The nannying fussbuckets have created a new category of evil - the "pro-smoking blogger". Mostly this is because they couldn't carry on with the lying claim that these bloggers were all in the pay of "Big Tobacco" since, in the main, they aren't. And the first act of terror under this new designation has been to claim that these naughty bloggers are "threatening" those nice anti-smoking folk who care only for the nation's health (and not at all for their own tenure, bank balance or preferment).
Indeed the nannying fussbuckets have gone as far as to create a little website - "TobaccoTactics" - wherein the expose the evil of these bloggers (not to mentions lobbyists, politicians and other opponents of their prohibitionist urges). I find some things odd about this whole effort not least the manner in which the anti-tobacco lobby tiptoe ever closer to defaming bloggers and writers who have the gall to disagree with the prohibitionist cause - presumably they are sure in their arguments or else confident that, without the funding anti-smoking groups enjoy, these bloggers are hard pressed to challenge.
Others have commented at length on the puerile nature of the "TobaccoTactics" webite but no-one - not even Dick Puddlecote - has spotted the glaring omission from the "politicians" list. Here is that list under "D":
Isn't there someone missing here? A non-smoking, teetotal advocate of personal choice? My MP and Dick Puddlecote's mascot?
It seems to me that this website and the carefully placed articles in the Guardian and Daily Mail reek of desperation - the prohibitionists are realising that their unpleasant, aggressive and judgemental campaigns are more and more counter-productive.
Those of us non-smokers who support the "pro-smoking bloggers" do so because we are pro-freedom and pro-choice. We are fed up with the endless nagging and finger-wagging from the anti-smoking brigade. And we think - like most sane people out there - that enough is enough. If people want to smoke they should be allowed to smoke - they know the potential consequences of that decision, they are grown-ups and should be allowed to carry on unmolested, uninsulted and free to make their own choices.