This is how to do it, MPs

Listen to the people:

SOUTH BEND - A member of the South Bend Common Council wants her name removed as one of the sponsors of a city smoking ban bill.
The change comes after Valerie Schey spoke with small business and bar owners.

The only people our shower of shit listen to, are the public health lobby. Them being the people that our shower of shit pay to lobby them. Out of our money. But they don't care what we think.

Arrgghh!

Woo

You don't hear 'Woo' for ages and then two come along at once:

Click to woo a bigger woo

Friday tunes

A bit of a funny mix tonight.



I know you've all just come home from it, but tonight's theme is about work. Only because I have so much of it to do this weekend. I need to catch up on a lot of jobs I've been putting to one side in favour of sitting.

I have a long list of jobs to do on the house.



I have a long list of jobs to do on the car.



After this:



It's chop chop, busy busy, work work, bang bang all weekend, until this:



It is weekend though, so at least there's beer.



And cigars



That's home brewed beer and cigars imported from Holland



I hope your weekend is a little more relaxing than mine will be.

Fancy a laff? There's some Dick stroking over at Microdaves.

Where do the fat kids get their money from?

Apparently TV is responsible for kids getting fat. Not only are people so unable to make their own choices, they have to do exactly as adverts tell them, they are so feeble that even the mention of unhealthy food in a telly program will force them to consume that same food in such amounts they become huge fat whaps.

CHILDREN’S TELEVISION shows have been criticised for fuelling the obesity crisis by promoting unhealthy foods.
Sweet snacks and sugar-sweetened drinks are painted in a positive light to young viewers in the UK and Ireland, according to experts.

I'm just a little confused by this though. There seems to me to be a big break in the chain between children's TV and fatness.

The study of the small screen found that there are an average of 14 “food cues” in weekday programmes broadcast between 6am and 11.30am, when pre-schoolers are most likely to have control of the remote.

Pre-schoolers are watching this stuff. That's where the missing link is.

If a pre-schooler sees a can of pop or a cheeseburger on the telly and decides they want one, how do they go about getting it?

1) Nip down to the ATM, take out some of their wage, drive to MacDonalds and place an order?
2) Ask a parent?

The only way a pre-schooler can get fat is if an adult buys food and feeds it to them. Young children neither have money nor the ability to forage for food.

In order to get fat, they need a parent with an inability to properly raise children.

TV regulation ain't gonna solve that problem.

Seven anti-smoker reasons why the ban is good

Apparently the smoking ban has changed our lives in seven ways:

It’s seven years since England joined Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland by introducing legislation banning smoking in offices, restaurants, bars and other public places.
The aim of the law, which came into force on July 1, 2007, was to reduce passive smoking and encourage smokers to reduce the amount they smoked. But there have been other side-effects of the ban that we weren’t expecting.

Indeed there have. For example, thousands of pubs closing down and all the staff being put out of work. In the cases of live-in landlords, being put out of their homes.

Of course that's not what is going to be discussed in this article.

Clothes last longer

Before the ban: There was no worse reminder of a heavy night out than smoky clothes in the corner of the room. The morning after a night out, you’d immediately have to wash your ‘going out’ clothes to get rid of the stench.
For those with long hair, it was worse. As soon as you got home, forget crawling into bed, first you had to shower – otherwise the smell of smoke on your pillow would keep you gagging all night.

Now: Get home, change into PJs, get into bed. Job done. No stains on your clothes? You can wear them again before they hit the washing machine.

This supposed benefit always makes me laugh out loud. I can imagine chavs getting up in the morning and putting last nights 'on the piss' tracksuit on again. Personally, when I go out, I make a bit of an effort and dress up. Those would not be the kind of clothes I wore again the next day to go shopping or slop around the house.

Smoking or not, my going out clothes are worn once and then washed. Anyone who does differently is a scruffy fucker.

Hangovers are easier

Before the ban: While they seem to get worse the older we get, pre-ban, you could expect the dreaded headache to be accompanied by a sore throat whether you smoked or not.

Now: You might still feel queasy, your head might still be throbbing but at least your sinuses are clear…

Really? As a smoker, I don't get a sore throat, but maybe it's just because I'm used to it. Still, making your hangover a little more bearable is not worth the intrusion of the state into private property with draconian fines for dissent and thousands of pubs closing as a result.

You want a better hangover? Drink less.

We’ve found new time-fillers

Before the ban: Having a dull night out? Or perhaps you were a bit nervous with the company? Before the ban, smoking was a go-to boredom filler and gave us all something to do with our hands.

Now: With the coincidental growth in smartphone, there are always football results to check and new Candy Crush levels to reach.

Fuck me! I would hate to be in the company of someone who spends all evening playing childrens games on their fucking phone. At least smokers are social people. At least you can have a chat with a smoker. You can't with someone who has their head buried in a blinking iphone.

We’re better off

Before the ban: You’d spend £6 on a pack of 20 cigarettes at the beginning of the night, thinking they’d last 24 hours. But they were gone in the space of a few hours – mostly to cadging friends.

Now: If you’re a ‘social smoker’ you’re less likely to buy a pack knowing it’s harder to smoke when you go out. For firm smokers, your non-smoking friends might not bother coming outside with you, so you’ll probably have more of the pack left.

Rubbish. Not only are the smokers outside in the beer garden or smoking shelter, their non smoking friends are out there too. If people want to smoke, they will. Either by still picking up that pack on the way to the pub or by simply staying in and inviting friends around.

Having said that, we are a lot better off; smokey drinkies are a lot cheaper than going to the pub, and the atmosphere is a lot better too.

We’re more aware of other aromas

Before the ban: You’d walk into a club or bar and a wall of smoke would hit you, making everything hazy.

Now: You walk into a club and see every imperfection. The worst thing? The smell of smoke did at least cover up bad smells coming from people, from those with ‘digestion issues’ to sweat from throwing shapes on the dance-floor.

We are able to smell a lot more farts in pubs these days. That's not a good thing though. I certainly don't remember walls of smoke and haze though, that's a typical anti-smoker line. You could smell that it was there, but it didn't fill the room. Maybe she just went in pubs that had particularly bad ventilation.

It’s not cool to smoke

Before the ban: You’re young, in a club and have a drink in one hand, so what did you have in the other? Even though we didn’t tell our mums, it was probably a cigarette – it was just part of a night out.

Now: When it’s a cold winter’s night and it’s pouring with rain, going outside for a puff isn’t quite as appealing – especially when you end up being the only person who stinks from it. We think we’ll just stay indoors for a nice pint actually…

Smoking is always cool and you know it. The truth is though, smoking is just as 'cool' as it ever was. I've met so many new people in smoking shelters since the ban. Smokers are a really friendly and sociable bunch. Whenever you go out for a fag on your own, there's always someone out there to talk to. I've sometimes spent the bulk of an evening out in the smoking shelter with friends or the Mrs, because that's where all the action is.

It's like the kitchen at parties.

No awkward seating issues

Before the ban: You’d walk into a restaurant and be greeted with the question “Smoking or non-smoking?” If you were with a fellow non-smoker or fellow smoker, it was straightforward.

But what if one said “non-smoking” at the same time the other said “smoking”. Who would get their way? Plus, if you did opt for non-smoking but found your table bordered on the smoking zone, you might as well have spent the evening puffing on a cigarette.

Now: We can actually taste and smell the food in front of us. Plus we don’t resent the people we’re eating with.

I don't remember it being awkward. It there was a non smoker in the group we would sit in a non smoking area and nip off for a fag if we wanted one. Sometimes the non-smoker would insist we sat in smoking if we were mostly smokers. That's how smokers and non-smokers used to get along before the ban.

And as for tasting the food, what a load of boloney. I've never had a problem tasting food. Food is good!

So this is how an anti-smoker views the ban; seven small reasons why their lives are marginally better for a couple of hours a week.

So forget the closed pubs, forget the intrusion into property rights, forget the staff out of work and forget the population being treated like children by their government.

Now you can wear last nights pub clothes again today. Score!