I think that during the course of discussing the politics of tobacco, it is not unfair to criticize a political party if they predominately bear the blame for anti-tobacco proposals and legislation. To have an adult conversation without being able to do so is pretty lame.
Whether you think it's unfair and lame or not isn't the issue. It's Kevin's house. If he doesn't want you peeing off the balcony, you don't pee off the balcony unless you want to get kicked out. It's that simple. Don't take this the wrong way. I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying, per se and your points have merit. It would be fabulous if we could all behave like adults and talk about any subject without getting offended, but it just isn't going to happen. So what are the alternatives for Kevin? Let any conversation go and lose members/revenue? He's too smart to let that happen. So it falls on us to make decisions on what is deemed as political. Talking about a piece of legislation that affects tobacco is fine, just leave the finger-pointing out of it. If you can't do that, don't post.
All this said, I don't want you to think that I'm lambasting you, Charles. I hope you understand that I'm responding to that line of thinking as per the rules Kevin has laid down. I hope I'm clear that in no way am I attacking or chastising you or anyone who feels the same way. This forum's diversity is one of its strengths and it is one of the reasons I continue to stay.
/soapbox
-Jason