Smoking ban: Ban on smoking in Wisconsin facing intense debate ...

[just candid]

Warning====Tobacco Toady zone====

MichaelJMcFadden wrote:

Alice, I think you should help solve that problem. Over 60% of the cost of cigarettes in many states are taxes pushed by greedy antismoking groups and Big Pharma NicoGummyPatchyProduct makers.
Stand up for the smokers you want to defend and demand a reduction in discriminatory and extortionate taxes!
- MJM

Warning==== Tobacco Toady zone!!!======

[D-RM]

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> Is your "D" for dum? That must be it, because you sure fit the format.

Coming from a loser who want,s the government to run her sad little life just brake,s my heart. I usually dont mention spelling error,s to anyone (We all make,em) But to show you how idiotic you are,
DUMB is spelled with a B at the end. Now go play with you're coloring book,s and water colors. Come back when you get better at tryng to insult someone. Right now you suck at it.

[PreachingToTheGa rbage]

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> Smoking must have reduced the O2 getting to your little bitty brain Garbage boy. That's OK, we understand.

And your a Road Scholar posting unequivocal essential information. So when you mention Garbage, it refers to YOU ! Your the Garbage.!!!

[PreachingToTheGa rbage]

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> Is your "D" for dum? That must be it, because you sure fit the format.

******* GARBAGE ALERT *******

[ING]

Look it up... ONE well done steak has more carcinogens than a CARTON of cigarettes!
I say, let's ban steak! It might trigger my heart murmur.

[Freedom]

Time to quit wrote:

<quoted text>
I highly doubt you have enough common sense left to be embarrased by your stupid posts. You obviously don't have the sense that God gave a fly. A fly will go away from smoke. Even with its teeny, tiny brain it knows what is bad for it. There is no hope for people like you.
On the bright side of things, you do prove Darwin right. Smokers get ED and are less likely to be able to reproduce. Additionally, since smokers are fewer in number by a huge amount when compared to non smokers, and kissing a smoker is like licking an ashtray, even smokers that are fortunate enough not to get ED are unlikely to get the girl. Plain and simple, smokers stink and there is not enough perfume in the world to cover up that stench.

Wow..that was quite eloquent.

Do you really think your pathetic tactics of demonization are impressive?

How well does your rhetoric of hate work on the non-smokers who oppose your beloved Nanny state...and all it stands for?

Now perhaps you will actually make an attempt at addressing your lack of a logical answer...or will you once again spew a hateful diatribe?

Just what other forms of smoke have "no safe level"?

You side has been asked to provide a list of your personal top 10 for...how long now?

What other forms of smoke qualify for this "special" label?

At what point does your lack of a logical answer become embarrassing to you?

[MichaelJMcFadden]

Time to quit wrote, "A fly will go away from smoke. Even with its teeny, tiny brain it knows what is bad for it."

Unfortunately, "Time" and his friends on here don't seem to have a brain as large as a fly's. Instead of simply going to places that ban smoking they keep going into places where it is allowed and then need to call in Big Brother Government to "protect" them from their choices.

Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" {And believe me, that ain't microsurgery... it's zeptosurgery!}

[Happy Contented Soul]

D-RM wrote:

<quoted text>
Coming from a loser who want,s the government to run her sad little life just brake,s my heart. I usually dont mention spelling error,s to anyone (We all make,em) But to show you how idiotic you are,
DUMB is spelled with a B at the end. Now go play with you're coloring book,s and water colors. Come back when you get better at tryng to insult someone. Right now you suck at it.

"just candid" is a premium example of what becomes of a critter whose cells stop reproducing at an early age.

[John]

Poor Demented Soul wrote:

<quoted text>
"just candid" is a premium example of what becomes of a critter whose cells stop reproducing at an early age.

Dang!! You still out here posting on the smoking forums?! Big Tobacco is getting their money's worth outta you! HA HA HA HA!!!!!

[D-RM]

John wrote:

<quoted text>Dang!! You still out here posting on the smoking forums?! Big Tobacco is getting their money's worth outta you! HA HA HA HA!!!!!

More proof that anti smokers have no inteligence. Big tobacco might be getting their moneys worth out of him but big phrma gets you,re stupidity for free.

[Sheri]

Here's an example of the lies that anti-smokers tell. According to the anti-smokers:
"In 2008, more than 1 out of 4 kids age 12 or older were current tobacco users -- this comes out to about 71 million American teens."

71 million is a gross lie!!

At about 8% of the population, there are only about 25 million kids aged 12 and older in the US.

[what a joke]

its funny how they can make such a big deal about second hand smoke, raise the prices so smokers cant afford it, and to make it illegal to smoke in public. but madison wont raise the tax on alcohol,or make it illegal to drink in public which is clearly ruining more lives than second hand smoke ever could. our lawmakers are a joke !!!
just like our nfl team !!!

[discusseded]

What's the adage about the journey being more important than the destination?

I for one am not inclined to see the job done until the journey to a venue can be done without being forced into "passive smoker" status in blatant violation of my freedom to choose.

[Sheri]

discusseded wrote:

What's the adage about the journey being more important than the destination?
I for one am not inclined to see the job done until the journey to a venue can be done without being forced into "passive smoker" status in blatant violation of my freedom to choose.

So, don't go where smoking is allowed.

[discusseded]

Sheri wrote:

<quoted text>
So, don't go where smoking is allowed.

Like outside my door?

Good demonstration of comprehension there, Sherri.

[MichaelJMcFadden]

Wow! Discusseded has evidently finally seen the light and wants to join us in opposing smoking bans!

He wants to journey to his nonsmoking venues without "being forced into passive smoker status." Obviously the most efficient way to achieve that goal is to get rid of the ban so the smokers go back inside their smoking places and Discusseded can once again roam the streets and dumpsters freely.

Of course he still hasn't been able to back up his assertion of a lot of studies showing coronary damage from "very low levels of ETS."

I tried to help him, and found a 2004 study by a Dr. Stefanadis... but unfortunately it used smoke levels at 2,000% of the middle of aircraft smoking sections to get the desired antismoking results.

So how about it Discusseded? Going to back up your words or run like a little girl from a flock of tarantulas?

My money is on the spiders. They've got more legs and they're probably cuter. Plus there's that whole personality thing.

Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

[PreachingToTheGa rbage]

discusseded wrote:

<quoted text>
Like outside my door?
Good demonstration of comprehension there, Sherri.

There is medicine for you, just see your doctor.

[Smoker]

discusseded wrote:

What's the adage about the journey being more important than the destination?
I for one am not inclined to see the job done until the journey to a venue can be done without being forced into "passive smoker" status in blatant violation of my freedom to choose.

Ok, you complete waste of space, why am i forced to inhale the exhaust from your vehicle every time you need a snickers bar? I cant even escape it in my house. Do i drive? Under 500 miles a year, the rest of the time we ride our bikes or get this, we walk. Now why is my right to this "clean air" any less important than yours in a Constitutional Republic? I mean you know we live in a Republic on NOT a Democracy right? In other words, you and your idiot buddies do NOT have he right to vote the rights of others away. These are the types of little problems that lead to civil wars, back someone into a corner and eventually they will push back. I cant wait until it is my turn to do some pushing and i dont mean in a metaphorical fashion.

[discusseded]

Smoker wrote:

<quoted text>
Ok, you complete waste of space, why am i forced to inhale the exhaust from your vehicle every time you need a snickers bar?

Sorry, whack job. You make far too many assumptions to ever be taken seriously outside of a shrink looking at hourly rates.

You are NOT forced to deal with any ramification of my car ownership because I own no car. I haven't had a snickers in years. It is a smoking jerk on the forum who has that preoccupation.

Try to step away from the ad hominem stuff long enough to put together a rational and relevant post--though if what you've shown so far is any guide, we will be waiting a long time for "rational". I'm sure we can bear up under your absence.

[discusseded]

Go ahead with your fantasies and bravado. Most of the people who bother with this venue are bitter, vindictive smokers, and I can see how your nonstop whining could even bore YOU. It's easy to understand your shift to attacking any nonsmoker who stops by, and even easier to see how you console one another by pretending your chosen method of addressing your addiction is NOT on its way out.

Still, it will be gone as soon as a means is found to free the masses whose smoking is only a manifestation of failed efforts to quit. When they can defeat the addiction, the demand for your execrable fetish will drop through the floor. Then the government will act decisively against the corrupt and parasitic industry that has held us hostage all these decades.