Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

On Sep 13, 9:36*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:49:05 -0400, BAR wrote:
In article om,
says...

On 9/13/2011 7:55 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:59:07 -0700, wrote:

The same technology? You want to mandate restaurants to have a glassed
in section with it's own air system??

If they did, would you be happy? *I thought not.
They have even offered to have two separate buildings, with the same
food and the same ambiance ... nope. not good enough.
Self absorbed non smokers demand access to both buildings because they
think they are missing something. Yes they are ... the fun people.

I was just at a party in a restaurant.
After eating we smokers all went outside for a smoke.
Some non-smokers tagged along to avoid boredom.
Left about 2/3 of the party sitting there twiddling their thumbs.
They sat in dumb silence until we got back.
Then the party resumed.
Anti-smokers are often a sad lot.
Walk around all their lives with a stick up their ass just to live a few
more years of their uptight misery.
Pretty sad. *Some are okay. *They usually do other drugs.

My argument all along. A longer life expectancy is the reward for a
dull, very dull life.

If you got em Bert, smoke em. No skin off my teeth.
Being a reformed smoker has saved me tons of money, eliminated a lot of
anxiety, cleared up my smokers cough, made my house look and smell
better, eliminated peer pressures to stop, freed up my time to do FUN
things.

If you are thinking of quitting, do it for yourself not for the pussys
that expect the government to meddle in your private affairs. You never
see the pussys asking someone to put out their smokes because they are
bothered by it. Better and safer for them to get the government to do it
for them. Eh Krause/Plume

I quit smoking 9 years ago. Just got tired of it after smoking for 29
years. I spent 7 years skydiving, it was the best 7 years of my life.
Skydiving, drinking and chasing women all over the DZ.

You sound like a case study in stupid, reckless behavior.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He's cried about his back injury for years.... something caused by
skydiving, if I remember right.

Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

On Sep 13, 9:49*pm, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/13/11 8:43 PM, wrote:





On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:46:55 -0400, *wrote:

I watched my great-grandmother sit in a chair in my grandmother's living
room for 15 years. She watched TV, ate and slept. I don't think she was
doing much more five years before we moved back east. So, for 20 years
she watched TV all day long and didn't do much else. Is that how you
want to spend your years from 80 to 100?

Yep it is the non smokers who are ****ing up SS and Medicare by living
so long *;-)

It was designed for a population that was only going to live 65-66
years.

I wouldn't get in the way of you and your buddy Bertie "checking out" as
soon as possible. :) Take Snotty Scotty and Loogy with you.

--
I'd much rather be a champion of the powerless than a lickspittle of the
powerful.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Mmmm... is smoking Georgia Special Bud as hard on you as normal
tobacco?

Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

On Sep 13, 8:27*pm, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/13/11 7:46 PM, BAR wrote:









In articleR5GdnR9K0vwK2PLTnZ2dnUVZ_sWdn...@earthlink .com,
says...

On 9/13/11 7:55 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:59:07 -0700, wrote:

The same technology? You want to mandate restaurants to have a glassed
in section with it's own air system??

If they did, would you be happy? *I thought not.
They have even offered to have two separate buildings, with the same
food and the same ambiance ... nope. not good enough.
Self absorbed non smokers demand access to both buildings because they
think they are missing something. Yes they are ... the fun people.

I was just at a party in a restaurant.
After eating we smokers all went outside for a smoke.
Some non-smokers tagged along to avoid boredom.
Left about 2/3 of the party sitting there twiddling their thumbs.
They sat in dumb silence until we got back.
Then the party resumed.
Anti-smokers are often a sad lot.
Walk around all their lives with a stick up their ass just to live a few
more years of their uptight misery.
Pretty sad. *Some are okay. *They usually do other drugs.

My argument all along. A longer life expectancy is the reward for a
dull, very dull life.

Gotta love the rationalizations of the simple-minded.

I watched my great-grandmother sit in a chair in my grandmother's living
room for 15 years. She watched TV, ate and slept. I don't think she was
doing much more five years before we moved back east. So, for 20 years
she watched TV all day long and didn't do much else. Is that how you
want to spend your years from 80 to 100?

There's no reason to believe your familial experience is *the* pattern
for all older people. I know a few guys well into their 80's who are
actively involved in intellectually complicated "mover and shaker" tasks
that would be beyond the abilities of many half their age. Neither of
them are "smokers." I had a relative who died at 99 after a long,
healthy, active life, and she was sharp as a tack until the very end.

Hey, it's perfectly ok with me if you prefer to die young.

On the other hand, my grandfather started smoking "roll yer own's" at
age 11 when he lived in rural Skytook OK, and always smoked Lucky's,
Chesterfields, Pall Malls, or Camels. The only time he smoked a
filtered cigarette was when he had to bum one or pulled the wrong knob
on the vending machine. He quit those when he was 78 and went with a
pipe. He quit the pipe when he was 85 and passed away at 97. BTW, the
week before he died, he was mowing his lawn with a push mower.

Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 20:38:33 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 16:15:59 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:07:02 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:06:01 -0700, wrote:

So, now you're going to have the barkeep prevent people who are
smoking, perhaps drunk people, walking in to the other area. Thanks
for making MY point.

Why not?
The bar keep has lots of rules they enforce.

Feel free to talk to the bartender.

I am sure I know more bartenders than you do.
My wife employs about a dozen at the country club. They are the bar
cops.

So, feel free to talk to them.
\

OK so you were full of ****.
BTW who do you think is there to enforce the smoking ban?
Same drunks, same cigarettes, the only difference is, instead of
having them move back to the smoking section you have to throw them
out. Great for business huh?

So, you're claiming that the bartenders are going to start enforcing a
ban on smokers ranging all over the place?

We were talking about "INSIDE" that bar/restaurant
Do try to keep up ... or are you changing the subject yet again?

Huh? I'm taking about inside. "the bartenders are going to start
enforcing a ban on smokers ranging all over the place" What do you
think "place" means???


There have been very few problems enforcing smoking bans in
restaurants and public buildings. I suppose that in your mind it's bad
for business when someone is ejected for disruptive or dangerous
behavior?

It is only disruptive if we have nazis like you and Harry are there.
As you pointed out, it is not necessarily illegal to smoke in a bar in
Florida anyway. It all depends on what kind of license they have.
If it is a restaurant that serves liquor it is illegal. If it is a bar
that serves food (AKA a cocktail lounge with a class A license) it is
up to the county.
By a like token, if it is a tobacco store with a liquor license (a
cigar bar) it is legal too.



Oh, I'm a Nazi. Thanks for clarifying! So, it's not necessarily
illegal, but you don't like ANY restrictions on YOUR rights, and to
hell with anyone else.

Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 20:43:41 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:46:55 -0400, BAR wrote:

I watched my great-grandmother sit in a chair in my grandmother's living
room for 15 years. She watched TV, ate and slept. I don't think she was
doing much more five years before we moved back east. So, for 20 years
she watched TV all day long and didn't do much else. Is that how you
want to spend your years from 80 to 100?


Yep it is the non smokers who are ****ing up SS and Medicare by living
so long ;-)

It was designed for a population that was only going to live 65-66
years.


So, when are you going to croak?

Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:37:36 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Sep 13, 8:27*pm, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/13/11 7:46 PM, BAR wrote:









In articleR5GdnR9K0vwK2PLTnZ2dnUVZ_sWdn...@earthlink .com,
says...

On 9/13/11 7:55 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:59:07 -0700, wrote:

The same technology? You want to mandate restaurants to have a glassed
in section with it's own air system??

If they did, would you be happy? *I thought not.
They have even offered to have two separate buildings, with the same
food and the same ambiance ... nope. not good enough.
Self absorbed non smokers demand access to both buildings because they
think they are missing something. Yes they are ... the fun people.

I was just at a party in a restaurant.
After eating we smokers all went outside for a smoke.
Some non-smokers tagged along to avoid boredom.
Left about 2/3 of the party sitting there twiddling their thumbs.
They sat in dumb silence until we got back.
Then the party resumed.
Anti-smokers are often a sad lot.
Walk around all their lives with a stick up their ass just to live a few
more years of their uptight misery.
Pretty sad. *Some are okay. *They usually do other drugs.

My argument all along. A longer life expectancy is the reward for a
dull, very dull life.

Gotta love the rationalizations of the simple-minded.

I watched my great-grandmother sit in a chair in my grandmother's living
room for 15 years. She watched TV, ate and slept. I don't think she was
doing much more five years before we moved back east. So, for 20 years
she watched TV all day long and didn't do much else. Is that how you
want to spend your years from 80 to 100?

There's no reason to believe your familial experience is *the* pattern
for all older people. I know a few guys well into their 80's who are
actively involved in intellectually complicated "mover and shaker" tasks
that would be beyond the abilities of many half their age. Neither of
them are "smokers." I had a relative who died at 99 after a long,
healthy, active life, and she was sharp as a tack until the very end.

Hey, it's perfectly ok with me if you prefer to die young.

On the other hand, my grandfather started smoking "roll yer own's" at
age 11 when he lived in rural Skytook OK, and always smoked Lucky's,
Chesterfields, Pall Malls, or Camels. The only time he smoked a
filtered cigarette was when he had to bum one or pulled the wrong knob
on the vending machine. He quit those when he was 78 and went with a
pipe. He quit the pipe when he was 85 and passed away at 97. BTW, the
week before he died, he was mowing his lawn with a push mower.

Thus, somehow because one person lived to be 97, it must be ok for
people to smoke. Uh huh.

Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

On 9/13/2011 9:57 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:37:36 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Sep 13, 8:27 pm, X ` wrote:
On 9/13/11 7:46 PM, BAR wrote:









In articleR5GdnR9K0vwK2PLTnZ2dnUVZ_sWdn...@earthlink .com,
says...

On 9/13/11 7:55 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:59:07 -0700, wrote:

The same technology? You want to mandate restaurants to have a glassed
in section with it's own air system??

If they did, would you be happy? I thought not.
They have even offered to have two separate buildings, with the same
food and the same ambiance ... nope. not good enough.
Self absorbed non smokers demand access to both buildings because they
think they are missing something. Yes they are ... the fun people.

I was just at a party in a restaurant.
After eating we smokers all went outside for a smoke.
Some non-smokers tagged along to avoid boredom.
Left about 2/3 of the party sitting there twiddling their thumbs.
They sat in dumb silence until we got back.
Then the party resumed.
Anti-smokers are often a sad lot.
Walk around all their lives with a stick up their ass just to live a few
more years of their uptight misery.
Pretty sad. Some are okay. They usually do other drugs.

My argument all along. A longer life expectancy is the reward for a
dull, very dull life.

Gotta love the rationalizations of the simple-minded.

I watched my great-grandmother sit in a chair in my grandmother's living
room for 15 years. She watched TV, ate and slept. I don't think she was
doing much more five years before we moved back east. So, for 20 years
she watched TV all day long and didn't do much else. Is that how you
want to spend your years from 80 to 100?

There's no reason to believe your familial experience is *the* pattern
for all older people. I know a few guys well into their 80's who are
actively involved in intellectually complicated "mover and shaker" tasks
that would be beyond the abilities of many half their age. Neither of
them are "smokers." I had a relative who died at 99 after a long,
healthy, active life, and she was sharp as a tack until the very end.

Hey, it's perfectly ok with me if you prefer to die young.

On the other hand, my grandfather started smoking "roll yer own's" at
age 11 when he lived in rural Skytook OK, and always smoked Lucky's,
Chesterfields, Pall Malls, or Camels. The only time he smoked a
filtered cigarette was when he had to bum one or pulled the wrong knob
on the vending machine. He quit those when he was 78 and went with a
pipe. He quit the pipe when he was 85 and passed away at 97. BTW, the
week before he died, he was mowing his lawn with a push mower.

Thus, somehow because one person lived to be 97, it must be ok for
people to smoke. Uh huh.

Pity the poor guy who marries you.

Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

On Sep 11, 8:09*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:32:49 -0700, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:37:01 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:05:13 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:07:51 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:49:58 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 10:57:56 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 08:34:20 -0400, Drifter wrote:

I think they should be able to put up a sign that says "this is a
smoking establishment, if you don't like it, get even with me and
spend your money somewhere else."

Smokers shouldn't go where people are unless they refrain from exhaling.

If a privately owned place is clearly marked "smoking allowed", don't
go there. It is called freedom of choice.

You do not have the right not to be offended, particularly on someone
elses property.

A privately owned place that is open to the public, is quite different
than a privately owned place like your home.

That is simply a perversion of the law.

It is not. It's been pretty well upheld by the courts.

I bet you would support the right of a restaurant owner to refuse
admittance of a person wearing a T shirt that said "Kill all the
fags" or something else offensive.

Don't have to, since most restaurants can refuse service to people who
are disruptive.

So public accommodation is not an absolute.

"Disruptive" is certainly an abstract assumption.

Have I ever said that is was? No shirt, no shoes, and now (in San
Francisco) no pants, no service.

That is discriminatory too.

I saw a sign yesterday that said

MEN, No shirt no service.

WOMEN No shirt, Free Beer.

Now that IS FUNNY! But then again, some women they would be ahead to
them give free beer to keep their tops on.

Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:17:57 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:


I really thought I'd never see another apologetica for smoking.

Me either... strange stuff is generated these days from the right wing
about "individual" rights and freedoms.

Plenty of left wingers would be happy to tell you to put your
anti-smoking mania where the sun don't shine.
And I didn't see anybody here defending tobacco use, excepting
individual preference.
You might be taken more seriously if your mania extended to the
overweight, and those burning carcinogenic wood in fireplaces or driving
polluting cars, or flying in polluting airplanes.
Those are more serious health issues than second-hand cigarette smoke.
Perhaps you 2 can't go there. It does take common sense.
BTW. "apoligia" is the correct word.
That was really clumsy for an averred literate.
You 2 knee-jerkers should at least attempt to correct each other.

Wally-Mart in trouble locally
 

On 9/13/2011 10:20 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sep 11, 8:09 pm, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:32:49 -0700, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:37:01 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:05:13 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:07:51 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:49:58 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 10:57:56 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 08:34:20 -0400, wrote:

I think they should be able to put up a sign that says "this is a
smoking establishment, if you don't like it, get even with me and
spend your money somewhere else."

Smokers shouldn't go where people are unless they refrain from exhaling.

If a privately owned place is clearly marked "smoking allowed", don't
go there. It is called freedom of choice.

You do not have the right not to be offended, particularly on someone
elses property.

A privately owned place that is open to the public, is quite different
than a privately owned place like your home.

t That is simply a perversion of the law.

It is not. It's been pretty well upheld by the courts.

I bet you would support the right of a restaurant owner to refuse
admittance of a person wearing a T shirt that said "Kill all the
fags" or something else offensive.

Don't have to, since most restaurants can refuse service to people who
are disruptive.

So public accommodation is not an absolute.

"Disruptive" is certainly an abstract assumption.

Have I ever said that is was? No shirt, no shoes, and now (in San
Francisco) no pants, no service.

That is discriminatory too.

I saw a sign yesterday that said

MEN, No shirt no service.

WOMEN No shirt, Free Beer.

Now that IS FUNNY! But then again, some women they would be ahead to
them give free beer to keep their tops on.

That's like this local pawn shop commercial with three uh, um, "girls"
and the announcer says "these girls are about to lose their shirts" and
I can hear men all over the state begging, please, noooooooooo.... Trust
me, nobody wants to see these girls with their shirts off...