madpoet (anonymous) says...

I agree. I have voted in every election since I was old enough. When I hear that less than 25% of registered voters typically vote, I just don't understand it. I generally advance vote at the courthouse. I spend about 5-10 minutes voting with the new machines. It take such little time and effort but can have a big effect. Those of us who live outside the city limits can't vote on the smoking ban but there's no excuse for those who live in Emporia. Plus school boards are up for vote too. I hope we get a big turnout with such a hot button topic on the ballot.

March 27, 2009 at 1:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

Just so you know, when I went and voted yesterday, the lady in the voter registration office said there had already been at least 480 people that had advance voted so far.

March 27, 2009 at 1:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

Douglas McGaw wrote, "we all have a stake in the outcome of this referendum, and we should all vote. Do not leave it to others to decide issues for you."

I agree completely. I would also add - don't let anyone (from either side) do your thinking for you.

Read some of the actual studies that were done, rather than relying on someone telling you what they think the studies mean.

The results of a 38-year long American Cancer Society study (Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Tobacco Related Mortality in a Prospective Study of Californians, 1960-98) may be found here:
http://www.data-yard.net/43/1057.pdf

The results of another long-term study (Mortality from Cancer and Other Causes among Airline Cabin Attendants in Germany, 1960–1997) may be found here:
http://www.data-yard.net/39/cabin.pdf

A third long-term study by the World Health Organization (Multicenter Case–Control Study of Exposure to
Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer
in Europe) may be found here:
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/re...

The EPA's report (The Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders) may be found here:
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.g...

The Congressional Research Service's analysis of the EPA report may be found here:
http://www.forces.org/evidence/files/...

The results of a Federal Lawsuit over the EPA report may be found here:
http://www.forces.org/evidence/epafra...

A partial list of the chemicals in second hand smoke may be found here:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/fa...

OSHA has determined that limited exposure to many chemicals (including those found in 2nd hand smoke) is considered safe. The list of chemicals amounts of each that OSHA has determined to be safe may be found here:
http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/pel/recognit...

Spend the next few days reading. Think for yourself and decide how you will vote.

March 27, 2009 at 2:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

madpoet (anonymous) says...

I wonder if the people who freak out about shs have any idea what chemicals they are exposed to daily? And have they read the food labels lately? I took organic chemistry in college and don't know what most of that stuff is. Life is a risk. We'll be risking our necks this afternoon when we drive home on slick roads. We need to get some sense of proportion back.

March 27, 2009 at 3:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

"SHS is an unnecessary one. It serves no purpose, harms people not using the product, and can be prevented with the ban. We're not Knights of the Round Table here; we don't need to be exposing ourselves to unnecessary peril."

Even assuming Wacky Cracky's statement is true, why are we voting on this stupid smoking ban? Emporia has had very effective smoking regulations in effect for decades.

In case you and your radical nico-phobe crusaders haven't noticed, smoking is already banned in every public building, government building, retail store, school, and office in the city. Nearly every restaurant in town is smoke-free.

Bars, saloons, taverns and private organizations are currently allowed to make their own decisions on whether to allow smoking on their premises. That allows the adults that go there to make their own choices of doing business there or going elsewhere. There are non-smoking options.

Since smoking is already banned anywhere you or your children might go, why are you so hell-bent on passing a ridiculously restrictive law that is meant to quell a problem which doesn't exist?

It can't be a health issue; unless you and your kids spend all your time in bars or the VFW. Every other business is already smoke free, so exactly what are you trying to accomplish?

The facts lead me to believe that you and the nicotine nannys of CAE have some hidden agenda. Otherwise, you would have called the "smoking ban" what it really is: a "stop people from smoking in bars, motel rooms, and private clubs" law.

You and your family and friends must spend a lot of time in bars, motel rooms, and private fraternal organizations to be so worried about their air. Even if you do, you have the choice not to. All other businesses and buildings are already smoke free. Hang out in one of them.

This proposed smoking ban is a ploy, a joke, an attempt of a few to control many, another government intrusion into private lives, and a further reduction in personal rights.

Stone soup, magic beans, wooden nickels, the CAE smoking ban. All are a scam.

Your rights, my rights, everyone's rights. All worth preserving.

Vote "NO" on April 7.

March 27, 2009 at 4:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Citizens of Emporia. The possible loss of just one of your precious " FREEDOMS " is a " PERIL " that not even one of us can tolerate ! Mark my words, if this smoking ban is passed in a vote, these bullying, control radicals that are the CAE and those who support the CAE, a smoking ban will not , I repeat, will not stop at just this one ban and you have seen them as much as say so in a number of their comments on this and other threads .

If you value your " RIGHTS and FREEDOMS " and do not want to be told that something you are doing, serves no purpose or is unnecessary, then the only vote to consider is a NO VOTE on this unnecessary smoking ban !

March 27, 2009 at 8:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

crack
you said
"Life is a risk, but SHS is an unnecessary one. It serves no purpose, harms people not using the product, and can be prevented with the ban."
You can prevent your exposure to shs very easily without a ban. I believe it was you that I've explained this to before. As far as not serving a purpose, you are wrong. Smoking serves as much of a purpose as alcohol does. I know how much you like to sneak swigs of hooch out of your auntie's cupboard.

I have presented a simple solution to the problem without government intervention and it has been rejected so if you are harmed by shs it is now on you. If you are afraid of shs "Why, then, do you even take the chance? ". Use your brain, use your feet, if you smell the smoke, hit the street!

This nonsmokin' nondrinkin' third party votin' US Army veteran says vote NO please. Thank you.

But if you feel you must vote yes, please vote NO.;)

March 27, 2009 at 9:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

crack stated:

Oh who cares? Never mind.
steve

March 27, 2009 at 9:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

olddog (anonymous) says...

Crack and the CAE will like this one!!!!

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Support our Troops

Please help support our troops overseas.
Send your gifts of Copenhagen, tobacco, cigarettes, cigars, or just your well wishes to any of these fine boys.
They will share with others in need of a "little bit of home" right now.

http://military.mychildsafe.org/

Please help support our troops overseas.

Vote NO!

``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

March 28, 2009 at 5:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

Mister0:

You've convinced me to take up smoking and to vote no. Because the laws of the universe and research don't count here in Emporia. As a matter of fact, I will encourage everyone I meet (including your children and grandchildren) to smoke - so that they can be just like this happy lady - enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YjrkB...

March 28, 2009 at 6:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

Maximus posted, Mister0: You've convinced me to take up smoking and to vote no. Because the laws of the universe and research don't count here in Emporia. As a matter of fact, I will encourage everyone I meet (including your children and grandchildren) to smoke - so that they can be just like this happy lady - enjoy!"

Once again, another confused person. Maximus - the ban isn't proposed because *smoking* is bad for you. It's being proposed because they say exposure to second hand smoke is bad for you.

Tell me, Maximus. Have you actually read any of the research studies? It should be easy enough to do - I posted links to some of them above.

Have you actually read any of them or are you content to let someone else do your thinking for you?

Judging by your obvious inability to distinguish the difference between active smoking (which is not the issue) and exposure to second hand smoke (which is what the vote is about), I think I already know the answer.

March 28, 2009 at 8:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

For those who don't want to wade through the entire report, I encourage you to at least read the Results and Conclusions summaries.

For those who prefer more of a "sound bites" format, browse some of the excerpts here:

http://www.davehitt.com/facts/epa.html

March 28, 2009 at 8:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

MisterO,
Hey, I'm on your side now! I've seen the light!
I just bought 5,000 shares of Philip Morris stock and will buy some RJ Reynolds next week. Vote no, and hopefully the nicotine the in the second hand smoke will create more smokers. More money in my pocket. I'm getting a no sign on Monday!

March 28, 2009 at 8:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Maximus:
You may have missed this or you may have just chosen not to comment on it at the time, but as a mother, I don't want my children to ever start smoking because smoking can kill and can cause burdensome health problems. A while back, laws were passed to remove smoking from places that people may be required to be as well as to remove smoking scenes from TV and movies under a certain rating. If the citizens of Emporia vote this ban in, all the smokers who are "out in public" (even those in privately owned businesses) will be standing out on the curbs smoking. The percentage of smokers nationwide stands around 20% but my children. as of right now, see less than 1% of the city's smokers actively smoking. If we push the smokers out on the curbs to do their smoking, won't my kids and many others view it as a bigger part of our culture than it truly is? How many of these children will consider it as an option when they are enduring those difficult and tempting teen years--after all, they see several hundred people doing it? (20% of 25,000=500 here in Emporia)
Since everyone can currently avoid both breathing it and seeing most of it, aren't the current laws regulating where smoking is allowed better than a new law that would make it impossible for children to avoid seeing most of it--in fact a law that would cause them to see all of it?

March 28, 2009 at 8:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

Oh...How rude of me, I almost forgot say thanks:

Maximus said, "You've convinced me to... vote no."

Thank you, Max. I'm glad I could help you see this ban is wrong.

March 28, 2009 at 8:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

MisterO;
I believe that Maximus comment was meant to be a very sarcastic one aimed at those who oppose a smoking ban !
Reread the comment, especially this comment, " As a matter of fact, I will encourage everyone I meet (including your children and grandchildren) to smoke - so that they can be just like this happy lady - enjoy! " This comment smacks of a big time smoking ban supporter to me ! Shoot it even smells of crackinsack, using a different sign in I.D. to me !

March 28, 2009 at 8:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

methusla posted, "I believe that Maximus comment was meant to be a very sarcastic one aimed at those who oppose a smoking ban !"

I know he was, buddy. So was I.

Heheheh

: - p

March 28, 2009 at 8:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

You know, after my sarcastic comment, I read the report and links that were provided...and it made sense. There is no research that proves that SHS is bad for anyone. As a matter of fact, I found research that smoking is good for concentration, memory, and even helps to prevent alzheimer's. Smoking is good for our health....and most importantly for my pocketbook. I'm voting no.

March 28, 2009 at 8:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

LifeGoesOn (anonymous) says...

I only hope that when this vote is over all you poor poor sad people will FINALLY SHUT THE HELL UP about it and move on!!

March 28, 2009 at 8:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Maximus Venomous
If you start smoking now it will be impossible for you to avoid shs. I would like to see a study that shows that the mere existence of smoke and shs is harmful for anyone. I am pretty sure it takes more than it's existence to be harmful for a persons health. I think one has to actually be exposed to it. The way things are right now it is very very easy to avoid shs. If you avoid it you can't have health problems from it. Are you following me here? It's really quite a simple solution we should all be able to agree with. If you are concerned for your health I would suggest to you that you don't start smoking and you choose to go to healthy environments. You are very very welcome for clearing all this up for you and pointing out how easy it is to not be harmed by shs. If I am wrong however about shs harming people that do not come into contact with it I apologize. If this is the case this ban won't help us anyway because if some one is smoking in their house across town and I'm watching TV in my house I could still be harmed by it's mere existence. If shs can kill you without you coming into contact with it we will have to have a world wide ban of any kind of smoke in order for the ban to be effective. I honestly don't think however that it's mere existense causes any problems, I'm pretty sure you have to be exposed to it. So to this I say, don't be exposed to it. Simple.

I have presented a simple solution to the problem without government intervention and it has been rejected so if you are harmed by shs it is now on you. If you are afraid of shs "Why, then, do you even take the chance? ". Use your brain, use your feet, if you smell the smoke, hit the street!

This nonsmokin' nondrinkin' third party votin' US Army veteran says vote NO please. Thank you.

March 28, 2009 at 8:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

LifeGoesOn
I look forward to that day too. As I have told other posters that have said similar things as you have on these forums, these forums are very easy to avoid if you don't like them. Like shs is very easy to avoid.

March 28, 2009 at 8:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

oh4theluvof: Very good point. In fact, better than you stated. You see, my limited math skills tell me that 20% of 25,000 is 5,000, not 500. That is 10 times more smokers standing on the street than you feared.

March 29, 2009 at 12:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

VoteNo_4_the_Ban (anonymous) says...

LifeGoesOn - it's your choice to click on the links ... if you don't want to read articles about the ban don't click on them. Plain and simple, they are easy to AVOID just like shs. You can make that CHOICE so quitcher bitchin!

March 29, 2009 at 1:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

LifeGoesOn (anonymous) says...

VoteNo_4_the_Ban, I have not been READING the articles, One doesnt need to, to know they all say the same thing over and over, thats my point, It is time to move on. and BTW its also my choice to state my opinion just as it is yours, and My opinion is thats it is time to shut the hell up about this stupid smoking ban, It's OLD NEWSm why kep repeating it over and over and over and over and over? People who are going to vote, will. and those who are not, won't. These articles and all the opinions of the HANDFUL of posters will not change ANYONES mind one way or the other. So give it a rest already!!

March 29, 2009 at 7:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

rabblerouser (anonymous) says...

"To protect all workers from second hand smoke"

Heather Crowe wanted to be the last person to die from second hand smoke in the work-place.

We want to help her.

In 2002, Heather's doctors told her she had inoperable lung cancer. They told her that her cancer resulted from her working for many years in smoke-filled bars and restaurants.

Because she became ill as a result of workplace exposure, Heather filed a claim with the Ontario Workers Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) for 'worker's compensation.'

WSIB accepted Heather's claim for compensation. They agreed with her doctors that her cancer was caused by second hand smoke at work.

After learning she had cancer from second hand smoke at work, Heather planned for a better future for other workers. She travelled across Canada, promoting changes to municipal, provincial and federal law to better protect workers from second-hand smoke. She allowed her story to be told in government advertisements and news stories.

You can read about her campaigns in "Heather's work".

Heather died at 8:00 p.m. on May 22, 2006.

Vote Yes

March 29, 2009 at 8 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

Well, I typically don't cross-post in threads, but since you rabblerouser did, I guess I can, too.

Well, finally. After months of asking for a single case of a single person dying from exposure to 2nd hand smoke, we apparently have one.

Of the hundreds of millions of people who have been exposed to 2nd hand smoke over they years, we have one.

I do have some questions about this particular case.

It's a shame that she died of lung cancer, however I've done a lot of looking around on the web to try and learn more.

Exactly who said she contracted cancer from exposure to 2nd hand smoke? I found where the Ontario Workplace Safety & Insurance Board ruled in her favor when she sued for workers compensation. I found lots of anit-smoking activist sites making that claim. But I haven't found a single medical doctor's testimony saying she contracted cancer from exposure to 2nd hand smoke.

Do you think it's odd that not one single medical doctor has gone on record saying he (or she) is treating Heather for lung cancer due to exposure to 2nd hand smoke?

So who exacly is saying she got cancer from exposure to 2nd hand smoke? Can anyone find any interviews with her physicians? Names or statements of those treating her?

Who is saying her cancer was caused by exposure to 2nd hand smoke?

March 29, 2009 at 9:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

type in heather crowe and read all of the posts and you decide.

www.geocities.com/defendliberty2004/heat...

March 29, 2009 at 9:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Rabblerouser;
It's good to hear your take on Emporia's upcoming election. Unless you have moved back here from Americus, you won't be able to vote on this until it is brought up by Commissioner Walters for a county-wide ban.
Steve

March 29, 2009 at 10:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Here is part of a piece from the following web page about Heather Crowes specific type of lung cancr.
http://surrealitytimes.blogspot.com/2...

Other contaminants linked to the specific type of lung cancer Crowe was diagnosed with - adenocarcinoma - include wood smoke, ultrafine particles and nitrogen oxides generated by gas and electric cooking, some styles of Chinese food cooking, unvented (or poorly vented) stoves and vehicle exhaust. Is PSC claiming that Heather Crowe was never exposed to these common pollutants associated with cooking, and thereby with restaurants, at any time during her 40 year career as a restaurant waitress? Are they claimimg she was never exposed to industrial and/or vehicle fine particle air pollution, despite living in Ottawa?

VOTE NO !

March 29, 2009 at 10:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

LifeGoesOn:
It is obvious that you do read these posts or you would not be responding to questions posed to you.
These posts are in response to letters to the newspaper so they are not "old News."
This whole issue is getting a bit old but, as long as any group or government is trying to take away one of my rights as an American, I won't stop talking or trying in my own feeble way to debate the issue. I AM TIRED of the slow erosion of rights that Americans seem to willingly give up.
I AM TIRED of government intrusion into my business and my everyday life.
I AM TIRED of a few well-funded do-gooders telling me how I must live.
I AM TIRED OF foundations and tax exempt etities using tax-free and taxpayers money to fund their agendas.

But LifeGoesOn;

I WILL NEVER GET TIRED OF EXERCISING MY RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH!
Steve

March 29, 2009 at 11:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

My bad, Bjnemp. Thanks for catching that 0 I dropped and putting it back in it's place. That would change it to thousands of people smoking that our children would have to observe unless their parents kept them unreasonably sheltered. I guess I could invent and market some sort of window blinders for the back seat passengers--just to be safe. That does seem far reaching, though, doesn't it. No, I think leaving the laws as they stand is probably the best way to not create more problems.

I notice Maximus still refrained from comment on this point. Wonder why? ; )

March 29, 2009 at 1:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

Sorry, I've been busy planning my future purchases of Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds stock. Does anyone know of any ordinances against setting up discount cigarette shops across from the Lowther schools? I hope not. I'm going viral with this idea.

March 29, 2009 at 3:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

Note to self-- Not to take market advice from Maximus.

On the other hand, PM is up 12% for the month, while Johnson and Johnson (the people who are paying for this shenanigan, and also make Nicorette) is up only 5%...

March 29, 2009 at 3:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

oh4theluvof,
Aren't we glad only a few more days of this humor? How people can be so flip over losing their rights is beyond me. Maybe Maximus isn't a U.S. citizen so they don't give a damn, that's the only explanation I have.
Steve

March 29, 2009 at 4:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

No doubt, Steve! The levels of naivety and simplicity in the lines of pro-ban thinking astound and disappoint me. I suppose these are the people who always have to learn the hardest lessons for themselves--I just don't want to go through the experience with them so they can learn what we already know.

March 29, 2009 at 5:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

LifeGoesOn (anonymous) says...

RBOW ( STEVE)
It is obvious you Dont read the posts, I said
" I have not been READING the articles",
I never said anything about all the posts now did I?
On top of that I responded to someone less than 6 hours after I made my Post and they made thiers, That does Not mean I read all the posts by everyone either does it? dont ASSUME you know what I read and dont read, I also do not agree with you, because this IS all OLD NEWS about the SAME OLD THING
I WILL agree with you when you say
"I AM TIRED of government intrusion into my business and my everyday life.
I AM TIRED of a few well-funded do-gooders telling me how I must live.
I AM TIRED OF foundations and tax exempt etities using tax-free and taxpayers money to fund their agendas"

Unlike you, I dont have to keep saying the same thing over and over on a web site that seems to get no more than a handful of peoples attention, In case you didnt notice there is only about 10 to 20 people who post on the subject and NONE OF YOU are saying anything new! It has become boring and one can predict almost to the word what will be said next by any of you.
My whole point is that when one REPEAT themselves over and over so many times people stop listening. If ya dont believe me, ask your (friends) for an Honest answer when you ask them if you should just slow your roll on this subject, Lets talk something else for a while...

March 29, 2009 at 9:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

LifeGoesOn
In my defense I enjoy repeating myself. In my defense I enjoy repeating myself. In my defense I enjoy repeating myself. In my defense I enjoy repeating myself. In my defense I enjoy repeating myself. In my defense I enjoy repeating myself. In my defense I enjoy repeating myself.

I have presented a simple solution to the problem without government intervention and it has been rejected so if you are harmed by shs it is now on you. If you are afraid of shs "Why, then, do you even take the chance? ". Use your brain, use your feet, if you smell the smoke, hit the street!

This nonsmokin' nondrinkin' third party votin' US Army veteran that likes repeating himself that likes repeating repeating himself says vote NO please. Thank you.

March 29, 2009 at 9:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Okay, LifeGoesOn, I'll bite. I have nothing better to do than this or go to bed and get rested up for a very long week--I pick this. What, pray tell, would you like to discuss? There is already a political thread going on the story list so I have to assume that you aren't interested in that. The topic here could be voting in general, as that is what the original letter is about, so I guess you've opted not to go that route either. Speaking of letters, as you said, no new topics have appeared in that section of the paper, so I have to deduce that you haven't written any yourself. Does that mean you have come unprepared? Well, I haven't. I don't know how much it will interest you, but I think a good topic would be: "What does the future of the opera look like in the coming economy and culture?" Ready........................GO!

March 29, 2009 at 9:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

justamarine (anonymous) says...

Thanks olddog:
Heres a snipit from that web page you posted

Hello Smoker's Club, love the website.
We are trying to get a few cigars over here in Afghanistan, a fellow soldier got a bundle of cigars in something called a “Tupperbomb” I think that’s what it was called. But he would not divulge his source. So I thought I would give you a shot, there are 3 of us who would love to have a good cigar after a firefight or IED bomb going off on our vehicle. If this is something you do or know of some group or organization that might do this please feel free to pass on our request. I am in the 41st Infantry conducting operations near the Pakistan border we see a lot of action in this part of the country but its our job so no complaints here, I love my job and what it means to the local people is awesome, the chance to be free and make their own decisions is, something many people take for granted.
Thank-you, This will make a few Grunts/Infantryman very happy.

SSG Howard, Roland
HHC 41st BCT J3 AIR NCOIC
Camp Phoenix
APO, AE 09320
The part about; ( the chance to be free and make their own decisions is, something many people take for granted.) Is the best part for those that don't understand about making there own decisions. so if you don't want to deal with SHS don't go into places that allow smokers.
Vote NO NO NO

March 29, 2009 at 10:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

driveonby (anonymous) says...

Cigarettes go up over $6 per carton tonight. I'm visiting my Indian friends this afternoon before increase. If your local community stores do not support your fight against bans, perhaps you should consider shopping out of town. I always enjoy plinking a few quarters in the slots in Topeka, when I'm up that way. You guys in Emporia are alot shorter drive than I am. Local stores should support the other small businesses in town.

March 31, 2009 at 10:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

Well Doug, you're famous now. Even though you wrote in this letter to the Gazette that you would not publicly recommend which side of the issue people should vote, Steve Sauder did it for you on his Wednesday morning ego stroke program where he tells the listeners what he thinks(like anyone cares). I normally turn the radio down when he comes on rather than to listen to his "wisdom" but kept it turned up today recognizing your letter in his introduction. Sure enough, he used your letter to promote the proposed smoking ban. He also opined that if the smoking ban didn't happen, Emporia could potentially lose the chance to host future High School State Basketball tourneys, IF the high school assoc added that as prerequisite that host cities be smoke free. He really liked your opening quote too Doug, guess that's how we ended up with Walters on the commission eh?

April 1, 2009 at 9:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

77flint (anonymous) says...

PALIOSOS!!

April 1, 2009 at 12:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )