Did Rush Limbaugh's speech at the CPAC convention remind you of the "Klingon Empire"?

I believe what Rush did was quote another source that stated second hand smoke wasn't proven to be a hazard. I half heard him talking about it today. I heard that there was a study suggesting it is a hazard.

I, unlike you, will withhold my opinion until the evidence is clearly laid out with compelling evidence one way or the other. It isn't true just because you want it to be true. Did you know that hot coffee causes more cancer than cold?

If this is true, how sure are you that second hand smoke significantly increases cancer. I know you want it to be true, but are you sure? Rush quotes a study that suggests it isn't.

There are others that suggest it is. Your link was just another bit of character assassination which seems to be a typical alarmist tactic. If you can't argue the merits of a case, attack the character of the opponents.

I am going to guess that Rush would be honored to be compared to Singer. Although he has a razor sharp mind, his science knowledge has a lot of room for growth. Note: My wife can and has smelled cigarettes across the street with our front door closed and people smoking in cars in front of her.

She also claims to be super sensitive to it and her eyes water. Does that mean she is going to get cancer from it Pegminer or did you forget what the question was? Again I will state that it isn't true just because you want it to be.

Alarmists need to separate facts from their own fancy. They have failed miserably in this regard.

The problem with the science on second hand smoke is that even if it is a conclusive risk, it is so minimal we don't have the resources to resolve them to a T. What we do have is 30yrs of research just like Rush Limbaugh has said and in 30yrs, without the biases there still is no denying that the evidence is sketchy and non-significant at best! It's not just Rush Limbaugh that slams on gov scare tactics, almost all respectable sciences do.

US Senate discusses health official’s inability to represent any REAL science http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCP2IY3SR... Doctor Whelan, President of the American Council on Science and Health quotes: " What is most alarming here is that the top doctor in the land is communicating a message that anything that is harmful at high dose can be lethal at low dose -- when that is simply not true." "The latest Surgeon General's Report on the health consequences of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) -- and a publication from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) that accompanies it -- need their own warning label: "Contains mix of facts, speculation, and downright hyperbole."" "Scare tactics, exaggeration, and political correctness do not make good public policy." http://www.acsh.org/factsfears/newsID.80... And needless to say even the EPA was taken to court for their "cherry-picking" the science. ------ Court rules that environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is NOT a Class A carcinogen William Osteen (US District Judge) ruling against the EPA *The ruling shows by scientific definition that ETS is not a Class A carcinogen http://www.tobacco.org/Documents/980717o... “There is evidence in the record supporting the accusation that EPA ‘cherry picked’ its data” … “EPA's excluding nearly half of the available studies directly conflicts with EPA's purported purpose for analyzing the epidemiological studies and conflicts with EPA's Risk Assessment Guidelines” (p.

72) “Group A classification in large part on a resulting relative risk of only 1.19, without adequately explaining why the Agency had required every other Group A carcinogen to exhibit a much higher relative risk, or why it had recently found relative risks of 2.6 and 3.0 insufficient to classify other agents in Group A. All of the 15 chemicals or mixtures previously classified by 'EPA as Group A carcinogens have higher relative risks than ETS.”(p. 76).

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.