|
Suffice it to say, the good folks in City Paper's accounting department were none too pleased with the receipt from a recent Friday evening interview. But when you're the first of three mayoral candidates to 1) roll up on a "Cocktails With" interview sans handlers and 2) offer a toast to start the talk, a trio of $12 chardonnays is the least we can do. (Full disclosure: The interviewer's Guinness tally topped that by two at a reasonable $6.50 a pop making for a loose-tongued conversation during which a notebook never sat atop the fancy wooden bar.)
Such was the case with Michael Nutter, who's supposedly too smart and too buttoned-up to take over the second floor of City Hall from a man, and longtime rival, for whom he has nary a kind word.
Nutter made his way into the bar in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel's lobby around 7:45 p.m.; the smoking ban didn't come up until, oh, after 9:30 p.m. and when it did, I'm pretty sure he confirmed my stance that pro-ban advocates knew damn well that most taprooms wouldn't want to risk opening their tax books in order to get an exception. (For objectivity's sake, we'll pretend it didn't come up at all so as to give the ban's architect a fair shot.)
Nutter spent a good amount of time discussing why the current mayor's ego is destroying the city the word "narcissist" came up, with emphasis and how the press owes it to Philadelphians to investigate the smoke-and-mirrors resume of current front-runner Chaka Fattah, who, Nutter says, while boasting of bringing low-cost heating oil to Philly, fails to mention that he got it from Hugo Chavez.
If this guy's too buttoned-up he does cop to thoroughly enjoying the Capital Grille scene he does a hell of a job hiding it behind righteous indignation, like when I asked why he's so fixated on John Street. "He's there for another year, and so's the police commissioner," Nutter said. "Are we just going to waste an entire year? Are we just going to let the city rot away? They need to be held accountable."
He also finds the "too smart" label downright offensive; the people should want someone with a little mental capacity in charge. And when it comes to crime, he's the only candidate who, so far, has been gutsy enough to point out one of the biggest, albeit controversy-laden, reasons for the increases of recent years.
Paraphrased: Fifteen to 20 years ago, crack ravaged America's inner cities. Today, the children of crackheads are you got it 15 to 20 years old. Go ahead and try to argue that there isn't a connection. (Full disclosure: This came after I told him that I'm entirely behind his mind-set that it takes aggressive policing to address aggressive criminals.)
Scrolling through his electronic scheduler, Nutter concedes that, yes, he's running himself ragged. Though the following night will afford him a couple of hours to unwind at a friend's party, the days are filled with subway-stop handshaking, phone-call fundraising (about five hours a day) and campaign strategizing. He doesn't complain, though, since he knew what he was getting himself into when he became the first declared candidate last summer.
"I'm the one who gave up my day job," he said. "The day after the election, they can all go back to D.C. or Harrisburg."
So, will they be on their way back to those places? Nutter didn't make any predictions, but the ear-to-ear grin that came when I mentioned people were shocked when he released his ample fundraising figures last month said just two things: Underestimate me at your own risk, and sure, I'll have another wine.
There has never been a single study showing that exposure to the low levels
of smoke found in bars and restaurants with decent modern ventilation and
filtration systems kills or harms anyone.
As to the annoyance of smoking, a compromise between smokers and non-smokers
can be reached, through setting a quality standard and the use of modern
ventilation technology.
Air ventilation can easily create a comfortable environment that removes not
just passive smoke, but also and especially the potentially serious
contaminants that are independent from smoking.
Thomas Laprade
Thunder Bay, Ont.
A ban on smoking in restaurants and other public places recently went into effect in League City.
Smoking Ban’s Real Threat Is To Freedom
The bandwagon of local smoking bans now steamrolling across the nation has nothing to do with protecting people from the supposed threat of “second-hand” smoke.
Indeed, the bans are symptoms of a far more grievous threat, a cancer that has been spreading for decades and has now metastasized throughout the body politic, spreading even to the tiniest organs of local government. This cancer is the only real hazard involved — the cancer of unlimited government power.
The issue is not whether second-hand smoke is a real danger or a phantom menace, as a study published recently in the British Medical Journal indicates.
The issue is: If it were harmful, what would be the proper reaction?
Should anti-tobacco activists satisfy themselves with educating people about the potential danger and allowing them to make their own decisions, or should they seize the power of government and force people to make the “right” decision?
The decision to smoke, or to avoid “second-hand” smoke, is a question to be answered by each individual based on his own values and his own assessment of the risks.
This is the same kind of decision free people make regarding every aspect of their lives — how much to spend or invest, whom to befriend or sleep with, whether to go to college or get a job, whether to get married or divorced, and so on.
All of these decisions involve risks; some have demonstrably harmful consequences; most are controversial and invite disapproval from the neighbors.
But the individual must be free to make these decisions.
He must be free because his life belongs to him, not to his neighbors, and only his own judgment can guide him through it.
Thomas Laprade
Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada
Additionally his plan violates the first ammendment's guarantee of the right to 'peaceably assemble'. How do you expect the police to do these things 'constitutionally' when they murdered 22 people last year, a lot of them unarmed?
Another idea he has is to put security camera's on street corner's. Why do we just put camera's in everyone's house because you never know what can happen. That'll keep us all safe.
How will this plan do any good for the people of this city? How is taking away people's right's a good thing? There is a question for Michael Nutter.
Here is a follow up question, because I already know his answer to the first question. Why don't you get at the root of the problem namely how do drugs and guns get on the street? Answer that question, because I already know the deal.
Don't violate our right's and say you're protecting us.
Nothing significant has been distributed from the offices of World health organization for decades which does not also distribute fear.
Public Health is a theological political lobby group more focused on promotion of itself and its partners than the protection of anyone else.
If we take away the fear they distribute, they actually have very little left to say. Fear promotes hatred and that is the real bottom line.
If the charity foundations wish to live in the political world abandoning the cures they advertise, they should be honest enough with their sponsors to say so.
Industrial foundations should be limited in their obvious ability to sell their contributors products.
If science tells us toxins in cigarettes can be reduced and the only thing that prevents those reductions are politicians. Perhaps those politicians should face the public and ask us, for a change, what we would do.
The hate campaigns over ruling the reality of real science can not hide the fact there are still the same number of smokers today as their were in 1950 population has more than doubled and prevalence figures as a result, have dropped significantly. We would expect to see a reduction immediately in reflection of population increases yet the so called smoking related diseases tripled in that time span??? What are the real causes, the so called public health professionals and Politicians are trying to hide? is the real question we should all be asking and how many have already died?
The advantage to voters it becomes very easy to separate the followers from the leaders in listening for the repetitive all to f familiar chants giving rise to political decisions of late.
Citing the words of industry financed lobbies. Industries make investments in search of returns as an obligation to shareholders, irregardless of anyone else’s health.