admireed (anonymous) says...

Sorry Ryan. Your job does not matter. Get a grant to live on like some of us.

November 11, 2008 at 4:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

OutsiderJ (anonymous) says...

I bet not one single person from EDA or CAE ever asked Ryan what he thought was best for him. I bet none of them ever came to where he works and expressed concern for his health (which is one of their supposed concerns with second hand smoke). Most of all I doubt any of the clean air folks would listen, hear, or acknowlege his position on the ban because they are convinced that they already know what is best for everybody.

As Samuel Adams said when speaking on fascism.
"The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men."

November 11, 2008 at 5:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Has your employer come out and said you would in fact lose your job? Or is this all an assumption?

November 11, 2008 at 6:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Newsie (anonymous) says...

Hey Ryan,
Before you begin suffering the effects of second-hand smoke -- and it is a good bet that you will -- ask your employer if he will back you by paying your medical bills. Afterall, if you are so loyal an employee that you are willing to inhale the toxic fumes from cigarette smoke, then surely he will be the loyal employer and help cover your bills.
Let us know what he says.

November 11, 2008 at 6:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

joecitizen (anonymous) says...

business owners have the same right to choose for their business as you do for your home. if you don't like it, then don't go there. that simple. as for protecting employees, this is a right to work state, and all employees have a right to choose where they work. they obviously didn't have a problem with it when they hired on. grow up, and stop pushing your ideals on everyone else

Admired---- you are a fool, his job matters to him, and not everyone meets the criteria for grants.

November 11, 2008 at 6:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy and newsie:

I think I can answer your questions to Ryan because he works for me.

newsie; No, I will not be paying for his medical bills, he has his own insurance. Even if he didn't, the costs of providing insurance for my four employees would be prohibative. I can't even afford it for myself. Read his letter, he does not agree with your assumption that SHS is as toxic as you believe.

goodoleboy; Yes I have told my employees that their hours will be cut and may be eliminated if this ban passes. This is predicated on my customer base and the number of smokers who are customers. They have already stated that they would not be coming in as much , or staying as long if they cannot smoke. And in case you haven't noticed the economy is not in such great shape that we need another reason to turn away our paying customers.
Most of all, Before you speak FOR THE WORKER, maybe you should speak TO THE WORKER .
I am sure they would be able and willing to discuss this with anyone willing to endure the toxic fumes at the Bar.
Steve

November 12, 2008 at 7:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Newsie (anonymous) says...

Rbow: Sad for Ryan. And it is not just I who believes in the dangers of SHS. There are plenty of authoratative reports by reputable health agencies that point to the dangers of SHS.

November 12, 2008 at 8:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

crackinsasck, So the employees who are FORCED to work for the city in garbage and with CHEMICALS and petroleum products don't deserve your protection because it is inherently unhealthy? Ryan CHOOSES to work in a job he wanted, he was not FORCED to breathe shs.
NEWSIE, Ryan doesn't need you to feel sad for him, he just wants you and your kind to leave him to his own choices! That is, or was what America was all about. He has his beliefs, you have yours, you should both have the right to express them without forcing your beliefs on each other.
Where do you work? Is it free from all things that could be harmfull to your health? I doubt any place of employement is completely free of some kind of 2nd hand something which some would deem dangerous.
Steve

November 12, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

CRACKINSACK, there is no aurguing with you, as you bring up hypothetical after hypothetical arguments. So-----Please answer this question with complete honesty and factuality.

Where in Emporia Kansas USA is ANYONE FORCED to breathe 2nd hand smoke? I wait for your answer, Steve

November 12, 2008 at 10:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

irishemporia (anonymous) says...

Ryan: No low-paying job is worth what you face after continuous exposure to second-hand smoke. And no employer who threathens you with your job and refuses to back your health needs is worth your loyalty.

Want to see the effects of second-hand smoke? Check this out.

http://www.csmngt.com/smokers%20lung.jpg

November 12, 2008 at 10:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

child in car w/smoking parents=not your car=none of your business.

child in restaurant with smokers present= different restaurant there are over 30 that are smoke free.

sweeping sidewalks with smokers When's the last time you saw anyone sweeping sidewalks OUTDOORS with 2nd hand smoke lingering?

students walking to class with smokers in front of them. Walk faster, your lungs are in better shape.

workers who are unable to find work elsewhere?
Look at the help wanted ads in the paper.

Your examples are not factual. I still await an answer.
Steve

November 12, 2008 at 11:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

irishemporia (anonymous) says...

rbow: Finally, I understand. Everyone should make concessions except the smokers because smoker's rights trumps all -- even the children.

November 12, 2008 at 11:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

giggles (anonymous) says...

Those of you who are wholeheartidly for CAE have your noses so far up in the air you would think that you wouldn't have to worry about second hand smoke.
The whole point is, you don't frequent these places, you don't own or have any share in one of these establishments. So why is it your business?
IT'S NOT. It never will be. You violate the principle of this country. FREEDOM.
What they do is not your business. They never asked you to be involved or to make their decisions for them. You choose what is right for you. Stay out of everyone elses business.
That is the real problem in this town. Some people don't know when and where to put their nose, no pun intended.
Find something more worthy to put your time into, like ending poverty in Emporia or child abuse.
You can't force your ideals of this topic on others because just as you have research and evidence for your side there is just as much research and evidence for the opposition. There is nothing solidly conclusive about this subject that makes you right.
By the way, I am a non-smoker. I just don't tell others they have to be too.

November 12, 2008 at 11:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

cookatwork (anonymous) says...

This is getting ridiculous!! People CHOOSE to work the jobs they work at by applying for them - no one FORCES them to choose those jobs. IF it is an issue of not qualifying for different jobs there ARE ways to take care of that. I worked in restaurants and bars through college - I LOVED THOSE JOBS!!!! I KNEW there was smoking in both of them - they fit my needs and, AGAIN, I loved those jobs!!!!

The question was raised earlier - what about the influx of non-smoking clients - wouldn't you like to be able to give ryan a raise? QUESTION FOR YOU NON-SMOKERS - do you all stay home and NOT go anywhere that there is smoke? HOW many of the non-smokers in Emporia, who do not visit a bar now and then, would start coming out on a regular basis? Let's get serious!!!!! I would venture a guess that 98% of the non-smokers who also drink at bars STILL go to the bars whether there is smoking or not.

November 12, 2008 at 1:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

wirewatt (anonymous) says...

The smoking issue is getting out of hand, we have tax monies being used against the people whom pay them. We are reading all kind of excuses of why we need to be protected. I don't smoke, never have and won't start now. I however don't believe we should be walking all over the rights of the business owners. The answer is very simple, DON'T GO INTO THERE BUSINESS'S. We are losing more freedom's every day, their pocket book will control what they do. The laws on the books we have now do a good job of taking care of the problems.

November 12, 2008 at 1:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

smith_ron (anonymous) says...

This is not about the rights of business owners. It is about health -- plain and simple. The rights of business owners don't trump the rights of the health and safety. Otherwise, we'd be serving beer to 14-year olds.

November 12, 2008 at 3:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

giggles (anonymous) says...

Oh get real people! You have the right to decide to go there. They can't make you patronize their business. You don't have to go. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. Stop trying to complicate the issue. Health and safety of who? I don't have to work there, I don't have to go there. My health is safe, my children's health is safe, I don't have to take them to restaurants with smoking, and I certainly don't take them to bars. That's my job as a parent. You nor anyone else here trying to decide for me is MY parent. Butt out!!!
This is clearly and solely a business rights issue. The only people I see complaining are the ones who think they have the right to control other people's lives.
You have to draw a line when it comes to health and safety. Otherwise we would all need to stay at home and peek out our window shades...but that is probably hazardous to your health too. It's called using proper judgement. You are just telling people they cannot make their own proper judgements. I'm sure people can say the same for you crackinsack and smith_ron, perhaps they should be making your decisions for you.

November 12, 2008 at 4:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

giggles (anonymous) says...

My point is that you wouldn't have to care about their inconsideration of others if you would just stay away. You know smoking is allowed there so why are you being inconsiderate of their right to smoke.
If you enact a ban on this then what will the next ban be?
Junk food, how many calories you can consume?
Perhaps I want to ban you from coming into public places because all of your pushiness and control issues stress me out, that's a health problem. Stress is bad for the heart and stomach and brain, let alone other organs. You are a health problem that needs to be banned...

November 12, 2008 at 5:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Crackin up: You are either intoxicated on socially conscious Kool-Aid or are an attention-starved crusader.

Your non-sensical, hateful comments above make it clear that you have no interest in "clean air" or the improved "health" of fellow citizens. You are simply a hater.

You hate smoking and you hate people who smoke. Above you said that you want smoking eliminated inside buildings, inside cars, outside on the street, on sidewalks, or anywhere else close to where you might happen to be.

You are an irrational, unreasonable, hate-mongering, fear-spreading elitist against all America stands for: freedom of choice.

After a smoking ban is passed, what freedom will you attack next to feed your need for social greed? Repeal of the 2nd Amendment? Gay rights? Pro-choice? Christmas?

I'd suggest you get a hobby, but it appears you already have one: attempting to force the world to live as you dictate.

November 12, 2008 at 6:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

By the comments that crack makes, I would bet that he/she doesn't go to a bar all that often. I would also bet that would not change if this ban passed.

One other thing I have noticed. As I have stated before, I do not live in Emporia. However, I was born and raised there and try to come back on a regular basis. When I do, I like to go to a couple of the local drinking establishments with my good friend. Most of these places that I go to, I see the bartender standing behind the bar smoking a cigarette when not serving the beer. This makes me really question the motive of "employee's health".

November 12, 2008 at 8:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

Don't buy in to the claim that it is about health, that's a joke. If smoking was the one and only cause of health issues, entire generations would be dead today and we wouldn't need to worry about the baby boomers draining off what remains of Social Security funds. If it were about health, prohabition would have succeeded, we would be after factories to do more to reduce emissions, we would not be breathing car emissions, etc. Sackinhercrack has told you over and over it's all about cigarette smoking's smell, and the moral police's inability to control smoker's in their decision making processes. That bothers her and the others like her that are confused and actually think people want them to decide for the world what is best for us.

November 13, 2008 at 6:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

crackinsack
The sky is falling, the sky is falling! It must have hit you on the head. You stated, "Smokers are everywhere and we must be protected from them." There are a lot of dangers out there in the big bad world, you can face them or stay at home and hide under the bed. As a business owner I do think about making that next buck, if I didn't I would not have lasted for the thirty plus years I have been in business. I also care about my employees and customers health, and their well-being. That means I support their right to work where they want, to live where they want and to live their lives as they see fit. The problem is a lot of us do not believe shs is the big deal that you and others make it out to be. For every study you have I could find one to refute it.
From your posts above you won't be happy and safe until all smoking is banned everywhere you may happen to be.
I still haven't recieved a logical, truthfull answer to my question "Where in Emporia is anyone FORCED to breathe 2nd hand smoke?"

November 13, 2008 at 7:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

crackinsack, I'll be happy to answer your above questions. The answer to all of them is nowhere, no place . Just like non-smokers are not forced into my bar. If you do get out enough to "see the kids on their little laptop" I hope you are getting hazerdous duty pay. Putting up with all that smoke to "watch us", God , get a life and leave the rest of us alone.
You sound like someone straight out of 1984. It's not that everyone want's to "bad mouth" you, it's just that you can't make a logical argument for this proposed ban.
Steve

November 13, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

"Where in Emporia is anyone FORCED to live in a house with lead paint?"

Nowhere. They can move out anytime they want. A common sense approach would have been to have the home inspected before moving in. Can't afford a better home? Go back to school, get a better job, improve their job skills to get more pay. They can take on extra part time jobs to pay to have it removed. Everyone had lead paint in years past, a bunch of us should be dead I guess.

"Where in Emporia is anyone FORCED to go into a building that is structurally unsound?"

Nowhere. If they use common sense, or simple thought processes, they will avoid it.

"Where in Emporia is anyone FORCED to do illicit drugs?"

Nowhere. People using illicit drugs do so by choice. Again, anyone with common sense and an IQ above 10 should know better than to use them, how to avoid them.

"Where in Emporia is anyone forced to be around drunk drivers?" Nowhere, but drunk driving is still illegal; just as smoking in public should be illegal. Thanks for helping make my point.

No one is forced to be around drunk drivers, but they are there just the same, law or not. Laws only apply to those who choose to obey them. Murder, kidnapping and armed robbery are illegal, they still occur even though the penalties are severe. Why use this comparison? Because you are promoting a ordinance that will effect people like myself who will obey the ban even though I don't agree with it. There will be others that will rebel against it and continue to smoke wherever they please and the Police will not be able to stop it anymore than they are able to prevent all crimes that are illegal. There are many of us that are considerate of others when we smoke. I don't smoke around my family or in our home. I don't smoke in other people's homes or vehicles if they don't smoke. I don't stand in the doorways of no-smoking establishments where people have to walk thru. I don't throw my cigarette butts on the ground, I use ash trays or properly dispose of them. I don't smoke in restaurants usually, I'm there to eat and can smoke later away from others.

You are trying to promote a personal choice you have made to be smoke free, hurray for you, but I don't value your input whether I smoke or not. More than 95% of the public accessible businesses and buildings in Emporia are currently smoke free already. You have many more options to avoid SHS than I have where I can go and smoke if I so desire. People like you and your peers of CAE should open your own businesses if you think you know what is best for Emporia. I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't last a year.

November 13, 2008 at 11:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

A social reformer named Crackin,
whose sense of fairness was lackin',
opposed the right to choose
for anyone whose views
were different than what she was backin'.

November 13, 2008 at 2:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

"I agree that no one is forced into those situations. Just like we're not forced into breathing second hand smoke."

You said a mouthful there. You finally admitted yourself that SHS can be easily avoided.

crackin, you have no point to understand and you also have no future as a poet.

November 13, 2008 at 3:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

giggles (anonymous) says...

Crackinsack, if you have the time to sit around and think up absurd poems such as that, then you have waaaaaay too much time on your hands. Just out of curiosity, do you have many friends? I am just guessing you do not by the examination of how you try to demean and belittle others based on the ideals that they don't always agree with you.

November 13, 2008 at 3:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Crackinsack: Above you said:

"I don’t hate people who smoke, but I do dislike it when they hurt others. Maybe I’m just more compassionate than most. None of your examples will “be next”. They don’t harm others."

That's right, Crack; none of the things I listed hurt anyone, yet many vehemently oppose each one despite having the freedom and right to avoid any of them, just as you voraciously oppose smoking despite having the freedom, right, and choice to avoid it.

I admire your tenacity and enthusiasm but suggest a find real issue to champion; one that doesn't stomp on the rights of others.

Oh! And about your claim to being "just more compassionate than most". How can you dare to say that? You have accused smokers of being pests, dangers to society, smelly, poisonous, uneducated, inconsiderate, selfish, and an endless list of other unkind and inappropriate terms. You also deny their rights and insist on imposing your will upon them and business owners. Compassionate? Try vitriolic: A more accurate description.

November 13, 2008 at 3:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

8jnemp (anonymous) says...

After doing some soul searching, I realize that I may be looking at this the wrong way. Perhaps smoking is bad afterall. Maybe we should give the ban a shot.

November 13, 2008 at 6:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

paulkersey (anonymous) says...

Crackinsack,

For God sakes, just go away. You have ceased making any intelligent conversation, you put down people who write articles in, you seem to be here for no other reason than to cause a stir (which is your right under the 1st amendment, but just because you can doesn't mean you should). I really wish you would find something better to do than try and take away what few precious freedoms we have left. Please find a hobby! If you need help, I have come up with a list of possible suggestions for things you can do instead of spewing your idiocy here:

*Hiking--Take a long walk off a short bridge.
*go fly a kite
*go play in traffic
*pound sand (more enjoyable in Iraq)
*Go to Iraq! Volunteers wanted!
*join the Peace Corps
*Join the Foreign Legion
*Move to Lawrence
*just freaking move anywhere but here!
*Collect stamps!
*collect pogs
*collect anything other than this community's hatred for you
*GO AWAY!

That's all I could think of for now, more to follow!

November 13, 2008 at 9:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Well it looks like the city and clean air Emporia don't want to compromise on the key parts of this ban. We will probably start working on a petition drive to get this on the ballot for a vote in April. There will be a couple of commissioners up for re-election at that time also. It sure will be interesting on how they vote on this ban.
Steve

November 14, 2008 at 7:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Pretending to be me again, eh 8jnemp? Do you really think anyone on this blog, except for maybe Crackinsack, is stupid enough to fall for your deceptive ploy? You are one ignorant low-life excuse for a human being for attempting to mislead others by stealing my identity. But, you could never be me. I am honest, educated, adhere to moral values, and don't pretend to be something, or someone, I am not. I bet your mother is very proud of you.

November 14, 2008 at 5:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

Crackinsack-

Thanks for dragging me into this. Yeah, I know the person, but we don't hang out everyday. Besides, I still collect pogs.

I still don't understand why CAE is so opposed to this going to a vote? It passed in Manhattan, why are they so scared to bring it to a public vote? Let it come to a vote, and one way or another, it will be settled, and the majority wins. That's how Emporia does it, thats how America does it, and its worked pretty well so far. Let's keep tradition alive!

November 14, 2008 at 5:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

joecitizen (anonymous) says...

just for the record crack, the fall in smoking rates can more appropriately be attributed to the continued increases is tobacco taxes. do your homework. I'm a non smoker, but that's not what this is about for many of us. we want our right to chose. what's next? saturated fats? Will Theresa Walters apply for more grants and pay herself to organize Clear Arteries Emporia. Will they be the new Fred Phelps? Picketing and hatemongering?
All kinds of stuff is bad for you, but you get to chose what you do or don't do, that simple. if you don't feel smart enough, or don't trust your own judgement, try moving to communist china. They have people to do all that thinking and choosing for you.

November 15, 2008 at 12:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Since this whole thing started, Clean air Emporia has been funded by foundation grants (tax Free) and tax payer dollars directly, (EDA). Emporia Open For Business have funded themselves using their own hard earned money.

It also looks like a compromise will not be made and the commission wants to bring it to a vote the night before Thanksgiving. The timing on this seems a little OFF to say the least.

When the commission passes this ordinance EOFB will have to again use their hard earned money to petition the city to strike the ordinance down. But we will do it! Actually we have already started on the paperwork to do it. When this comes to election in April, it will serve as a referendum on the city commissioners as two will also be up for re-election,(I think).
After listening to the comments at the open meeting a while back I can't understand why the commission is actually considering the passing of this ban.
For them to pass a ban favorved by the few over the protests of the many makes you wonder if all those rumors of the "Good Ole Boy club and the supposed conflicts of interest involved are truthfull.
For them to pass this ban during the current business and financial downturn is asinine. Passing any law during these times which May, or Could,or in my opinion,Would effect my sales negatively would be political suicide.
I am sorry to say that this issue will probably drag on through the spring and divide this city like few issues have done before. Thank You Bobbie Sauder And Teresa Walters.
Steve

November 15, 2008 at 9:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

crackinsack; I would like to thank you for finally answering my question about Where in Emporia is anyone forced to breathe 2nd hand smoke? Your reply to neighbor on Nov. 13 th @ 1:25 was on the money. Thanks for your honesty!
Steve

November 15, 2008 at 12:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

What a surprise. A few of Emporia's wealthiest brain-dead elite propose a grossly over-restrictive smoking ban which is vehemently opposed by the masses but is still rushed to approval by the city commissioners, who just happen to also be among Emporia's wealthiest brain-dead elite, not to mention close friends, in the same small social circle, and having numerous profitable business ties with the ban instigators.

I must be naive. With such an efficient & cohesive coalition of obviously well-healed citizens arbitrarily deciding what is best for we impoverished common folk and what is, or isn't, socially and morally acceptable for us, I don't understand why Emporia has such a reputation for being backward, cliquish, and in decline. Go figure.

November 15, 2008 at 1:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

joecitizen (anonymous) says...

we should start a drive to immediately dump our city comissioners, and hold a special election, before they push this and lowes, and every ofther bad idea down our throats.

November 15, 2008 at 3:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

joecitizen; we are too late on the Lowe's project, but the economy will probably stop that one anyway. But you can call or e-mail the city commissioners on this ban and let them know how you feel. Maybe if enough of us do so they may surprise us and vote the right way on it by tabling it completely.
Steve

November 15, 2008 at 4:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

irishemporia (anonymous) says...

Hey Gazette: How much longer do we have to read Houndi's "Suck" comment. You do know what he (or she) is referring to. I have kids I encourage to read these discussions, but not this one.

November 15, 2008 at 9:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

WILLIAM_A (anonymous) says...

Rbow
You are 100% right that this should be tabled completely.!!!!!

I am affraid our current sitting commissioners and city leaders have been drinking the Elite Kool Aid at the Country Club and it has impaired their judgment .

November 15, 2008 at 10:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

irishemporia;

If you feel a comment should be removed, go to the comment and click on (suggest removal). That will alert the gazette to your feelings.

November 16, 2008 at 7:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

irish; if your children are reading shouldn't you also remove your comment about the "sacrafice" wouldn't want to scare them would you?

November 16, 2008 at 8:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Irish: Houndi's comment to Crackinsack is admittedly inappropriate, but certainly well-deserved.

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

eugene (anonymous) says...

crankinsack If you don't like the smoke at the town royal don't go there. I am a non-smoker and it does'nt bother me.

November 16, 2008 at 4:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MelissaE (anonymous) says...

This discussion is funny!

irishemporia discusses a virgin sacrifice and then balks at houndi's comment because irishemporia wants his/her children to read these discussions. I wonder if there is a lot of talk about virgin sacrificing in irishemporia's house....that's not troublesome but the slang terms are...?? (BTW--neither has anything to do with the actual disccussion)

FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Be your kids' censor but don't try to censor others just because you don't like it. Tacky as it may be, houndi actually censored his/her own comment even though we still get the meaning (gotta love slang terms and people who are offended but somehow know what it means). Whether or not the EG wants to remove anything is their CHOICE because it's their site. Same with the Internet and TV. If you don't like it, don't go there and don't recommend your children going there, either.

November 16, 2008 at 6:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

"Whether or not the EG wants to remove anything is their CHOICE because it's their site. Same with the Internet and TV. If you don't like it, don't go there and don't recommend your children going there, either."

THERE YA GO! After weeks of verbal sparring by hundreds of bloggers, MelissaE has summed up the idiocy of the CAE smoking ban proposal with her statement above. Finally someone actually gets it and was able to put it into words. It's that simple:

"is their CHOICE because it's their site"

"If you don't like it, don't go there and don't recommend your children going there, either."

Thank you, MelissaE. You just nailed the problem with the ridiculous smoking ban proposal.

November 16, 2008 at 7:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

irishemporia (anonymous) says...

Melissa: Freedom of Speech has its limits. Words spoken to incite a fight (such as Houndi's comment, which is clearly an insult directed at a person), is not protected by the First Amendment. For more information, check out the Fighting Words doctrine at http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org//...

The comment regarding the virgin sacrifice is clearly not an insult directed at anyone. In fact, the word human could have been substituted for the word virgin and the meaning of the phrase would have remained the same. Heck, even the Bible references sacrifice. Based on the logic posted above, should children should be shielded from the Bible? Absolutely not. Can you say the same about needless vulgarity?

For further information: http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/s....

November 16, 2008 at 8:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Bjnemp:
Right on! or should I say WRITE ON!
Your above post is perfect;
Thanks
Steve

November 17, 2008 at 6:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MelissaE (anonymous) says...

irishemporia, spare me the lesson. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Heehee, Bjnemp--I wondered if anyone would catch that. :)

November 17, 2008 at 8:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

To all ban smoking advocates who advocate, that if a smoking ban is approved in Emporia and who say that non-smokers will frequent former smoking bars more and spend more money in said bars. To these freedom of choice destroyers I say this, B_ll S__t, you will not frequent these bars that used to be able to allow smoking any more than you do now, simply because in your dillusional minds these bars are located in the wrong side of town and in your totally one sided, little minds are below your social standard and it has been that way in Emporia and all across this nation for decades.
And in case you haven't realized it yet, there has been absolutely no equality in this country for some time now.
Also to those who keep saying " vote the current city commissioners out".
Unless and until all Emporia citizens come to the realization that in Emporia a City Commission form of government is nor will be a fair and impartial form of government. All citizens of Emporia will have to unite and force a special election to change the city government to a City Council form of government, which would be much more fair and impartial form of city government, with representation from all parts of the City.

November 17, 2008 at 9:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

irishemporia (anonymous) says...

Your very welcome, Melissa. Think how much more weight your opinion will carry when it is backed by facts rather than mis- and dis-information.

November 17, 2008 at 10:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

slvrnblck (anonymous) says...

rbow--

You said earlier that this is coming to a vote in April, can you clarify that for me? Does that mean that the commissioners are going to table the issue and bring it to the public or are they going to vote one way or another and then the individual groups will take the alternative proposal to vote in April?

I am under the belief that both the CAE and the EOFB have enough signatures to combat the ban either way. Am I correct?

November 17, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Crackinsack: First, dear deluded one, only a small percentage of those opposing the ridiculous and unnecessary CAE smoking ban are "smokers (or smoking enablers)". Most are non-smokers who just happen, thank goodness, to oppose the tyranny and anti-American style behavior exhibited by you and the Clean Air Clackers.

Second, "we" are assuming nothing. We know exactly who makes up the self-professed privileged elite clique that introduced the uber-restrictive smoking ban and are attempting to force it down the throats of the gullible city commission and unsuspecting public.

Third, Methusla is a kind, concerned, and educated older gentleman who is homebound and therefore doesn't frequent bars. For you to personally attack and disrespect the gentleman as you did above is despicable and typical of the tawdry tactics continually used by you and your socialist anti-smoking sidekicks. Attacks without facts seems to be your modus operandi.

You early-on exhausted your miniscule storehouse of legitimate arguments and have long since resorted to spewing forth misinformation, conjecture, idiocy, and personal attacks on anyone who disagrees with you in an attempt to defend the indefensible.

Give it up, Crack. Stay off this blog and let the more intelligent and socially adept folks discuss this important issue in a civil and proper manner. You aren't qualified or equipped for the task.

November 17, 2008 at 2:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

slvrnblck;

If tthe commission passes the ordinance the way it was worded last Wed. at the meeting then I believe that eofb will petition to get the ordinance overturned in the April election.

Neither side has the required signatures on a valid petition to bring it to a vote, that is why cae want's the commission to do their dirty work for them.

If the commission tables the ordinance or takes no action then it would be up to cae to petition for the vote.

Any action at the state level seems unlikely in 2009, there don't seem to be the votes for it!

November 17, 2008 at 3:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

slvmblk (anonymous) says...

Thanks for the clarification, rbow. I just hope this thing hurries up and passes.

November 17, 2008 at 4:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

slvmblck (anonymous) says...

oh great..another imposter. I do appreciate the clarification. I still question the motive of the ban, however.

November 17, 2008 at 4:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Crackhead: Who appointed you as the supreme entity to keep "my fellow citizens healthy": The CAE, yourself, or God?

"Some folks think they have the right to smoke in public and others think they have the right to beat their spouse with a stick the width of their thumb."

What!! Again, you twist the facts and lie to spread your socialist venom. The issue is not over the right to smoke in public. The issue is over the right to smoke in privately owned businesses. As to the part about beating spouses "with a stick the width of their thumb", I would suggest to your spouse that he use a much thicker stick.

"Yes, you ARE assuming. I don’t fit your descriptions in the least."

No, we are not assuming. You give yourself way too much credit and importance. I was referring to the few original socially superior zealots who penned the stupiid smoking ban, and you ain't one of 'em.

"How did I “disrespect” him exactly?"

ARE YOU KIDDING ME!! Or are you just too immune to self criticism to relate? In your entry to Methusla above, you called his opinion "ridiculous", you insinuated he was a lush and spent all his time drinking in a bar, accused him of using profanity, which he did not, and used sarcasm to paint him as not intelligent.

"I can disagree with whomever I chose thank you very much."

Disagree, yes; but that's not what you do. You attack, disprespect, and quote lies and misinformation. Are you so socially inept or jaded as to not realize that?

"Keep in mind that the ban benefits EVERYONE in some way."

Really? Who, exactly, would the ban benefit besides you and your elitist friends? Me? Bar owners? Emporia's tax base and economy? Those who value the freedom to make individual choices? Disabled, elderly, or ill people who would be forced to walk great distances and then stand alone in freezing cold, rain, wind, snow or in a dark alley in order to smoke? Children, who aren't allowed in bars anyway?

You're a selfish and unreasonable person, Crack; drunk on Kool-Aid of delusion or giddy with the hope of forcing your values and ideals upon others. You obviouosly possess a need to feed your overwhelming desire for attention and repair your pathetic lack of self esteem.

Give it up, Crack. Your lack of credibility and facts, and your endless barrage of vile personal verbal assaults on legitimate contributors, hurt your radical cause far more than they help.

November 17, 2008 at 4:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

eugene (anonymous) says...

irishemporia If you don't like houndi comments maybe you are'nt an american never heard of freedom of speech. Can I see your green card. If you have a problem with this meet at the town royal friday night. I will explain the freedom of speech act. Also if you have any virgin's to satrifice bring them my way I will do it for you.

November 17, 2008 at 6:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

eugene (anonymous) says...

I think you all better think about the drug problem in Emporia before you talk about the smoking problem. There are more drugs in this town then you know about unless you are the drug problem.

November 17, 2008 at 7:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Crackin: Oh! I forgot. You also have no sense of humor.

November 17, 2008 at 9:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )