Help, I Can't Breathe!

[VaHawk]

HMMMM, I LOVE your attitude, dude! A rational, compassionate, positive spin of a post on a thread that has generated a lot of ugly, negative, accusatory, irrational posts.

 

I think that cigarette you are thinking of must be Salem (a menthol) who's old ad slogan was "take a puff, it's Springtime".

 

Wow, a passionate kisser who loves to be explored and have his hot buttons found and pushed, in addition to this? You have got to be the creme de la creme!

[VaHawk]

First off, congratulations as you have been officially chastised by Miss Flower. I'm surprised he didn't refer you to a doctor!

 

But, I loved your response the best of any I read on this thread and I agree 100% with everything you stated. I was trying to think of how to reply, but I could not have come up with a post that expressed my thoughts as well as your post did.

 

Whatever happened to Live and Let Live? Isn't that the whole basis of individual freedom?

[VaHawk]

RE: U smoke in non-smokers' faces, yet you call us

 

>

>I must have missed the study that is the Genesis of this

>ingenious conclusion--please share your source.

>

 

What's the matter, didn't you whip out your handy dictionary.com. Genesis is proper noun as it is a chapter of the Bible.

 

>

>Real problems like spending BILLIONS for medical treatment of

>smoking related illnesses; real problems like watching parents

>or siblings or dear friends die of cancer or have their life

>severely curtailed by having one (if they're lucky) lung

>removed as a result of smoking related cancer; not being able

>to go for walks with your grandparents due to their smoking

>related emphysema--these aren't "real" enough for you? And

>these are also casued by SECOND HAND SMOKE--so you aren't just

>putting yourself at risk, but many others as well.

 

>

 

Most of what you cite are really personal, individual problems, which as such are individual and not for you or anyone else to legislate as policy. Like all anti-smokers you tend to go overboard in your zealousness.

 

>

>You and yours still don't get it do you--we couldn't care less

>what you do--just so you don't do it in a way that affects

>other people--think about it--what right have you to blow

>smoke in my face or even onto the sidewalk I have to walk on

>and am forced to inhale your (the general your)?

>

 

I SERIOUSLY DOUBT that anyone is going to be damaged by second hand cigarette smoke by passing someone on the sidewalk who is smoking a cigarette, especially considering how much carcinogenic fumes you are breathing from automotive and industrial sources.

 

>>I'd rather die 20 years younger than behave in such an

>>ignorantly self-righteous manner.

>

> Easy to say now sweetie, but when you're

>gasping the last breaths I bet those 20 years look pretty damn

>good But more to the point, your last years are likely to

>be spent on public-assisted medical treatment paid for by

>who?--you guessed it--TAX-PAYERS.

 

>

Well, I agree with Trixie. Who would want to live in a world with a bunch of sanctimonious people like you abrogating everyone else's personal freedoms for an additional 20 years? And where does the public-assisted medical treatment come into play? Medicare? Smokers pay medicare deductibles just like non-smokers. Did you ever consider that they may need medical treatment because people with your attitude make them go stand outside in inclement weather to have a smoke? NO, of course you didn't. Everyone is entitled to live as they please as long as you and your kind are pleased with their choices.

 

In addition, how about the stupidity of the tobacco lawsuits, where attorneys, gasp!, such as yourself take 70% of the settlement and the states you represent spend the rest of the settlement on anything but educating youth to the dangers of smoking or even MY GOD helping those who have suffered the consequences of years of smoking. Don't you think ya'll are even more sleazier than the tobacco companies?

 

>

>Percodin, Codeine, Morphine and Heroin do a pretty good job

>too, but you don't see delivery systems for them sold over the

>counter.

>

>

 

How assinine but so predictable for one of your counterpoints. This equation is totally ridiculous as smoking products are still available for legal over the counter purchase.

>

>

>The only truly "polite smoker" is one that smokes away from

>not only others in his group, but away from where people are

>likely to walking by. There is NO reason why nonsmokers

>should have to walk off the sidewalk or take other building

>exits to avoid smoke. As a practical matter they just put up

>with it, but they should NOT have to.

>

 

LOL! Isn't this one of the most ridiculous comments ever written. As a practical matter, there is NO REASON why smokers who are smoking in an area that is sanctioned as a smoking area should have to put up with sanctimonious people such as you with their nasty gestures and comments, but they "just put up" with it!

 

>

> I also find car exhaust offending, but

>there have been great strides made in cleaning that up.

>However, the automobile in it's many forms, has GREAT

>UTILITARIAN VALUE, whereas the cigarettes has none--it's a

>nuisance without redeeming qualities except for temporarily

>satisfying the addiction of the addicted. It doesn't transport

>people to jobs, hospitals or shopping--it doesn't plow fields,

>transport hundreds of thousands of people across country or

>carry produce to market to feed smokers and nonsmokers alike.

>It does however, cost people their early deaths, create a

>tremendous amount of medical jobs and suck billions from the

>pockets of taxpayers that could be going for Aids, cancer,

>Sickle Cell, etc., research and cures. So don't even go

>there, as you have NO convincing arguments.

>

 

WOW you definitely give new meaning to the word intolerance. One could make the same arguements in regards to unsafe sex, alcohol, overeating, ad nauseum.

 

>

 

>I've never understood the self-righteous attitude of smokers

>when they call nonsmokers "fanatics" or "rabid" or the like.

>After all, it is the smoker that is blowing smoke in OUR face

>and causing us to inhale, not the other way around! We really

>don't give a damn if you smoke or not--just do it in a way

>that we aren't exposed to it and pay for your own long-term

>health insurance so when you start having your smoking related

>illnesses, the taxpayers aren't paying your bill.

 

>

And so does whoremongering, drinking, overeating obesitiy, gang violence, teen pregnancy, etc. in a way that the rest of us taxpayers are footing the bill! How many people in these situations are paying for their own long-term health insurance? Or perhaps you would prefer to return to the olden days when those without insurance were denied admittance to hospitals for medical treatment and thus condemned to die on the streets?

>

>

>And lastly LaBelle, you sound like a really cool person from

>the many messages on here I've read. For your own good, I'd

>like to see you stop smoking, but that's your deal not mine.

>

>

>When I have used the words "you" and "your" above, I wasn't

>getting personal to you, but was really talking to smokers in

>general and not trying to offend you personally. :+

>

 

Exactly!!! His and everyone else's "deal" so take your self-appointed PUBLIC HEALTH CZAR, intolerable bs somewhere else and preach it there. No, nothing personal, huh, as you saw fit to totally dissect and dispute every one of his points and opinions with your usual sanctimonious, holier than thou, total bullshit.

[Flower]

VERY Bad analogies

 

>But

>

>I'll give up all of my [bold]demands[/bold] if you'll embrace

>diversity. If you'll accept my faults, the same way that I

>accept yours. If you make a reasonable accommodation for my

>life-style choices just like I do for you.

>

Some of my best friends are smokers, therefore I can be totally objective! }(

 

That being said, there is a difference between a smoker making an accommodation for a nonsmoker compared to a nonsmoker making an accommodation to a smoker--can you guess what it is?

 

Try real hard now--it's a tough one! :7

 

This is a self scoring quiz--for the answer to this toughie, see my post below:+

[Flower]

Answer to tough quiz

 

The nonsmoker isn't blowing smoke in your fuckin face!

[Rick Munroe]

>I think that cigarette you are thinking of must be Salem (a

>menthol) who's old ad slogan was "take a puff, it's

>Springtime".

 

OK, this is a little creepy. When I was really young, my mother smoked for a while (before she went on "the health kick") and I think it was Salem. Does this mean I have a mother complex? Do I like to kiss Salem smokers because I'm seeking Mommy's love? Do I need to change my name to Oedipus Rick?

 

>Wow, a passionate kisser who loves to be explored and have his

>hot buttons found and pushed, in addition to this? You have

>got to be the creme de la creme!

 

You're sounding pretty damn good to me, too, Va. ;-)

[+ Lucky]

Golly gee, Huey. Thanks! It's nice to be missed...

[woodlawn]

RE: Would They, Could They: The Sad Tale Of Little Woodie

 

>An investigation has disclosed that

 

Looks like you're still angry about the several recent occasions when I've made a fool of you. Heard any "heresay" lately?

 

You don't know shit about me. You never will. I don't give out personal information to whores. Nor do I leave it lying about where they can find it.

 

Getting back to the subject of this thread, I don't care much for cigarettes. But I find it utterly hilarious in this day and age that promiscuous gay men are giving others a lecture on the need to change their personal behavior for the sake of public health. Clean up your own act first, guys.

[+ Lucky]

Little Woodie

 

Woodie, you don't know goosepepper about me! How dare you say I am promiscuous!! Have you no decency, man?

[LovesYng]

You can always become the "BOY (BITCH) IN THE BUBBLE" then nuttin will bother you in life.x(

[Trixie]

RE: U smoke in non-smokers' faces, yet you call us

 

So, how do you guys do that thing where you can take the text of a message and insert your own replies into it, sentence by sentence? Is that a function of M4M, or your computer?

In any case, Flower, I do appreciate where you're coming from. Cigarette smoking is, of course an addictive and dangerous habit to those who smoke. And it can also possibly be dangerous to people who work around it on a daily basis, such as bartenders, barmaids, etc. Here in California, smoking is no longer allowed in bars... or indoors in any public space or workplace. I can live with that, I even think it's laudable.

However, the dazzling display of "facts" you juggle in your argument failed to convince me that I should refrain from enjoying a cigarette out-of-doors. They may work on a group of jurors who're half-asleep anyway, but not on this Judge Judy!

It is legal for me to smoke out-of-doors. That right is sanctioned by law. As in Pursuit of Happiness. When I step outside to smoke, I do not do so in a crowded doorway, and try to stand a good distance away from passersby. However, once I have lit up, I feel I have established a certain territory. No one has the right to come in close proximity to me and then complain about what they can plainly see I've already been doing. What they do have is the right and freedom to move elsewhere. Hopefully without having to make some impolite comment.

Unfortunately, I have to go garden now, so I may not fully address the other things you had to say. Perhaps we can discuss the automobile some other time.

La Trix

[Rick Munroe]

RE: U smoke in non-smokers' faces, yet you call us

 

>So, how do you guys do that thing where you can take the text

>of a message and insert your own replies into it, sentence by

>sentence?

 

Click "reply with quote." Now ask me how we do that thing where we take the hole of a man and insert our own cocks into it, inch by inch. }(

[Trixie]

RE:Neat Trick

 

Gawd, I can be such a dolt... I thought "Reply with Quote" meant that there would actually be a quote a the end of one's message, such as the "Slings and Arrows" speech from Hamlet. Or, that "Spike and Tack Hammer"... I don't know what play that's from, but it must have debuted way, way off Broadway.

Trix

[Flower]

RE: U smoke in non-smokers' faces, yet you call us

 

A lot of what you say is correct and I agree--if you are smoking then anyone that comes near is "walker beware."

 

I like your posts and you seem like a classy person--certainly one who ought to work on gaining that extra 20 years you mentioned:*

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

What, Me, Bitter?

 

>>An investigation has disclosed that

>

>Looks like you're still angry about the several recent

>occasions when I've made a fool of you.

>

>You don't know shit about me. You never will. I don't give

>out personal information to whores. Nor do I leave it lying

>about where they can find it.

 

 

Frigid?

 

Petulant?

 

Obsessed?

 

Angry?

 

Who, me?

 

Not I, little man. . . .

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Oh, And By The Way, Little Woodie

 

You did not prove anything at all as you were both factually, philosophically and legalistically incorrect, as is nearly always the case with your post. All you "caught" me in was a repeated typo.

 

BIG FUCKING DEAL.

 

At least I used the terminology in both its appropriate and technically legal meaning, and did so without taking it out of context, fixating on the inconsequential or doing any of the other pedantic habits you engage in when your small and petty minded obsessive behavior motivates you to comment on those matters about which you so clearly know so very little about.

[Trixie]

RE: U smoke in non-smokers' faces, yet you call us

 

You are kind, beloved Flower!

[woodlawn]

RE: Little Woodie

 

>Woodie, you don't know goosepepper about me!

 

Know you? Man, I'd know your hide if I saw it in the tannery.

 

>How dare you

>say I am promiscuous!! Have you no decency, man?

 

What a silly question. If I had any decency, would I be hanging out with sleazy characters like you and Franco ("let's see if I can come up with an incredibly pretentious fake name for my career as a whore") De Santix?

[axebahia]

RE: Would They, Could They: The Sad Tale Of Little Woodie

 

Great stuff. This is one of the best posts I ever read. I loved it!

[+ Lucky]

RE: Little Woodie

 

[VaHawk]

RE: Would They, Could They: The Sad Tale Of Little Woo...

 

>Great stuff. This is one of the best posts I ever read. I

>loved it!

 

I hope you like this one too! Let me know, not that I give a shit.

 

The winter of 1910 was an especially harsh one in Europe. The temperatures were subzero freezing and the snow and ice storms raged fiercely and often. In the deep dark forbidding Black Forest of Germany, life was indeed bleak, as all the horses had been slaughtered for food, stranding the locals as there were no beasts of burden left to pull the troikas.

 

Jan and Hilda, both blonde, blue eyed Arayans, true children of the Fatherland, were at their wits end. Hilda was pregnant and due to deliver any day. Although, Hilda had already given birth to 3 children, the last delivery was an especially difficult one and this one didn't promise to be any easier, as the doctor had said at little Fritz's birth that another delivery could be fatal to both mother and child. But the doctor was in the next burg over and that was more than 50 miles away, and with no horses to pull the family's sled, the future did indeed seem fraught with danger.

 

Jan and Hilda sought out the advice of the village elder. "There is only one hope" said elder Adolf, "you must bury a crock of sauerkraut and bratwurst under the full moon and chant seig heil 20 times and everything will be okay". Although this sounded really crazy, Jan and Hilda did it anyway.

 

On the night of Feb. 11, 1911 Hilda went into labor and both she and Jan wailed and moaned at the lies of the elder as there was still no way to get to Dr. Mengele for the delivery. In the midst of their railings and anguish a troll (there are no fairies in Germany as they don't look good wearing pink triangle badges) appeared and offered to spare the life of Hilda and her child if they would agree to accept the troll's friend Sol Goldstein as the doctor, who just happened to live in the same village, but had always been invisible and unacceptable to Jan and Hilda because of his Jewish faith.

 

What a fateful decision indeed! The good doctor, true to his faith whipped out his scissors and went 'snip, snip'. Thus did the illustrious ad rian come into the world.

 

But was ad rian a happy child? No way, as he always felt a part of him was "stolen by the filthy Jews" and he grew up with hatred in his soul and vengence in his heart. When Hitler came to power, he enthusiastically became a concentration camp commandant, ordering the extermination of the "filthy Jewish vermin". Alas, to the sheer chagrin of ad rian, out of the far west came a horde of the most vile vermin imaginable - an army of hundreds of thousands of "kikes, niggers, spics, wops, chinks, and wasps". They toppled him from his post and he shivered in fright and prayed to the Gods to save him.

 

At this point, the nasty little troll who attended his birth, showed up and made him an offer he couldn't refuse. The troll would guarantee a safe, new life in America free of strife, as long as he, ad rian, would raise any future children in a doctrinism of hatred and intolerance. ad rian readily accepted and wound up working in the Chevrolet assembly line in Detroit, Michigan, USA. He married a blonde, blue eyed German girl orphaned during the bombing of Dresden. They lived in a little pink house with blue shutters encircled by a white picket fence and had 3 children, their favorite being their only son axe.

[Flower]

RE: U smoke in non-smokers' faces, yet you call us

 

>You are kind, beloved Flower!

...and so are you kitten:P....it's so nice not to have someone calling me all sorts of vile names:7

[axebahia]

RE: Would They, Could They: The Sad Tale Of Little Woo...

 

Nice try, but don't give up your day job. I think Franco shows more literary talent.

 

And BTW, I am the one who regularly opposes the Zionist fascists on this Board, and never defends neo-nazi escorts draped in the Confederate flag so you might want or need to revise your copy just a little.

[Flower]

Hey Lucky--looks like the European Commission heard ya Here is part of this morning's news:

Health - Reuters

Putting Off Smokers with Rotting Lung Pictures

 

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Commission (news - web sites) has started the hunt for images of rotting lungs and dying cancer patients to be printed on cigarette packets across the European Union (news - web sites), a spokesman said on Monday.

 

Next month cigarettes sold in the EU must show even larger health warnings than now, and from mid-2004 member states will have the option of adding pictures to the packs showing the hazards of smoking, the EU's executive body said.

 

 

The European Commission announced a tender on Monday for organizations to come up with images and test their impact on different European audiences.

 

 

"Research and experience in countries which have introduced health warnings illustrated with color pictures have proven that they speak more than a thousand words," Health and Consumer Protection Commissioner David Byrne said in a statement.

 

Brazil and Canada compel tobacco companies to print pictures of premature babies and brain hemorrhages on their products.

 

 

Commission health spokesman Thorsten Muench said Europe would follow their lead but there would also be a lighter touch.

 

 

"We will have rotten lungs and we will also have more humorous images. It's not just dead bodies lying around," he said at a news conference.

 

 

For each of the current 14 health warnings, there will be a choice of five or six pictures so that member states can choose the ones that best fit local tastes.

 

 

"There will be research into how every image works in every country," Muench said.

 

 

He accepted the images might not put off hard-core smokers but said he hoped they would stop people starting smoking.

[woodlawn]

Fleur de Lies

 

>You did not prove anything at all as you were both factually,

>philosophically and legalistically incorrect,

 

You're a liar. You know nothing about the hearsay rule or the other rules of evidence. You post an enormous amount of bullshit on this message board about that and other subjects of which you know nothing, relying on the attitudes of most posters that it simply isn't worth their time to bother correctinng the misinformation you provide.

 

 

as is nearly

>always the case with your post. All you "caught" me in was a

>repeated typo.

>

>BIG FUCKING DEAL.

 

The fact that you claim to know all about hearsay but can't figure out how to spell it is not a big deal. I call attention to it only because it provides such an amusing contrast with your frequent boasts that you understand English perfectly and your frequent criticisms of the verbal skills of others. There must be some impish god of message boards who sees to it that in every post in which you do that, you also include some stupid mistake that makes you look a bloody fool.

 

>At least I used the terminology in both its appropriate and

>technically legal meaning, and did so without taking it out of

>context, fixating on the inconsequential or doing any of the

>other pedantic habits you engage in when your small and petty

>minded obsessive behavior motivates you to comment on those

>matters about which you so clearly know so very little about.

 

As I've pointed out, you don't know shit about hearsay or about any other legal issue. You've repeatedly implied that hearsay evidence should always be rejected, for example, when the truth is that it is often admitted in the most serious civil and criminal proceedings. You can't learn the rules of evidence by watching "Law and Order" reruns, so if you're too lazy to get off your ass and pick up a book that actually contains some information about them, you'd best keep your mouth shut on the subject before you make yourself look foolish yet again. You probably know something about being a whore. Stick to writing about that.