djdiablo (anonymous) says...

After some rather divisive decisions on the part of the Emporia City Commission it strikes some of us that perhaps the current commission members represent certain areas of Emporia better than other areas.
I suggest that Emporia be divided into districts and that each of these districts be allowed to elect their own commissioner(s) who might better embody the needs of their neighborhood(s) rather than having a disproportionate number of commissioners who seemingly represent only one or two parts of town.
(One of these districts might include the so-called Metropolitan Planning Area. It seems to be “taxation without representation” when some downtown business owners cannot vote on issues affecting their business because they don’t live in the city proper but still live close enough to be required to abide by city zoning, reviews and permit rules. How is it possible for someone to pay business taxes to the city but not to be able to vote on issues that affect their businesses?)
By increasing the number of commissioners to seven or to nine, Emporian’s might feel that their points-of-view and their best interests were being represented more fairly and equitably than they are presently. Hopefully this would also go a long way to dispel the feeling that lately a number of resolutions have been enacted by commissioners with conflicting interests.

December 18, 2008 at 2:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

WILLIAM_A (anonymous) says...

Good luck Kessler, I think you will be needing it!!

December 18, 2008 at 6:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Good luck Jim, you're going to need it. I propose that voters write in my candidates of choice against Kessler & johnson. JOE CAMEL AND THE MARLBORO MAN. PLEASE EMPORIA ANYONE BUT THESE TWO!
Steve

December 18, 2008 at 6:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

irishemporia (anonymous) says...

How funny you would endorse the Marlboro Man. Two of the actors who played the Marlboro Man died of cancer related to smoking, according to snopes.com. And the controversy surrounding Joe Camel was that the ad campaign targeted minors, according to wikipedia.

December 18, 2008 at 7:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

George Burns smoked cigars like no ones business and died from complications from falling in the tub. He was 100. What's your point irish?

December 18, 2008 at 7:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

irishemporia,

My whole post stated ANYONE BUT THESE TWO. If you would like to write in the
LUCKY CHARMS LEPHRECAUN
that would work also. My two write in choices would leave no doubt to the two losers WHY they lost.
Steve

December 18, 2008 at 8:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

While I believe that the Joe Camel character was targeting minors, I really hope you do not put your full faith in what you find on wikipedia. I remember quite a few of my college professors saying they would not accept that for a source for any of our papers, and for good reason.

December 18, 2008 at 8:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

And believe me, if johnson runs she will loose!
Steve

December 18, 2008 at 8:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

I also believe this smoking ban is targeting young children.

By taking away freedoms now before they can remember what it was like to live in a country with freedoms.
Steve

December 18, 2008 at 8:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

rbow, I'm on your side here. Hope by your last comment you didn't think otherwise......

December 18, 2008 at 8:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

justthefacts (anonymous) says...

I've met Mr. Kessler and found him to be a reasonable person of good moral character who has the courage to speak his mind and vote his conscience. I find it unfortunate that you wish to reduce such an important election to only one issue. When communities narrow governance to one single issue, things fail. Please: Please consider the bigger picture and the entire community. If people continue to smear and personally attack those who would serve the only individuals who will serve are those with nothing to lose. In that case, we all lose.

December 18, 2008 at 10:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Pingeon,

Nah, we're cool. I'm not near as touchy as crackinsak.
In a little over 3 months everyone can let Mr. Kessler, and maybe(I hope she doesn't run), Ms. Johnson know how we feel about their slow taking away of our rights.
Steve

December 18, 2008 at 10:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Just the facts,

The fact as I see it is Kessler, Johnson, and Agler voted to take away my rights and freedom to chose. That IS ONE BIG ISSUE AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED.
If he voted his conscience Fine! I can & must as a voter hold him responsible for his actions and how they pertain to me and other citizens of this town. Their votes on this were wrong and they know it.
Steve

December 18, 2008 at 10:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

And who loses if we WAKE UP one day with no rights, or freedoms?
Steve

December 18, 2008 at 10:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Justthefacts: Working to keep Kessler, Johnson and Agler from ever serving again in decision-making roles in our community may appear on the surface to be a "one issue" reprisal, but it is not. The fact is, these three individuals caved in to pressure from a small group of their friends and business associates who called in favors. They also voted for this ban after holding a public meeting at which 80% of those in attendance were against it. People will be voting against Kessler, Johnson, and Agler not so much because of the smoking ban but because of their blatant disregard for public opinion and their obvious allegiance to the socially elite who make up the CAE committee.

Those three commissioners don't care about Emporia. They care only about their own agendas and those of their socially connected cronies. They tried to pull a fast one. Let's make it their last one. Vote 'em out.

December 18, 2008 at 11:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

justthefacts (anonymous) says...

Trouble is Kessler Johnson and Nelson are up this time, not Agler, you get the three positive votes on most issues out of there, that only leaves Longbine and Agler who haven't been very pro employee or city either. They are beholding to the economic development and chamber folks. I would just urge caution when throwing the baby out with the wash water.

December 19, 2008 at 1:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

spectator (anonymous) says...

Kessler again? Doubt it.
Johnson again? Maybe. I don't agree with the ban vote but she's the only one trying to look out for the city employee (health insurance premium down a whopping $34/year BUT deductable up 150% and premiums increase 20% next year, a raise in salary is impossible unless the good-old-boy-good-buddy thing is in effect and more. By the way, the $60K+ salary study and 'adjustments' were pure toro caca, ask any rank & file city employee) but she gets shot down EVERY time.
Nelson again? No. Vetos Johnson (see above) with no questions asked. Even comes up with ideas of his own to make it harder on the employees.
Agler again? No. Has controlling interest in the City AND County - conflict of interest anyone?
Longbine? No. Agrees with Nelson and Kessler.
I guess we're S.O.L. all the way around.

December 19, 2008 at 5:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

shadou (anonymous) says...

Where is Mr. Kessler on the $60 million debt of the city? Has he proposed any solutions to this unmanageable problem? Not that I have seen but he wants to put us deeper in the hole with TIF for Lowe's. That is enough to make me vote against him.

Ths smoking issue aside, I believe he and the rest of the commission have been absolutely irresponsible regarding the economic plight of Emporia. We have not had any new development under this gang that might provide living wage jobs, our streets are a disaster, the water lines continue to break, we still have substandard rental housing and the general appearance of the city is dogearred. Why vote for more of the same?

Surely there are some of us who truly care about our community. Run for office! Put your self in the hot seat but do it with the intention of making Emporia the best that it can be. Don't worry about feathering your own nest, care for all of the community. That is what is presently lacking in the Commission, concern for the community.

December 19, 2008 at 8:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

slvrnblck (anonymous) says...

BJ--

you said:

The fact is, these three individuals caved in to pressure from a small group of their friends and business associates who called in favors.

You are stating opinion like it is a fact, which you do more times than not. You have no idea the number of people who contacted them and gave their opinion through emails, phonecalls or personal visits.

you said:

People will be voting against Kessler, Johnson, and Agler not so much because of the smoking ban but because of their blatant disregard for public opinion and their obvious allegiance to the socially elite who make up the CAE committee.

Once again how do you know where there allegiance lies. You aren't there with them, you don't have a clue as to what they go through. All you do is stand back and make judgements about people and see things the way you want to see them.

you said:

Those three commissioners don't care about Emporia. They care only about their own agendas and those of their socially connected cronies. They tried to pull a fast one. Let's make it their last one. Vote 'em out.

How can you say they don't care about Emporia? They dedicate a lot of time and effort to whatever issues need to be addressed. They had extremely long meetings deciding the Lowes issue and the smoking ban. They were away from their families and businesses and work to serve us as Emporians. Just because they don't always vote the way you want them to does not mean they don't care about Emporia or are trying to pull one over on you. Maybe they just think you are on the wrong side.

If you don't want to vote for them because they don't share your views that is one thing but to call them out for not caring about Emporia or because they are only voting to help their "cronies" out is hogwash!!

December 19, 2008 at 11:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

slvrnblck,

I have heard a lot of "dirt" (I guess?) about all of the commissioners, and I feel that a lot of it is really made up, over-exaggerated, etc. But when in comes to the smoking ban, there was absolutely no conflict of interest at all, because Blaise Plummer said so. He is the city attorney. Ohh yeah, he's also on the Emporians For Drug Awareness board.

There may have been no legal conflicts of interest, but to me, the whole thing sure stinks like old garbage...

December 19, 2008 at 12:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

To all you anti smoking ban people, I would love to see the reasoning behind not re electing Mr. Kessler besides your one disagreement with his judegement. Its like a bunch of kids where the teacher was mean to them once so they all hate him now. None of you would be spouting this crap if not for this ban nonsense. And another thing, you ASSUME public opinion is on your side, well you knkow what happens when you assume..... I truly hope you get your vote, I also hope that you are prepared to eat crow if you lose that vote.

December 19, 2008 at 1:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

"you ASSUME public opinion is on your side, well you knkow what happens when you assume"

Repealed 52% 560 votes
Remain in effect 47% 501 votes
1061 total votes

You and umption...

December 19, 2008 at 1:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Because the gazette forums are clearly indicative of entire City of Emporia? Great logic you have there sir, Bravo! I guess we can just use that poll to decide every piece of legislature that comes down the pike eh?

December 19, 2008 at 1:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

You don't have to call me sir, I work for a living.

December 19, 2008 at 1:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

As do I, forgive me for not resigning myself to the deteriorated banter that inevitably takes place every time this topic comes up.

December 19, 2008 at 2:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

"You have no idea the number of people who contacted them and gave their opinion through emails, phonecalls or personal visits."
With all due respect, this is the biggest source of distress to me in all this. Why don't we know? It would seem that if a scientific survey had been done, we would all know about it (even though we know not even the most scientific of surveys can be 100% correct, they can come very close). Even if it was done in a "private lobbying" format, I would think that they would publish an estimate of calls/visits/e-mails logged in favor of the ban. The fact that there are no published numbers for any of this makes it seem all the more illegitimate to me.

December 19, 2008 at 2:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

Just to be funny for a second. Don't take me seriously please. But... Assume just makes an A$$ out of U and ME.... ok carry on folks.

December 19, 2008 at 2:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

LifeGoesOn (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy, get off your high horse, You can be and are just as sarcatic and rude as many on this topic as well as others.
you say
"Great logic you have there sir, Bravo!"
sarcasim

you say

"Its like a bunch of kids where the teacher was mean to them once so they all hate him now. None of you would be spouting this crap if not for this ban nonsense"
Rude and Arrogant

so for you to say
"forgive me for not resigning myself to the deteriorated banter"
seems hypocritical.

December 19, 2008 at 2:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Look at some of the above posts, look at posts about this topic in other threads and see how far it has deteriorated. Pointing out summons faulty logic is sarcastic?

"Its like a bunch of kids where the teacher was mean to them once so they all hate him now. None of you would be spouting this crap if not for this ban nonsense"

This is rude and arrogant? Look at some of the posts on this topic and tell me I'm wrong. I though it was put extremely delicately considering the how people are acting here.

I have not deteriorated to name-calling and attacking people, I only question people’s ideals and I have done so in a polite manner here in this thread. How is that hypocritical?

December 19, 2008 at 2:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

LifeGoesOn (anonymous) says...

Pointing out summons faulty logic? In your eyes it's faulty, not theirs.
and yes telling someone they do nothing but spout crap,, is rude telling them they act like school kids, is arrogant

so YES, In MY EYES, you saying "forgive me for not resigning myself to the deteriorated banter" then making your posts telling people they act like kids and their opinions are faulty is rude, arrogant and a bit hypocritical

December 19, 2008 at 2:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Faulty logic is thinking that a forum is representative of the whole City of Emporia. Go up to any reasonable person and tell them that, see what they will say. Just because the gazette poll said the people think a certain way makes it set in stone right? Yes that is a false notion, and faulty logic, and needs to be dispelled. The FACTS are that no one really knows what side the majority of public vote lies on, and until there is a vote on this matter we likely will not. Its all SPECULATION until then, so again explain to me how assuming a gazette poll is canon is not faulty logic?

And yes here latlely the thread on this topic have deterioted greatly, so much so I saw some threats of phycial violence between posters in other threads on this topic, as well as a massive stream of name calling on both sides, how is that not child like?

December 19, 2008 at 3:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

"Because the gazette forums are clearly indicative of entire City of Emporia? Great logic you have there sir, Bravo! I guess we can just use that poll to decide every piece of legislature that comes down the pike eh?"

Goodoleboy--You know, you seriously may have something there. Honestly, this would be a better representation of what the city as a whole wants than what we are getting from Neverland... Food for thought!

December 19, 2008 at 3:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Back to the story people this thread is about Jim Kessler not the smoking ban. There is another thread for that.
Steve

December 19, 2008 at 3:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

Ohh come on! I know what it said, I know I voted that it would get repealed, just as you voted that it would not get repealed. I highly doubt Teresa Walters said it was going to get repealed. IMHO, the lines are drawn, and yes, it WILL be close!

Matt

P.S.--I'm not your friend, buddy!

December 19, 2008 at 3:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy:
My one disagreement with Mr. Kesler is one I consider very important to me. That is why I will not only NOT vote for him but campaign actively against him. He and I know our stance on that issue and I think he was wrong. Hence; no vote.
Steve

December 19, 2008 at 3:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

I tend to look at all sides, my line of thinking is this. If the majority of Mr. Kessler's constiuents are telling him they are for the ban maybe he feels obligated to vote the way he feels best represents said constituents. Rought place to be, he cannot vote strictly on what you think he has to do what he was elected to that convey the will of the public. Do you think he done a good job of things up until this point? And if so this one deal breaker is the straw that breaks the camel's back so to speak? You are viewing him as it if him vs. you, when in fact I see more as the people he represents vs. you. If he has done his job I think the real gripe is with the ordinance and not the commissioner himself.

December 19, 2008 at 4:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Look out Matt,
I think she want's a date!
Didn't I tell you to be nice to the ladies and it would pay off?

You lucky dog!
Steve

December 19, 2008 at 4:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy,
At 2:18, I posted a sensible question with sound logic behind it because you seemed to want to answer on the behalf of CAE. Since that time, you have posted many things, but none of them has been a reasonable answer to my question which I will ask again. Why don't we know? You will have to go back and read the post for the whole thing? I didn't originally address it to you specifically because I intended it as an open question, but I am curious to know why you wouldn't field that one.

December 19, 2008 at 4:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Kujiin (anonymous) says...

Where is Mr. Kessler on the $60 million debt of the city?

Now you've done it. You opened Pandora's Box. We will be blinded by the light. Awesome thanks for mentioning the cities deficit.

December 19, 2008 at 4:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Yes, thank you Kujiin. I had forgotten that shadou had posted that as well and has received no response either. Thank you for reminding us.

December 19, 2008 at 4:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Oh4theluvof

Dig through my posts if you like, I always wanted this to go to public vote, I sadly cannot vote on the measure because I am a rural resident. But it is logical to assume that with all the bans sweeping over the nation and Kansas that this ordinance would have a good support base? No ban has been repealed in this state, what does that say? Google up figures on non smokers in Kansas, Kansas support of smoking bans and see what you get. This is not just all one big conspiracy, people actually want the change. Odds are you'll get your vote, all I am saying is don't be surprised if it passes.

PS I do not answer on the behalf of the CAE nor do agree with how they brought about the ordinance.

December 19, 2008 at 6:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy
One of the problems I see with the bans "sweeping over the nation" is how it's happening. Like this ban, probably a lot of others aren't getting voted on and may not represent the will of the people. I have said before I don't drink or smoke(Adam Ant would call me a goody 2 shoes) and I am opposed to this ban so we can't assume all nonsmokers want this. I'd rather breath smoke filled free air than clean air in a country that's not free. "Better dead than red""Don't tread on me" that sort of thing. I know you probably think I'm blowing things out of proportion but this ban isn't the only problem I see. There seems to be a trend moving us closer to socialism and I don't like it. You know how much faith I have in our government.
Oh...I lost my train of thought....perhaps I need anoyher layer of tin foil on my hat....just kidding.

December 19, 2008 at 7:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Whoops!
I meant ANOTHER layer of tin foil not ANOYHER.

December 19, 2008 at 7:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

If the bans were wildly unpopular such as Prohibition was then they would not be passing and/or would be repealed. The conundrum is that many see it as a rights issue, others do not. This is more where the controversy lies in my opinion. More and more people are just choosing not to smoke and in this country majority rules, that is not socialism, that is the American way since the beginning. Funny thing though, its the very nature of smoking that is the problem, do you see people attacking chewing? Nope that would be legal still cause the nature of the habit is not such that infringes on others.

December 19, 2008 at 7:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy
I guess we'll shift gears and forums and continue our discusion.
The reason I see it as socialism is the government is stepping in and saying this is the way it has to be instead of letting the market dictate whether there is a market for it or not. Right or wrong I believe that(free market economics) is the American way.
The American way to rid the public from shs is to convince people not to smoke and then there would be no market for it. Thus far this has been the strategy of those apposed to shs in public and smoking in general. They have realized that it is a losing battle and now have pushed their tactics into what I see as socialist territory. That is why I oppose this ban.

December 19, 2008 at 8:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

seriouslyfolks;

Nothing could be more right on than your last post.
And goodoleboy; If you have ever taken a flight on an airplane in the last 15 years Not only is smoking not allowed
but chew or smokeless is not allowed. It started out as a smoking issue, to protect the airline employees, but to level the playing field chew was included. evidently you haven't been on any airline flight in the last 15 years or you wouldn't have posted your last post.You can not on any airline chew tobacco because of smoking bans.

Where does a cowboy chewing a plug on an airplane pose A health problem? If you can't answer that question, shut the hell up!
Steve

December 19, 2008 at 10:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Sometimes people use the words liberal, conservative, socialists, communists, fasciest, leftest, rightwing, leftwing etc. These terms are usually used to describe a persons pollitcal
leanings.
These terms are unknown in the third world. Why is it that America is so hated in the world and yet people are desperate to get into this country. Because
in their countries if you and I disagreed on an issue like this we could be jailed or even worse, put to death for our beliefs. So for all those who think I'm off base, and those who think your'e off base, I say God Bless America!
And Merry Christmas.

December 19, 2008 at 10:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Wrong Steve, I travel frequently I just don't chew so I do not really pay attention to it, but I have seen others getting away with chewing, would never happen with a cigarette though, why is that?

December 20, 2008 at 3:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Wrong Steve, I travel frequently I just don't chew so I do not really pay attention to it, but I have seen others getting away with chewing, would never happen with a cigarette though, why is that?

There are elements of socialism everywhere today in our government, and there have been aspects of it in the past all the same. It's nothing new. we are not the free market economy we would like to think we are.

December 20, 2008 at 3:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

LifeGoesOn (anonymous) says...

goodolboy, that comment is stupid
"I travel frequently I just don't chew so I do not really pay attention to it, but I have seen others getting away with chewing,"

just because they get away with it DOES NOT mean it is not banned! YOUR argument is Flawed and illogical.
Steve is not wrong, you are

Just because you do not pay attention to a law or ban doesn't mean it doesnt exsist, Duh

December 20, 2008 at 6:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Back to the election:

I should know this but when is the deadline for filing for the city commission race? Will there even be 3 candidates file?
Or will 11 people file and then have a primary?
Steve

December 20, 2008 at 8:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy
You are correct that there are elements of socialism in our current government but that doesn't mean they are all right. One example of a market that had to be eliminated by the government was the slave market. That was an example of great government intervention because human beings are not a commodity they are human beings. Tobacco is a commodity and with the current(pre ban) laws and other measures being taken by individual and insurance companies there isn't the big problem that certain people say there is. There just isn't. As I have stated before I don't smoke and have zero problems keeping myself and my family away from it. If I can do it being the average man that I am than I don't believe the level of difficulty for others would be much different. If you want to hang out at a bar without smoke go to the Blind apparently it's a smoke free bar. If the market for smoke free bars is as big as the ban folks make it out to be surely there will be more coming. Let the market dictate that. It works! As far as restaurants go there are plenty of smoke free restaurants too. I heard Gambino's went smoke free, the owner apparently thought the market called for it. He had a choice and made it with the knowledge he had of his business and his clientele. The ban tells business owners that they don't have that choice.
I do understand the health issue, believe me. When I quit smoking almost thirteen years ago I was aware of the health issues in fact five years prior to that when I started smoking I knew the risks. I believe the entirety of the population knows about the dangers of shs because of good campaigns and education on the subject. It (unlike shs) is everywhere. Every movie I rent now has a commercial warning me and my family of the dangers of smoking. That's good. That is the correct battle field for the war on tobacco. The ban is socialism for the sake of expedience. The anti tobacco lobby has grown weary and has implemented a "surge" if you will to take a larger step toward eliminating the tobacco industry. Are their motives honorable? I think they probably are. Are their current (ban)tactics crossing the line? THEY ARE!! SHS does not pose an immediate threat to the health of the general population. If it did George Burns, for example, would not have lived to be 100 years old. He smoked cigars(first hand and shs) all his life and died from complications from slipping in the bath tub. Not everyone can live that long breathing smoke and not have health issues from it. I understand that and I quit. Smoking is a gamble no doubt but it is not an immediate threat to ones life like getting hit by a car or drowning and it shouldn't be treated as if it's worse some how.

December 20, 2008 at 9:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Sorry Steve I got away from the subject of the story.

If the ban goes to a proper vote will it be on the same ballot with Kessler?
If so it's unfortunate we won't know if his opinion on the ban is truly representative of the majority of Emporia.

December 20, 2008 at 9:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy:
If you will permit me, here is a line from your post,goodoleboy (anonymous) on December 19, 2008 at 7:40 p.m, More and more people are just choosing not to smoke and in this country majority rules, that is not socialism, that is the American way since the beginning.
To me the key words in this line are the first 10 words and the most important of the 10 words is the word "CHOOSING".
You see before the smoking ban coalition started their quest for "POWER" rampage through out the U.S., everyone had the "RIGHT and FREEDOM" of "CHOOSING" whether to smoke or not smoke and "CHOOSING" to avoid those who smoked and businesses that allowed smoking. Now that individual "RIGHT" of "CHOOSING" is being taken away by dubious means at best, and that sir violates the " THE INALIENABLE RIGHTS" of all people.
That sir is known as the"SUBJUGATION"
of people against their will.

December 20, 2008 at 10:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy,
please forgive me for coming off in an attacking way. I confess, I was irritated that a line of "deteriorated banter" took over and seemingly prevented any answers to my question. I honestly wasn't trying to bait you or accuse you of wanting things to go the way they have gone or being a part of or speaking directly for the CAE. In my irritation, it came off that way. I only meant (and should have said it this way) that you seem to have a more understanding perspective on the way this is going down. Not that you approve, just that you get it.
OPEN statement, NOT directed at any specific person: I don't agree with those who think that the trends or patterns in other towns should indicate what should happen here. The fact that they are passing doesn't indicate the will of the people because, as we are seeing here, in most of those cases the people aren't being asked. The fact that they aren't being repealed YET could just as easily indicate that the people are lazy or ignorant about making personal choices. There is equal opportunity as to which option that non-repealment represents. For that reason, I would like to know the actual numbers for this ban in this city. If any commissioner is unwilling to be that careful in making decisions here, then I don't want him/her.
goodoleboy, I must repectfully disagree with this quote from you, "If the bans were wildly unpopular such as Prohibition was then they would not be passing and/or would be repealed."
Prohibition passed and remained in affect for 13 mob-dominated years before the powers-that-were admitted that it wasn't working and would not ever work. None of these smoking bans have any kind of significant operating history to confirm their success. I expect my city commissioners to take that into account and not be quite so ready to jump on trendy band-wagons. I will be fine with this ban if the majority of this town agrees to it because then I will know that there will be willing compliance rather than unwilling defiance and that no business owner will lose everything they have in this currently massive gamble.

December 20, 2008 at 10:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

How many of you believe that the current City Commission and City Commissioners are a true and fair representation of every citizen of Emporia and the City of Emporia as a whole ?
I for one do not !

December 20, 2008 at 10:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

d23_66801 (anonymous) says...

please tell me what a crackinsack is?

December 20, 2008 at 10:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Lifegoeson

goodolboy, that comment is stupid
"I travel frequently I just don't chew so I do not really pay attention to it, but I have seen others getting away with chewing,"

just because they get away with it DOES NOT mean it is not banned! YOUR argument is Flawed and illogical.

--------------------------------------------------

If you are going to quote me, quote the whole statement, not just he parts you like so you can twist things. If you see at the end of the whole statement there was a question mark. Here I will re quote it for you.

"Wrong Steve, I travel frequently I just don't chew so I do not really pay attention to it, but I have seen others getting away with chewing, would never happen with a cigarette though, why is that?"

I don't care about smoking and chewing on an airplane, I do neither so inquiring into if I can do either on an airplane does not pertain to me, most of the time I am asleep with Ipod on and oblivious to it all anyways.

The point goes to the very nature of the habit, why is that I can look around see people chewing every now and then, and they get away it? There is a good damn reason that smoking was banned on planes, you are confined to one area and whatever you do directly affects your neighbors, with smoking in general the by product is directly shared with those around you, no other habit can make that claim, this is my point, and it clearly went right over your head. It was a question to Steve, not a statement of fact,

Lrn2debate

December 20, 2008 at 2:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

methusla

Look around in our society, there are laws and ordinances put into effect everywhere based on the majority or the people wanting said acts. There is no right to smoke. Theoretically if a law came down the pike tomorrow making cigarettes illegal for whatever reason, and the people voted it into effect, how could claim that you had the right to smoke? The whole "right" issue here is not an individual right, the right issue is with business owners and the ordinance dictating what they can do, which in point of fact is nothing as there are ordinances and codes a plenty that have to be adhered to in any public business. Laws, policies, your tax dollars, everything in this country comes down to a vote directly or indirectly, and the majority always dictates direction.

December 20, 2008 at 3:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

oh4thelovof,

Could not agree more on having a vote on this, if I could sign Steve's petition I would for that reason alone. I too want to see the numbers because everyone has an idea or a theory but until it goes to public vote we will really never know. I have NEVER advocated that the commissioners solely decide on this.

December 20, 2008 at 3:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

You know the whole airplane argument got me thinking. Bar owners and smokers routinely tell people to patronize other places if they do not like smoke. Well the airlines are basically doing the same thing in reverse, yet are there any airlines that cater to smokers?(enlighten me if there are, I have never had the need to look). If there were enough support surely some airline would cave and offer smoking flights right?

December 20, 2008 at 3:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy,
No comment on my last post? Man that post took me forever to type as I am a slow typist. I thought we had a good rap going.
Check the post out again and let me know what you think.

December 20, 2008 at 3:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy:
I nor any one who opposes the smoking ban has ever maintained that anyone has the "Right"to smoke, but everyone does have the "RIGHT" to "FREEDOM" of choice to either smoke or not smoke, etc. without the fear of outside interference of their "RIGHT to FREEDOM" of choice by any individual, group of individuals or government entity by using "unnecessary force" as defined by the definition of "FREEDOM and LIBERTY".
So you see no one is saying that anyone has the right to smoke, but those who oppose the smoking ban are saying is, this ban supresses or outright denies the "RIGHT and FREEDOM" to choose to either smoke or not smoke and have places they can gather and socialize at places that allow smoking, just as the CAE and smoking ban advocates have the "RIGHT and FREEDOM" of choice to choose to either be exposed to smoke and smokers or avoid being exposed to smoke and smokers and to gather and socialize at smoke free places.
What seems to be the hardest thing for you and the CAE and its advocates to undrstand, is that it is in fact a matter of the "RIGHT and FREEDOM" to make a choice, but the problem seems to be that you and the CAE do not have anyone trying to take away any of your "RIGHT and FREEDOM" to make a choice and basically classifying you as a 2nd or 3rd class citizen with a ban of some sort.
Why would anyone want to illiminate a single group of individual citizens "RIGHT and FREEDOM "to chose how they want to live their life and life style and live by another group of citizens way of living or life style.
Don't you think that almost everyone, with any common sense, posses the ability and knowledge to make the choice to avoid any situation that they believe is dangerous, or possibly unhealthy ?
Doesn't what the CAE and its advocates are doing, or trying to do sound similar to what happened in Europe in the middle to late 1930s'? To me the similarity is absolutely "uncanny" !

December 20, 2008 at 5:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )