|
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
|
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
|
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
|
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... |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Sep 13, 9:29*pm, JustWait wrote:
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... I haven't seen the commercial, Scott. I wonder if it's on youtube? |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Sep 9, 1:34*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:20:56 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On 08/09/2011 5:50 PM, Drifter wrote: On 9/8/2011 7:43 PM, wrote: On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:12:36 -0700, wrote: You seriously believe that all costs are passed along to the consumer? All costs? Feel free to try and defend that statement. Yes I do. Unless the company wants to lose money and nobody wants to do that. Anything as inelastic as insurance premiums gets spread universally so all prices just go up. It's either that or pay the stockholders less. Which would you choose if you were COTB. Stock holders get their slice or no jobs/invest. The Obama way, everyone on welfare. You really have a hard-on for him don't you. About as much as you do for Canuck and Fretwell Oh wait, you're an idiot. pot...kettle.... |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Sep 13, 1:05*pm, Drifter wrote:
On 9/13/2011 12:18 PM, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 00:05:34 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 02:29:56 -0400, wrote: Take a limiting case... Imagine driving down a highway in the middle of nowhere. You need to use the toilet and finally you come across the only restaurant for miles. Unfortunately, it's a smoking establishment and you're allergic to cig smoke. So, that's why it applies equally That is bull****. You really had to stretch for that one. The limiting case is a legitimate logic tool. Look it up. The world does not revolve around your weak bladder. What was your plan if the bar was closed? Pee on your RV. I don't have a RV, try again She could pee on a fire hydrant. And probably does on a regular basis. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/13/2011 10:42 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sep 13, 9:29 pm, wrote: 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... I haven't seen the commercial, Scott. I wonder if it's on youtube? Well, it's a local pawn shop so I doubt they advertize outside the state... I will look, but trust me, you don't even want the picture in your head. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/13/2011 10:42 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sep 13, 9:29 pm, wrote: 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... I haven't seen the commercial, Scott. I wonder if it's on youtube? OK Tim, click it only two hours before or two hours after eating... It's just gross... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiAHnBA8Tzs The guys in these commercials are just as bad... |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Sep 11, 8:27*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:09:54 -0400, Drifter wrote: On 9/11/2011 4:38 PM, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:45:58 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:10:10 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:11:30 -0400, wrote: Read up on fantasy andgetback to me. The settlement was with the attorneys general of the states involved and specified that this was going to be the end of it. I am sure there might be some individual who might try to take on Altria after this but they wouldgetground up and spit out. The idea that anyone on the planet has not seen the warning on the side of a cigarette pack is ludicrous. Which has nothing to do with fantasy that lawsuits should be known about in advance. How many suits have there been since the settlement? What difference does that make? Tell me about how many lawsuits are known about in advance. I notice you keep avoiding telling me. I suppose you consider 12 year olds cognizant of the dangers of cigar smoke also. Typical "libertarian" nonsense. 12 year olds are prohibited by law from smoking. As I said, the tobacco companies don't seem to care. Also, does this mean you believe in certain gov't intrusion? I'm shocked! You're shocked at Greg doing a flippy floppy? Why? He has to in order to stay opposed to you. It is not necessary Plume will always disagree with anything I say. That is why it is fun playing withher. Icanusuallygetherarguing withherselfbefore it is over. And though bit hard on the arse by defeat, D'Numb will never recognize it. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:06:24 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -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??? OK I apologize, "all over the place" confused me. If you mean all over the inside of the bar, yes the bartender or the manager if they have one will enforce the smoking regulations or any other rules in that bar. If it is a tough place they also have bouncers.. I still don't get your question I hope you're wife is going to pay them extra for their extra effort. I can just imagine bartenders chasing after smokers... around and around the table. In the mean time, everyone else gets to breathe the smoke. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? I am just not convinced you have a right to go in a place clearly marked "smoking allowed" and complain about the smoke. What is so compelling in there that you have to go in there except for your desire to be offended and sue someone over it? If it's a public place and the law says it isn't a smoking allowed place, I have just as much right as everyone else. I just don't get what your problem is. The law is pretty clear. It reminds me of the people who buy a house next to the airport because it is cheap and then complain about the planes. Which people? Are you changing the subject? |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Sep 14, 1:28*am, wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? I am just not convinced you have a right to go in a place clearly marked "smoking allowed" and complain about the smoke. What is so compelling in there that you have to go in there except for your desire to be offended and sue someone over it? If it's a public place and the law says it isn't a smoking allowed place, I have just as much right as everyone else. I just don't get what your problem is. The law is pretty clear. It reminds me of the people who buy a house next to the airport because it is cheap and then complain about the planes. Which people? Are you changing the subject? No, twit. You are changing the subject. He is trying to make his point easy for you to understand. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
In article 0ab8acb0-5fc9-4c27-b214-
, says... 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. Wrong. The back injury originally occurred when I was 18. Went through USMC boot camp with a herniated disk. Didn't start skydiving until I was 25. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
In article ,
says... On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 15:25:12 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 9/13/11 3:21 PM, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:19:53 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:51:56 -0400, X ` wrote: On 9/13/11 12:45 PM, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 09:32:56 -0700 (PDT), North Star wrote: When I worked in an office we were glad when smoking restrictions came along in the 80's. Nothing worse than to have a co-worker at the desk next to yours smoking one after another. It was like heaven...although the 'smokers' got a whole lot more breaks than the non-smokers. I didn't begrudge them at that point. That brings up an interesting question. I wonder how much lost productivity arises from the number of people who are standing outside smoking a cigarette? I know that there seemed to be people who spent as much time outside our office smoking as they did inside. The smoking pit was right outside our window. Some of the guys were happy that it seemed to be the hottest women who smoked. Women who smell like an ashtray are hot? Who would want to kiss an ashtray? Another smoker Blech. Everything about women who smoke smells bad...their breath, their skin, their hair, their clothes, their bed linens, their homes, their cars. I cannot drive in a car of a smoker. It seems to permeate everything and gets on my clothes. And that makes it impossible for you to drive?? |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
In article ,
says... On 9/13/11 7:08 PM, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:02:04 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 15:17:51 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:51:56 -0400, X ` wrote: On 9/13/11 12:45 PM, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 09:32:56 -0700 (PDT), North Star wrote: When I worked in an office we were glad when smoking restrictions came along in the 80's. Nothing worse than to have a co-worker at the desk next to yours smoking one after another. It was like heaven...although the 'smokers' got a whole lot more breaks than the non-smokers. I didn't begrudge them at that point. That brings up an interesting question. I wonder how much lost productivity arises from the number of people who are standing outside smoking a cigarette? I know that there seemed to be people who spent as much time outside our office smoking as they did inside. The smoking pit was right outside our window. Some of the guys were happy that it seemed to be the hottest women who smoked. Women who smell like an ashtray are hot? Yup, they just want to have fun No idea what that means.. No doubt. You are probably allergic to fun too. Smoking isn't fun. It's a dirty, filthy, smelly addiction. So isn't your rec.boats addiction. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
In article ,
says... On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 19:10:12 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 9/13/11 7:08 PM, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:02:04 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 15:17:51 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:51:56 -0400, X ` wrote: On 9/13/11 12:45 PM, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 09:32:56 -0700 (PDT), North Star wrote: When I worked in an office we were glad when smoking restrictions came along in the 80's. Nothing worse than to have a co-worker at the desk next to yours smoking one after another. It was like heaven...although the 'smokers' got a whole lot more breaks than the non-smokers. I didn't begrudge them at that point. That brings up an interesting question. I wonder how much lost productivity arises from the number of people who are standing outside smoking a cigarette? I know that there seemed to be people who spent as much time outside our office smoking as they did inside. The smoking pit was right outside our window. Some of the guys were happy that it seemed to be the hottest women who smoked. Women who smell like an ashtray are hot? Yup, they just want to have fun No idea what that means.. No doubt. You are probably allergic to fun too. Smoking isn't fun. It's a dirty, filthy, smelly addiction. Along with lip, throat, and lung cancer, not to mention all the other great diseases that come up. We should probably ban the sun, it's causes skin cancer. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
In article ,
says... 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. I think the government should outlaw the sun. It causes skin cancer. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally (boring)
On 9/14/2011 2:06 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -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??? OK I apologize, "all over the place" confused me. If you mean all over the inside of the bar, yes the bartender or the manager if they have one will enforce the smoking regulations or any other rules in that bar. If it is a tough place they also have bouncers.. I still don't get your question Time to change the subject http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/63466.html |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/14/2011 2:24 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:06:24 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -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??? OK I apologize, "all over the place" confused me. If you mean all over the inside of the bar, yes the bartender or the manager if they have one will enforce the smoking regulations or any other rules in that bar. If it is a tough place they also have bouncers.. I still don't get your question I hope you're wife is going to pay them extra for their extra effort. I can just imagine bartenders chasing after smokers... around and around the table. In the mean time, everyone else gets to breathe the smoke. You can imagine bartenders chasing smoking hot women around the table. That's reward enough, don't you think? |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/14/2011 2:28 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? I am just not convinced you have a right to go in a place clearly marked "smoking allowed" and complain about the smoke. What is so compelling in there that you have to go in there except for your desire to be offended and sue someone over it? If it's a public place and the law says it isn't a smoking allowed place, I have just as much right as everyone else. I just don't get what your problem is. The law is pretty clear. It reminds me of the people who buy a house next to the airport because it is cheap and then complain about the planes. Which people? Are you changing the subject? Hooray for him. You are boring us to tears. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/14/2011 4:25 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:28 am, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? I am just not convinced you have a right to go in a place clearly marked "smoking allowed" and complain about the smoke. What is so compelling in there that you have to go in there except for your desire to be offended and sue someone over it? If it's a public place and the law says it isn't a smoking allowed place, I have just as much right as everyone else. I just don't get what your problem is. The law is pretty clear. It reminds me of the people who buy a house next to the airport because it is cheap and then complain about the planes. Which people? Are you changing the subject? No, twit. You are changing the subject. He is trying to make his point easy for you to understand. He's got his work cut out for him. She's a hopeless dimwit. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/13/2011 11:22 PM, TopBassDog wrote:
On Sep 11, 8:27 pm, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:09:54 -0400, wrote: On 9/11/2011 4:38 PM, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:45:58 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:10:10 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:11:30 -0400, wrote: Read up on fantasy andgetback to me. The settlement was with the attorneys general of the states involved and specified that this was going to be the end of it. I am sure there might be some individual who might try to take on Altria after this but they wouldgetground up and spit out. The idea that anyone on the planet has not seen the warning on the side of a cigarette pack is ludicrous. Which has nothing to do with fantasy that lawsuits should be known about in advance. How many suits have there been since the settlement? What difference does that make? Tell me about how many lawsuits are known about in advance. I notice you keep avoiding telling me. I suppose you consider 12 year olds cognizant of the dangers of cigar smoke also. Typical "libertarian" nonsense. 12 year olds are prohibited by law from smoking. As I said, the tobacco companies don't seem to care. Also, does this mean you believe in certain gov't intrusion? I'm shocked! You're shocked at Greg doing a flippy floppy? Why? He has to in order to stay opposed to you. It is not necessary Plume will always disagree with anything I say. That is why it is fun playing withher. Icanusuallygetherarguing withherselfbefore it is over. And though bit hard on the arse by defeat, D'Numb will never recognize it. Her real name is Daphnie Dimwitty. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/14/2011 9:28 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/14/2011 2:24 AM, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:06:24 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -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??? OK I apologize, "all over the place" confused me. If you mean all over the inside of the bar, yes the bartender or the manager if they have one will enforce the smoking regulations or any other rules in that bar. If it is a tough place they also have bouncers.. I still don't get your question I hope you're wife is going to pay them extra for their extra effort. I can just imagine bartenders chasing after smokers... around and around the table. In the mean time, everyone else gets to breathe the smoke. You don't chase them around, you tell them to put it out or leave. If they don't leave you call the cops and charge them with trespassing. Seriously, why is every argument from you so ridiculously overblown? You can imagine bartenders chasing smoking hot women around the table. That's reward enough, don't you think? |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/14/11 1:06 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:28:10 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? Yes leave, please. If enough people did that the owner would ban smoking or he would have a smoking restaurant and you and Harry would never come in. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you come in. Owners of cheesy restaurants probably like a facility where smoking is allowed, because it'll help conceal poor ingredients in and bad preparation of the food. Why bother when the patrons can't smell or taste what is served? -- I'd much rather be a champion of the powerless than a lickspittle of the powerful. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/14/2011 1:48 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/14/11 1:06 PM, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:28:10 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? Yes leave, please. If enough people did that the owner would ban smoking or he would have a smoking restaurant and you and Harry would never come in. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you come in. Owners of cheesy restaurants probably like a facility where smoking is allowed, because it'll help conceal poor ingredients in and bad preparation of the food. Why bother when the patrons can't smell or taste what is served? You or the little woman should learn to cook. You'd be doing us all a favor if we didn't have to hear about or observe the ritual of "The Krauses coming to the trough" Oink Oink |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:02:25 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:24:52 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:06:24 -0400, wrote: OK I apologize, "all over the place" confused me. If you mean all over the inside of the bar, yes the bartender or the manager if they have one will enforce the smoking regulations or any other rules in that bar. If it is a tough place they also have bouncers.. I still don't get your question I hope you're wife is going to pay them extra for their extra effort. I can just imagine bartenders chasing after smokers... around and around the table. In the mean time, everyone else gets to breathe the smoke. Are you really that stupid or are you just trolling again? The easy way bartenders have to restore order is to cut off the offender and ban them from coming back. . So, I'm both stupid and a Nazi? How do you prevent the smoker from getting into the non-smoking section? What if they don't stub out the cig? How long do I have to sit there waiting for the cops to show up after the person refuses to leave? |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:06:15 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:28:10 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? Yes leave, please. If enough people did that the owner would ban smoking or he would have a smoking restaurant and you and Harry would never come in. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you come in. I guess you didn't read the part where it's a split restaurant and I'm already seated in the non-smoking section. Read it again. So, basically you're willing to infringe on my rights, and in fact I wouldn't even be able to finish my meal. Do I get a refund on the food? Sounds to me like your cigar is the most important thing in your life and to hell with anyone else's rights or health. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/14/11 2:09 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:06:15 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:28:10 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? Yes leave, please. If enough people did that the owner would ban smoking or he would have a smoking restaurant and you and Harry would never come in. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you come in. I guess you didn't read the part where it's a split restaurant and I'm already seated in the non-smoking section. Read it again. So, basically you're willing to infringe on my rights, and in fact I wouldn't even be able to finish my meal. Do I get a refund on the food? Sounds to me like your cigar is the most important thing in your life and to hell with anyone else's rights or health. Hey, it's the loonytarian, er, libertarian, way. -- I'd much rather be a champion of the powerless than a lickspittle of the powerful. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:15:12 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:48:14 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 9/14/11 1:06 PM, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:28:10 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? Yes leave, please. If enough people did that the owner would ban smoking or he would have a smoking restaurant and you and Harry would never come in. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you come in. Owners of cheesy restaurants probably like a facility where smoking is allowed, because it'll help conceal poor ingredients in and bad preparation of the food. Why bother when the patrons can't smell or taste what is served? Show the *******s, don't go there. This is a problem that the market can easily deal with. If every non smoker boycotted "smoking allowed" places the market would decide how many restaurants your cohort will support. Unfortunately it may not be as big a number as you want to accept. around 20% of Americans admit they smoke in surveys but sales numbers seem to imply that number might be closer to 35-40%. I know a lot of "non-smokers" who still smoke. You only have to look at the White House to see that. I do notice that the most vehement anti smoker evangelicals are former smokers themselves who can't stand being around smoke because they fear that they do not have the will power to resist sparking one up. I will agree with anyone who says this is a drug addiction and it may be harder to kick than heroin. That explains the number of people who are hooked on the gum. (another disgusting habit). The people who clean up the country club would much rather vacuum up a few cigarette butts than to be scraping gum up out of the carpet and off the bottom of the tables. http://www.gallup.com/poll/28213/lat...ical-lows.aspx Which bad habit kills people with regularity? Not gum chewing. Feel free to continue to defend smoker's "rights". |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
|
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:15:36 -0400, X ` Man
wrote: On 9/14/11 2:09 PM, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:06:15 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:28:10 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? Yes leave, please. If enough people did that the owner would ban smoking or he would have a smoking restaurant and you and Harry would never come in. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you come in. I guess you didn't read the part where it's a split restaurant and I'm already seated in the non-smoking section. Read it again. So, basically you're willing to infringe on my rights, and in fact I wouldn't even be able to finish my meal. Do I get a refund on the food? Sounds to me like your cigar is the most important thing in your life and to hell with anyone else's rights or health. Hey, it's the loonytarian, er, libertarian, way. You heard the applause when Blitzer asked St. Paul about the hypothetical guy in a coma... let him die was the reaction from the audience. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/14/11 2:59 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:15:36 -0400, X ` wrote: On 9/14/11 2:09 PM, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:06:15 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:28:10 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? Yes leave, please. If enough people did that the owner would ban smoking or he would have a smoking restaurant and you and Harry would never come in. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you come in. I guess you didn't read the part where it's a split restaurant and I'm already seated in the non-smoking section. Read it again. So, basically you're willing to infringe on my rights, and in fact I wouldn't even be able to finish my meal. Do I get a refund on the food? Sounds to me like your cigar is the most important thing in your life and to hell with anyone else's rights or health. Hey, it's the loonytarian, er, libertarian, way. You heard the applause when Blitzer asked St. Paul about the hypothetical guy in a coma... let him die was the reaction from the audience. Would you expect anything less from right-wing dirtbags? -- I'd much rather be a champion of the powerless than a lickspittle of the powerful. |
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:21:42 -0400, X ` Man
wrote: On 9/14/11 2:59 PM, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:15:36 -0400, X ` wrote: On 9/14/11 2:09 PM, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:06:15 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:28:10 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:19:09 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:55:24 -0700, wrote: 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. I support everyone's rights. So, define MY rights to not be around a carcinogenic cloud. How do I avoid one in a restaurant. I'm seated. Some guy waltz' in from the smoking section, and puffs away. I'm supposed to do what? Wait for the bouncer? Leave myself? Yes leave, please. If enough people did that the owner would ban smoking or he would have a smoking restaurant and you and Harry would never come in. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you come in. I guess you didn't read the part where it's a split restaurant and I'm already seated in the non-smoking section. Read it again. So, basically you're willing to infringe on my rights, and in fact I wouldn't even be able to finish my meal. Do I get a refund on the food? Sounds to me like your cigar is the most important thing in your life and to hell with anyone else's rights or health. Hey, it's the loonytarian, er, libertarian, way. You heard the applause when Blitzer asked St. Paul about the hypothetical guy in a coma... let him die was the reaction from the audience. Would you expect anything less from right-wing dirtbags? No, but it was humiliating thinking that people in other countries might experience that reaction. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com