Given Senator's Gillbrand's history of involvement with Philip Morris and more recently revelations that she told campaign contributions from Altria and that her father was given a full-time lobbying position in Albany with Altria one can only question the process and thinking that went into the selection of Ms. Gillbrand for her Senate appointment.
Something smells rotten. Let's hope that Govenor Paterson will swear off any campaign contibutions from tobacco companies as he seeks relection. As for Senator Gillbrand, she needs to know that actions speak louder than words. We're watching!!

I am willing to chalk up Senator Gillbrand's representation of Big Tobacco as "business is business".

She is now to be a US Senator, so let's see if she can step up to the plate with honor and ignore what Big Tobacco has given to her in the past.

Perhaps she has the ethical and moral fortitude to ACTUALLY represent the people of New York.

It should be pointed out that Gillibrand's father, Doug Rutnick, had long been a contract lobbyist for Big Tobacco. His work did not coincide with the beginning of her political career, but long preceded it. Other than that, the account is accurate.
Albany Insider

Here appointment is outag..... no it is OUTRAGEOUS! The light of day makes the fair haired and wrinkle free look like a prune. Prostitution is illegal in many places, but at least women of the night do not kill people. People like this exercise the same principle but do kill.... many people. Fathers, mothers, sons and daughters, ugly, painful, slow deaths. Why is she in the Senate? Are there really no better candidates in the state of New York?

At least the Senate will be losing Judd Gregg--a champion tobacco shill.

Even Leon (CIA) Panetta,my CA district's ex-US Rep. and former Clinton chief of staff,is tainted--I once observed to him at a fundraiser that the Republicans were getting most of the tobacco dough, and he replied earnestly:"How can we get some?"
Michael Steele--new RNC chair--certainly got his share of tob. cash--cozy times to continue for tob. and R's.
Republicans tried to use Kirsten G.'s tobacco ties against her--Google that for a good laugh.

Thumbs Up to Mr. Douglas for bringing this information to us. We would not have known about the nefarious activities of this low-life otherwise.

Thumbs Down to Governor Paterson for his deliberate action of appointing such a low-life to the U.S. Senate. Now we know his true motivation.

Even if we lose Judd Gregg from the Senate, I am not convinced that we will better off with him as the Secretary of Commerce.

The tobacco issue is still a blind spot for too many on the left, who have bought the industry's self-serving arguments that smoking is about "freedom" and "choice." It is likely that we will see many more Democrats carrying the industry's dirty ashtrays now that Democrats hold the power in both branches. Until Americans understand that this is a social justice issue of the first order, we will continue to see thousands of lives needlessly sacrificed to tobacco company profits every year. I hope someone runs against her on this issue and helps educate the public.

As a doctor who regularly visits with the ravages of tobacco on human beings, I am appalled that this issue is still with us! The harm from nicotine and tobacco toxins is so well established, that we can rightfully describe any public servant who protects tobacco business interests as sinful. BUT, let's remember that politics is a game of chance and Sen. Gillibrand is now out to be elected, as well as chosen; so let's be pragmatic and keep on her tail on this and other "evil" issues (witness "gun control"). I'm not a New Yorker, but this is the time for citizens of the Empire State to be promoting Andrew Cuomo for that seat!

As a doctor who visits with the ravages of tobacco on a dailty basis, I am appalled that we are still struggling with this issue! Our job is to stay on Sen. Gillibrand's tail regularly and to remember that she wants to be elected on a statewide basis for the first time. We need Cliff and others to watch her like a hawk, and to keep us informed if and when she strays! Her legal career, for the time being, is behind her. Her broader public service role is ahead of her.
If she screws up, New York always has Andrew Cuomo, who should have been Patterson's choice in the first place, to replace her in the next electoral cycle.

by Kathie
When I read about Gillibrand's selection I was very unhappy about her draconian attitude toward immigration. Now tobacco! The negatives keep coming.

Gillibrand was appointed for two years. She will have to run in 2010. We should support a candidate who is anti-tobacco and who supports preventive health and follows the NY Mayor's lead. This should not be difficult.

Enku

Unfortunately she has already been a "public servant" in the Congress and showed no reform tendencies. Lobbying for tobacco means taking no money from tobacco supportive groups. Often these are disguised and funneled to cultural or other worthwhile groups. Despite the decades of awareness about the heightened risk of tobacco use, and of second hand smoke, the tobacco interests are only moderately contained. I have never smoked, but once after a lengthy pneumonia I was left with an acute response of breathing difficulty when in a room where tobacco had been smoked. My own personal clinical test. I had a radio show, but had to take leave as my breathing and coughing made it impossible to talk.

Last week, Senator Gillibrand voted for the SCHIP legislation, which increased the federal cigarette tax by $.61/pack, and was the most impactful action ever taken by US Congress to reduce smoking.

at the top of this page you can click on a box called 'social rights'. i believe it is a social right to smoke anything that is legal. is it prohibition you want? you guys are always at the trough looking for money too.

By Kathie
I would like to change the subject for a minute. I'm new to Blogs. Can I suggest a subject change?
This morning I heard Paul Krugman say the economy is the worst he has seen in his lifetime. He also said the stimulus package before the Senate is 80% right for the current economic conditions with the exception of the business tax reduction. His concern is that the intransigence of the Republicans to pass the bill now might cause the country to go into Depressive condition from which it is very difficult to recover.

I would like to propose that the American people demand that the Congress take at least a 20% pay cut and a reduction of their health insurance. Maybe then they'd get it.

From Keith- I wish we had the equivalent of Emily's List for fighting tobacco. An organization that actively works to elect men and women of any political party who refuse tobacco money, refuse to meet with tobacco lobbyists, who don't have family members working for tobacco companies and related industries, and who will actively work against the interests of Big Tobacco and work for the health of all people. Sen. Gillibrand's connections to Big Tobacco disgust me. It disgusts me even more that she is a Democrat. No politician, especially a Democrat should be able to get elected with a history like Sen. Gillibrand's. I hope her tenure in the U.S. Senate is short.

I am running against Gillbrand...hey, anonymous Doctor....she WORKED for Cuomo before..get it? I am the health care candidate in this race for 2010 that doesn't have his hand in the financial sector or the tobacco industry!!!! Go to my blogspot and look at fiscal discipline, improving access to health care, honesty and getting people to be a big player in this economic recovery. Getting rid of 50% of capital gains taxes, and giving people tax credit for interest paid on their student loans regardless of income are some of many of my initiatives.
Dr. Noren
www.Hillarysenateseat.blogspot.com
NEW YORKERS!!!!!!!!!!

Clearly, Philip Morris has invested heavily in Gillibrand. Now it stands ready to see an excellent eturn on its investment.

Of course both Gillibrand and Philip Morris will deny any quid pro quo. This is a standard denial these days. From Philip MOrris it usually comes with flowery phrases like "participation in the democratic process". The company whose products lead to the death of over 200,000 Americans EVERY YEAR -- and the addiction of 600,000 more -- is fond of beautiful phrases that obscure the reality.

The reality is: Philip Morris has made a substantial investment in Gillibrand. And anyone who thinks this is charity is a fool.

Thank you for bringing to light the rather dark back story of this Senator's resume. The money trail often speaks louder than anything else and this case is no different. Democratic government and the free market idea of capitalism rarely function well when they are in bed with each other.

Thank you for bringing to light the rather dark back story of this Senator's resume. The money trail often speaks louder than anything else and this case is no different. Democratic government and the free market idea of capitalism rarely function well when they are in bed with each other.

I hope the stimulus helps.

The Public Health Ministries have found their own special way of joining Church and State as one omnipresent relationship between the people and their rulers.

In the days gone by, many fell prey, to the “fire and brimstone and eternal damnation” Or in other cultures the Hex of a Witch or the threat of becoming a Zombie, for failing a duty of belief. Today the punishments are much more basic; growing old and dying and by the most painful of methods imaginable, is your punishment for living a life of sin.

Primarily what we see is a complete loss of the medical institutions and science to focus on the original objective. The original intent was to improve the human condition and make life a more enjoyable voyage. To strengthen and improve by all means possible, the well being of all others, regardless of groupings or personal choices.

The EPA and the Consumer products branches of Governments were implemented to reduce risk, not to reduce freedoms of the individuals who might be at increased risk.

A not so fine line has been crossed, and the evidence is seen in this story. Along with thousands of other incidents; we have sacrificed science and the goals of science in favour of big campaigns and religious lobby followings, which incite bigotry and hatred as their core components to control or silence any level of dissension.

A religion that seeks compassion and forgiveness, regardless of political affiliation, providing enhanced life by hope and inspiration is legitimate.

All of these tests are failed when appraising Public Health Ministries, meaning; what we are dealing with, can only be described as a cult. Invented for the power of control and instituted like a disease or blight on society.

McCarthy was a fun ride for for most of those on the bandwagon. One day we said ENOUGH.

Isn't healthy living an extreme, that has just gone to far?

Haven't we had enough yet. It is far better to live free, than to live in fear of a little wisp of smoke.

Ignorant people do ignorant deeds. Can we develop more ignorance than smoking bans in place of a sign on the door? or taxing what is said to be an addiction? Current events and past history tell us if we continue on this path, we can find much more ignorance. The question remains; where do we want to go?

Lets consider the other side of the arguments presented by the three highlighted points.

• Cigarette smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the world, taking the lives of well over 400,000 Americans each year.

• Virtually all smokers start as children, becoming addicted to nicotine before they have reached an age at which they can make rational, informed choices about whether to consume a product that kills a third of all users.

• The tobacco industry continues to manipulate nicotine and other addiction-promoting substances in the product, with the express purpose of causing and perpetuating addiction in hundreds of millions of consumers around the world. ("Without nicotine, there would be no smoking," one of Philip Morris' senior scientists wrote in a notorious, once-secret company document.)

Cigarette smoking in the current US population is measured at 29% prevalence in total population and as the author points out, part of that population. 26% are children too young to make informed decisions. The number who die every year is 2.4 million in a 320 million population which is one of the lowest levels we have seen in all of history at .75% or as a multiplier .0075 [.0075 x 320 million = 2.4 million] Yet 50 years ago more than twice as many people smoked?

The current smoking population at one third or in most estimates by the politically astute one half will die of smoking related diseases. We have to remove the children from the estimates because we have no way of knowing if they will smoke or become addicted to the chewing gum or lozenges at the Johnson and Johnson candy counters, reducing us to evaluating those at risk in an adult population of 40% smokers and 60% non smokers. A reversal of the percentages 50 years ago, yet surprisingly in real numbers the number of smokers has not changed substantially in a more than doubled population. A consistent number of smokers paralleling a six fold increase of smoking related diseases in the interim.

So do the math. 40% of [adults = 74% of 320 million] is 94.72 million smokers [29% of 320 million is 92.8 million smokers]. Apply the annual death rate at .0075 from all causes and you would expect regardless of smoking 710,400 should die every year to be just like everyone else; the other 1.69 million non smokers who die of presumably non smoking related diseases.

Half of the smoker’s deaths would account for 355,000 and one third as indicated in the article would see 236,776. Now if those deaths are preventable, smokers had they never smoked, would be believed to die at rates reduced from the norm at close to 2/3 to one half of the rates seen in the rest of the population. Does that mean smokers are special people or have abilities, the rest of us don’t, which drives them to smoke? Or is it far more likely the knowledgeable sources of political banter are neither knowledgeable nor intelligent on the issues at hand?

Judging by the people attracted to the candy stands, selling child friendly flavors of alternative nicotine products, advertised by cute candy devils. Aggravated by the fact, this is one form of chewing gum and lozenges which are acceptable to consume in the classroom. I would think legislators are missing a much larger threat. We have all heard the claims of the drug pushers telling us “Doubles your chances of success” What we don’t hear is the end of the statement “When compared to placebos” as was demonstrated by the medical trials. Trials which allowed these products with an actual 98.4% failure rate, [or a 1.6% success rate compared directly to a cold turkey success rate at 50-60%] to be accepted as medical treatments. Largely touted by the entire medical community and all of the major medical charities as; “the only acceptable and recommended treatment”.

It seems the morality of the Public health diocese, is guided once again by the named trust and the perceived God on the all mighty dollar and few of the criticisms lodged against the tobacco industry, are held as consistent standards, when connected to their more favorable sponsors. Judging by the inequalities that exist in the marketplace and the advertising; we won’t be worried about children being addicted to cigarettes for long. But what they are addicted too and what the long term effects of those addictions will produce, in the way of fear, to control the next generation.