Happiness09 (anonymous) says...

Why are "kids" in smoke filled bars in the first place? DUH!

April 2, 2009 at 3:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Well, there ya go! Colorado does it, so we should, too! One problem, though. I don't give a rat's rump what the people in Colorado do or don't do. I live in Emporia. If Colorado citizens and business owners wish to give up their individual rights and freedoms, that is their choice.

Yesterday, an obnoxiously vocal defender of our proposed smoking ban admitted that the voracious debate over the issue boils down to rights versus health. She went on to say that health for a few is far more inportant than rights for all.

Well, I'm afraid the history and heritage of our nation disputes that. A wise and patriotic man, a fearless founder of our nation, once said, "Give me liberty or give me death." If Patrick Henry felt dying was preferable to giving up rights and individual freedoms, I have to assume he wouldn't roll over and allow a few snide and snooty social reformers bully him into voting for this ban without a spirited fight. I also think he would consider anyone who allowed the erosion of those rights to be a... well, you fill in the blank.

The smoking ban claims to solve a problem that doesn't exist (smoking is already banned in nearly every building in our city) by allowing government to infringe on our personal freedoms and dictate our choices.

Don't be fooled by all the lies, deception, and under-the-table antics of CAE. Vote for individual rights and freedom of choice.

Vote "NO" next Tuesday.

April 2, 2009 at 4 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

I don't live in Emporia and I don't get to vote on this. I have read about it and listened to the issues and commercials on the local radio. I don't smoke and don't care to be around smokers, but...I do have to agree something seems wrong about banning a legal activity(one that keeps getting taxed at a higher and higher rate to raise money for the government at that) in a private business. Seems to me if you own a business you ought to decide what legal activities go on in it. Is smoking legal or not? It is a property rights issue as much as anything, if you don't like smoking, don't go where it is happening, if it hurts a businesses bottom line, they will change.

April 2, 2009 at 6:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I feel a bit ashamed and embarrassed when people don't have the commonsense to stay away from something they believe is harming them. I am embarrassed when people say that they are so concerned about their health but want this ban so they can go to bars and drink. ??????????????????????

I'll be voting NO.

April 2, 2009 at 6:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I'm with you, seriously. If these folks are so dang worried about their health, why are they drinking to begin with? I'm voting NO even though I am no longer a smoker. I'm voting against Theresa Walters and her band of control freaks.

April 2, 2009 at 6:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Susan, You wrote:

"Please, Emporians, vote “yes” to do away with our smoky bars and restaurants."

Now I know your side thought let's get Susan to write a letter to the paper for the ban. NO-ONE would dare attack the director of SOS.

They were correct.

I just wanted you to know that my small contributions to the United Way and all other charities and fund raisers have been spent fighting this ban to keep Emporia's smoky bars & restaurants like they are.
Steve

April 2, 2009 at 7:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

tbluma (anonymous) says...

Said it before and I'll say it again. YOU CAN'T HAVE A BATTLE OF WITS WITH UNARMED PEOPLE.
VOTE NO

April 2, 2009 at 7:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

rami (anonymous) says...

If everyone is so worried about health, why are you in a bar attacking your liver with alcohol? VOTE NO! I can understand making restaurants smoke-free but bars and taverns? Please VOTE NO!

April 2, 2009 at 11:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

eldiablo (anonymous) says...

This issue ultimately boils down to two things:

Selfishness & Business

Forget the whole "It's a violation of our rights" bologna. That is a shroud that smokers are hiding behind.

Those who are against the ban, selfishly, want to keep smoking in bars and restaurants. Those are are for the ban, selfishly, want to visit smoke-free bars and restaurants.

Business owners don't give a flying potato about rights and freedoms. They are only concerned with business and they feel a smoking ban will negatively impact their business.

Drop the whole "rights and freedoms" nonsense. Call it what it is.

April 3, 2009 at 9:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

rami
You are 100% correct. If the ban was for restaurants only it would be more understandable. I would still question the necessity however. Most restaurant owners have already chosen to "ban" smoking in their restaurants anyway. If all these health advocates that want more smoke free restaurants would ONLY go to the smoke free ones and voiced their opinions to the smoking allowed restaurant owners, surely more restaurants would "ban" smoking, and it would be done without unnecessary government intervention. Some say it's "bologna" to say this is a rights issue, I say it's "bologna" to use the government as a tool so you can go to a few more restaurants.

I am not a business owner and will not be affected one way or another by this ban. I don't smoke. I have read all the reasons that people have for wanting this ban and they have a foul stench(the reasons, not the people). I will definitely be voting NO on Tuesday.

April 3, 2009 at 11:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

"vote “yes” to do away with our smoky bars and restaurants."

I thought this ban wasn't just for bars and restaurants, but all businesses in town. Maybe I was wrong, or maybe Susan accidentally said something she wasn't supposed to. Maybe I was right when I said this ban unfairly targets bars and restaurants WAY back in August...

On a different note, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the first business to a citation for smoking wasn't a bar or restaurant at all. ;-)

April 3, 2009 at 11:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

"The organization is competing for grant dollars and need to demonstrate success to justify additional donations."

YY4U-- Can you email any of this information?

April 3, 2009 at 12:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Well Matt it seems kansas tobacco free did a air quality study of 5 places in Emporia, on the sly last month and issued a press release today. Let's see who bites on this unscientific propaganda piece? Here is 1 Quote:

The Emporia results were compared to EPA outdoor standards since the US does not regulate indoor air quality for particulate matter.

Just when we thought it was about over.

April 3, 2009 at 12:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Here is a little piece of info, that shows the connection of smoking ban groups to big pharmaceutical companys !

Although public consciousness is
rapidly developing about the
pharmaceutical connections of the
global antitobacco establishment, the
large majority of the population,
media, and politicians is still
tragically unaware of the extent of
that connection. For this dissertation,
let us consider the investment in
antismoking activities by the Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation,
philanthropic arm of Johnson &
Johnson, between 1992 and 2000 in
one nation alone, the United States:
well over 300 million dollars have
been invested by just one
multinational in financing
antitobacco activities and “grass
root” antismoking groups. [38]

Even
more interesting is that the
antismoking activists never bother to
report their pharmaceutical funding,
and the most basic common sense
shows that multinationals such as
J&J do not invest hundreds of
millions of dollars solely on
humanitarian grounds.

VOTE NO !

April 3, 2009 at 1:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

As for Susan Morans' COLORADO KIDS . They have chosen to evidently make Colorado their home, and that is fine, that was there " CHOICE " and I respect that " CHOICE " ! But since they have chosen to make a smoke free Colorado their home, I don't feel that they should return to Emporia, which is no longer their home and start telling citizens of Emporia, who have CHOSEN to make Emporia their home, how to believe, live their lives and give up any of the citizens of Emporias, freedoms, rights and liberties. I don't think anyone from Emporia goes to their home in Colorado and tells them to do as we in Kansas or Emporia do and to wake up !

My point is, you made a CHOICE, now let us make our CHOICE , without interference from OUTSIDERS !

Citizens of Emporia, you see, the whole problem with this smoking ban is it is managed and funded by " OUTSIDERS ". Shoot even the strategy handbook the CAE used to pattern and plan this smoking ban is printed and furnished by " OUTSIDERS" that have no true vested interest in Emporia, Kansas, except to widen their control and profit base !

VOTE NO ! Say no to the selfish, controlling, dictating locals and the " OUTSIDERS " who are funding the CAE !

VOTE NO !

April 3, 2009 at 1:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )