant, do that, you must first buy the food, make it your property, then you can consume it.
k1e0x 4 years ago
owning food and water has NOTHING to do with having the right "to" food and water.
People in prison dont own or buy food and water they still have the right to food and water.
Shot down again
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Now THAT! is a good argument. That is a difficult questions because they are already denied their right to liberty by being imprisoned.
Since they are denied their liberty, they can not obtain their own necessities to life. Your argument is good, but it would be no different them murdering someone by chaining them to a wall.
k1e0x 4 years ago
now answer my question about driving drunk!
cant wait for this one
RhinoRT 4 years ago
"now answer my question about driving drunk!
cant wait for this one"
Here it comes, are you ready?
Drive drunk all you like. !!! If you own the road, I could care less what you do on it. Crash, set you car on fire.. whatever dude.
If someone else, such as the state, owns the road they can make rules for that road, such as rules against drunk driving.
Are you learning yet?
k1e0x 4 years ago
I didnt say anything about owning the road IDIOT now your just getting down right stupid. what about the right you say someone has to drink and drive only its in your neighborhood where you and your family drive. stop changing the question to fit your stupid a*# ideas
I know enough to see I have schooled you and shot down ALL your crazy a*# views time and time again. try again
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Yeah, you sure got me. lol
If you own the road, you can drive drunk on it.
I don't own the road where I live, I can't make the rules on it I don't possess that authority. If I did own the road, I would not allow drunk driving on it. (but I could)
k1e0x 4 years ago
dweeb. stick ur cigs where I don't even have to smell them.
gdanggatto 4 years ago
Ok...ok......ok........I've done some research. Turns out.....this dude is the favorite grandson of Philip-Morris. :-)
Smoke 'um if u gottem.
gdanggatto 4 years ago
How about: Smoke them while you are still free to do so. This form of large gov. 'mothering' sound more like a Socialist Democrat idea.
Goldwater once said: "You can't legislate morality." It's proven itself once during prohibition and the 'war on drugs', it'll prove itself again.
soulmantim 4 years ago
This dude must be "hooked" on at least two packs-a-day. Spare me. U wanna smoke.....that's ur business. Jut don't do it in the same air I have to breathe.
gdanggatto 4 years ago
lol at criticizing me spelling restaurant and then 'U' and 'UR'...
Anyway, I've never smoked in my life, anything.
But smokers are Americans too aren't they? A federal government mandates stuff like this is reminiscent of Soviet Russia. You can't FORCE morality, and if someone is addicted there are ways to ween off cigs (patches, etc) thanks to free market, not the federal government.
soulmantim 4 years ago 5
smoking is not a moral issue I know and respect a lot of good "moral" people who smoke.
smoking is a health related issue. smoking causes millions if not billions of dollars in health related problems, not to mention deaths.the moral problem only comes in when smokers smoke around people who dont ie kids in cars or even their own homes
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Smoking is a health related issue ... for the person who chooses to smoke, this is their right.
The state should not be funding hospitals in the first place.
If the state can make health decisions for you, can they tell you what foods you must eat or how often you must exercise?
Answer: The state can not make health decisions for you, despite the cost that they shouldn't even be paying.
k1e0x 4 years ago
banning smoking in public places is not a health issue for an individual its a health issue protecting the rights of the public who choose not to smoke.
again your logic is full of holes, if I eat unhealthy foods I harm no one but myself, if I do not exercise it effects me not the public
RhinoRT 4 years ago
it's private property. the fact that you call it 'public' is just buying into the socialist mentality that the government wants you to take.
I have a right to do as a I please with my private business and property, and you have no right whatsoever in a free society to tell me that I can't cater my business towards smokers or non-smokers, or tell me how to run it.
It's called consumer choice.
GodSaveUs80 4 years ago
you people seem to define public places as little mom and pop cafes or somthing. if you own a business you have rights but you dont have the right to expose people to poison or endanger their lives
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Is a cafe different than a stadium?
Why does size matter?
k1e0x 4 years ago
size doesnt matter ( no pun intended )I have the right to go to a restaurant a football game to work, ANY public place and should not have to worry about breathing some idiots smoke. the right to breath clean air far out weighs your right to smoke around someone who dosnt
RhinoRT 4 years ago
You have no *right* to breath clean, or any other kind of air, you also have no *right* to smoke in another building. AND also have no *right* to make demands on others property.
Your concept of rights is terrible, by your arguments I can say you don't even really understand what a natural god given right even is.
k1e0x 4 years ago
MY CONCEPT OF RIGHTS IS TERRIBLE?! I have no right to breath clean air?! you must be crazy! you can say I dont understand but you are sadly mistaken I DO know my God given rights I do know the difference between moral and immoral you are the one having trouble understanding what "rights" are
RhinoRT 4 years ago
Yea, your all messed up but ill teach you.
Rights exist outside of any government. Government cant give you rights, likewise no government can take rights away. Indeed government is a fictional man made concept and is really just another group of men who have no more rights than you do. You have a right to your life, your liberty and your property, nothing more.
k1e0x 4 years ago
the government has its problems. and is not perfect but we have the best government in the world we produce laws in this country to protect our rights without these laws protecting our GOD given rights....clean (smoke free) air, working, food , water the only thing you have taught me is you dont have a clue what free rights are
RhinoRT 4 years ago
But, you *do* have to worry about it, because its your responsibility to look after your own health.
If your allergic to artificial fog do you go into clubs that use it?
Do you demand that the owner stop using it while you are there?
No, you would get thrown out on your ear ..and rightly so for attempting to make demands of the owner.
k1e0x 4 years ago
yes I have to worry about it because of the stupidity and immoral idiots who have no regard for others
RhinoRT 4 years ago
RhinoRT, I agree with you 100% and I am a smoker! I don't have the right to cause harm to another human and that is exactly what I would be doing if I were to smoke in a public place!
dandcpark 4 years ago
That is just ridiculous! What food you eat or how much you exercise is only affecting you as an individual. When you smoke in public places it affects EVERY ONE in that same area. I don't expect someone to have to change the market where they shop just so they don't have to breathe in my smoke. If I can't wait until I get outside to smoke I would have a very serious problem!
dandcpark 4 years ago
My guess is......Hillary wrote this. :-)
gdanggatto 4 years ago
wow! What a youtube entry from someone who can't even spell restaurant.
gdanggatto 4 years ago
when there is nothing left to criticize...
soulmantim 4 years ago
There's a market for everything. If the market demanded a smoke infested bar, this would mean more small businesses looking to open such a bar.
BUT, it's the opposite isn't it?
More bars and resturants are would actually ban smoking on their premesis as it would tamper with the taste of their food and health of consumers. The market demands it. So Huck is really pushing bigger gov + higher taxes here, he's not doing anything radical about smoking.
soulmantim 4 years ago
You got it wrong on Huckabee pushing for higher taxes, as governor of my state he LOWERED and cut taxes 94 times during his term he only raised taxes 5 times and at least 2 of those times was passed by a state wide vote, bigger government ? dont think so every interview or debate he has plans for downsizing government ie. IRS
RhinoRT 4 years ago
fantastic about the IRS, but what about eliminating the Income tax?
downsizing gov doesn't always mean making the IRS smaller, it's also cutting the 'push' the federal government has on the states.
soulmantim 4 years ago
Huckabee is pushing the "Fair Tax Plan" this does away with income tax, everyone pays a consumption tax on items or services they buy staple items ie food, medicine, GAS ect. would not be taxed. no more IRS no more income tax forms. GO MIKE 08
RhinoRT 4 years ago
get rid of the IRS and replace it with NOTHING
GodSaveUs80 4 years ago
Former Governor Mike Huckabee loves to claim to have cut taxes an astounding 94 times. One such quote: "I was the first governor in the history of my state to ever lower taxes, the first one in 160 years. We lowered a total of 94 different taxes and fees."
The Arkansas Times, which has been covering Huckabee since before he was elected governor over 10 years ago, nicely answers that misleading assertion.
GodSaveUs80 4 years ago
Mike Huckabee DID CUT TAXES and I benefited from it. the arkansas times is a liberal biased piece of crap and holds no merit what so ever
RhinoRT 4 years ago
So anyway, what I mean is that there is a market for everything, unless the government gets bigger and mandates something. I don't know why Huck is running as a Republican, he sounds more Democratic. A Republican used to be for smaller government and fiscal responsibility. Do you realize what this tobacco ban would cost us? (just add another drug to the 'war on drugs').
soulmantim 4 years ago
smoking kills period the end. personally I wish society would get to where smoking was illegal and un-expectable by everyone everywhere. it is THE MOST stupid thing a person can do.
this is the ONLY area I would like to see more government control
make it illegal everywhere!!!!! GO MIKE
RhinoRT 4 years ago
nah.
next people will want to make alcohal illegal.
if you make tabacco smoking illegal then you create a black market for it. People will end up spending 100x more for them, it would be MORE dangerous, and there will be no tax revenue from it. Let the person decide if they want to smoke.
soulmantim 4 years ago
I know it will never happen I am just venting smoking killed my mother and my brother-in-law.
even before that I hated it with a passion. but you touched on another area if democrats want to raise taxes raise it on tobacco and alcohol.there already is a black market for both so that argument is nill.
RhinoRT 4 years ago
yah tobacco has killed a lot of people, no doubt. I think taxes on cigs and alcohol needs to be handled by the state, not the fed. If people don't want higher taxes, they shouldn't vote Dem. But Huck's argument about radon gas argument is ridiculous, let the business decide on this issue.
soulmantim 4 years ago
"smoking kills period the end."
..but does second hand smoke "kill"? Can someone actually die from it? I don't know this but its a worth question to ask.
Reference: Penn & Teller Bullshit: Secondhand Smoke.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Whoever posted this video is a real ass. I like an occasional pipe, but for health reasons, I don't want to breathe in cigarrette smoke everywhere I go. Also, people shouldn't have to quit a job just because of someone smoking. That's a bad work enviroment. If the government needs to regulate that; so be it!
ree3940139401 4 years ago
I agree with patriotaction. Huckabee is wrong about this issue, but it takes more than one issue a trend to make. Can you show me the other policies he supports that count as totalitarian or fascist?
bookender 4 years ago
I agree with your main points here and I oppose Mike Huckabee on this one issue, but seeing as how I will never find a "perfect" candidate who completely goes along with my values, I continue to support Huckabee.
patriotaction 4 years ago
The IDEA that the FEDERAL government has the right to enact such a law is totally unconstitutional. Huckabee has shown that either he has no understanding of the Constitution or that he intends to be a BENEVOLENT totalitarian fascist.
Lodestar77 4 years ago 2
Rights to smoke do not trump rights to not breathe second-hand smoke. You need to smoke, do it in some place people aren't working. Clubs and bars, though, obviously should be smoking or non-smoking... depending on what type of establishment the owner wants to run.
ogrepete 4 years ago
You own your body, but you do not own other peoples property. You may choose to smoke just as you choose to go on to others property. The property owner can decide if smoking is allowed or not but you do not get to make that choice.. you just don't have the authority to tell others what they may do with their property.
k1e0x 4 years ago
Today in California they are preparing a smoking ban in all apartments. In other news they are baning all teenagers from having cell phones AT ALL in cars.
k1e0x 4 years ago
I've got a funny feeling that Ron Paul made this video compilation. :-D haha
blwalla 4 years ago
He lost a lot of weight. So, he would be as bad as an ex-smoker is about smokers, by adding anti-obesity to his platform! True nanny state mentality. I guess it is easy to see who the best candidate is, so far as our personal liberties go! Ron Paul 2008!!!
mlang52 4 years ago
F#CK HUCKABEE, He's another RINO. The 'nice' Neo-Con.
It's up to the resturaunts or even local government to determine these things. It's my body, I should have the right to smoke whatever I want (although I've never smoked in my life)
soulmantim 4 years ago 2
I dont see how someone can be a RINO and a Neo-con...kind of an oxymoron...but whatever...Go Huckabee....yeah boi
hatcher32 4 years ago
Neo-Conservatives are democrats that pretend to be Republicans. They've gotten so liberal that it's hard to tell them apart sometimes. Richardson (D) wants to do something similar to Huckabee by restricting junk foods in school. I want my daughter to have the right to buy junk food in school and learn personal responsibility and choose for herself!
soulmantim 4 years ago
Neo-Conservatives are republicans that lean left
Mike Huckabee is no Neo-Conservative if anything he is far right.
I guess you would also like your daughter to have the choice to buy condoms at school.
how about setting an example by taking it out of schools, if you want her to eat junk food keep it in your own home. GO MIKE 08
RhinoRT 4 years ago
He was local government! and I am glad he got smoking banned in public places like restaurants
I normally am against any kind of "more government control" but this is one I would get behind (am behind!)
and you do have the right to smoke what ever you want but you dont have the right to smoke where there may be non smokers.!!!!
Mike Huckabee is no neo con.! GO MIKE 08
RhinoRT 4 years ago