Yesterday Wisconsin’s Tea Party favorite Scott Walker proved to the world that he is in fact a “Nanny State Progressive” and does not believe in freedom or the Constitution when he announced that he will not support repealing the smoking ban.

The scary part of all of this is if one takes a step back how similar this government mandated bigotry is similar to the Jim Crow laws with some glaring differences.

Jim Crow
The Jim Crow laws were state and local laws in the United States enacted between 1876 and 1965. They mandated de jure racial segregation in all public facilities, with a supposedly “separate but equal” status for black Americans. In reality, this led to treatment and accommodations that were usually inferior to those provided for white Americans, systematizing a number of economic, educational and social disadvantages

Smoking ban
In the case of the smoking bans the government is mandating that no business caters to smokers, there is no attempt at implying separate but equal, none whatsoever. But the similarities don’t end there. When the government sponsors any form of discrimination it emboldens bigots to carry it even further. And of course like the Progressive Jim Crow bigots they use questionable scientific methods to justify their bigotry. In the case of the Jim Crow Laws they used the so called Science “Eugenics” Of course these elete progressives thought they had the right to control all aspects of human behavior which brought about smoking bans in the early 1900’s and of course the infamous “prohibition”ell

In New York anti-smoking activist James Repace was helping a group drive smokers from their own homes. Now most people don’t know who Repace is. He is one of a group of activist who when commissioned at the EPA to study the effects of Radon turned it into their own anti-smoking crusade. Well I confronted Mr Repace and demanded he justify their use of Junk Science. Of course he deflected my questions, he did not deny my accusations and made no attempt to justify the methodology. More on their so called Science latter.

Also in New York anti-smoking bigot Progressive Nanny Bloomberg declared outdoor smoking illegal.

We now see this brand of discrimination rear its ugly head in the form of job discrimination. If you visit MoGASPS site you will actually see a lawyer defend this brand of discrimination and claim that it is not discrimination as smokers are not a part of the “Protected Class” This lawyer mentioned people like Aristotle but at no point did he discuss the Constitution. Why not? Because no where in the Constitution does it make o provision for a “protected class” The Progressive lost the Eugenics war. The handwriting was on the wall. The Jim Crow laws were unconstitutional, Why? The 14th amendment.

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

But the Progressives managed to turn defeat into a power grab. Instead of enforcing the Constitution as they swore to do they created this imaginary “Protected Class” But not only does their new law violate the very constitutional amendment they failed to enforce. It created another violation of the constitution by declaring private property “Public Accommodation” Which is a clear violation of the fifth amendment. . . . . nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Of course that is where they claim the right to smoking bans as private property is now declared “Public Accommodation” But you will never hear a Progressive discuss Discrimination and the Constitution. They will not mention for 100 years they deliberately failed to enforce the constitution, they will quickly turn you towards the civil rights act to justify their power grab and claim that it was necessary.

Now for the great Progressive Lie The Progressive God of Science. Fist of all they Cheated and used a highly questionable methodology called Meta-analysis which is more of a tool for activism than a scientific one. But just for sake of argument lets say their numbers are correct and the Relative Risk is actually 1.2 or 20% as they say. They throw out that 20% and people think that 100% is the maximum. That is not how Statistics works. Lets put into the perspective of lottery tickets. If you buy 1 ticket you have the same chance of winning as everyone else. If you buy 1.2 tickets your chances go up by 20% If you buy 10 tickets your chances of winning go up 1000% So while that 20% may seem scary it is relativly meaningless. So next time they quote you that 20% ask them exactly how many causes of diseases have been proven with a relative risk of 1.2. Guss what? The answer is None. While they claim thousands of deaths caused by second hand smoke they can prove the same amount as there are proven causes of diseases with the same low statistical significance. NONE! There was even an award winning article in science on studies with low statistical significance called Epidemiology Faces its Limits The same author wrote another article for the New York Times called “Do We Really Know What Makes Us Healthy”

But again the Progressives have long been known to use qustionable science do demoralize their opposition. In the case of Gun owners they attempt to portray them as a bunch of beer guzzeling binge drinking drunks. And of course if you are a mom who smokes you just may be forcing your kids into criminal behavior. The list goes on and on. Anything they can claim to be science that will dehumanize, demoralize  those they think lesser gives them feelings of power and control. And this too emboldens the bigots. Here are some examples from the Topix Smoking forum from a poster Called Just Candid.

As it’s a know fact that 38% of people who smoke have mental problems it comes a no suprise that a percentage of people who use Chantix try to harm or kill themselves. Could this just be the natural order of things, kind of like survival of the fittest?

Of course we all know they love to play the addiction card.

Poor addicted “Betty”. I ALMOST feel your pain Betty. We know your sddiction overides common sense. 0>:-)

And who can forget the Just Candid classic repeated so often.

“Most drunks, degenerates, amd scumbag riffraff are people who all smoke. 0>:- 0”

But this is the mentality when the government mandates or even sanctions discrimination in any way shape manner or form. So comrade Walker, enjoy your brief term as governor, I for one will work for your recall.