Posted on 08/23/2002 5:39:18 PM PDT by SheLion
I will say that smoking is not good for a person. It raises the risk for some things, it DOESN'T CAUSE them.
A lot of us here DON'T pay even $2 a pack, as we stuff our own. Its about the government demonizing a segment of the society, even as they try to fund their state budgets on that same segment.
As a former firefighter, did you ever fight a blaze that was started by a candle, fireworks, a kid with a match? Should all those things be banned by the government also?
Most of us here are not about "smokers rights", we're about property owners rights.
Amen! I can't stand beer or beer breath, but I have to kiss a beer drinker and love it. But I don't go around yelling to have beer banned because I can't stand the stinking stuff on a man.
My teeth are also white, and my hair smells good and I never had problem getting boyfriends, even if they didn't smoke. These anti-smoking men of today are big wusses.
To: Bill
Date: Several Year Ago
RE: Big Tobacco
Bill, this is much better than Whitewater and property flipping or cattle futures. Pretty simple, we make what I call "Big Tobacco" out to be evil. Just make up all sorts of stuff bad about them. It will be a piece of cake.
I have several of the Dem. state attorney general's in on this one. They will get together and sue the tobacco companies. He he. Form a whole new little gov't gang.
But, and this is killer, they will hire out the litigation to our various trial lawyer buddies. Who will take a chunk of the money and send it back to us in soft money donations and to various NGO's who will make donations to us. And to something else I have in mind. It's called Hilpac. More on that later.
This is such a cool way to take money out of the %#&&@%&# saps pockets.
Hillary
PS - I'm thinking about running for senate.
No, that is a FACT unless you consider having little ashbins around your house attractive. Just like having a spit cup for chewing tobacco is not attractive. To those smokers with kids, have the kids ever (or even you accidentally) knocked over the ashtray? Yeah - clean up that mess and tell me it's not disgusting.
oh - another source of cigarette-related fires: people throwing the ashes and smoked cigs in the trash.
We have to kiss ole beer breath, but they don't want to kiss us because we SMOKE! Give me a break!
God, Guys, give us a break! YUK. Beer Breath. 
But the beer drinkers didn't think of THIS, did they!
How do you handle it when somebody doesn't have medical problems but just doesn't want to be around it?
I'm not cutting you no slack here. heh!
I bet YOU love beer! I bet YOU pay $8 bucks for a suitcase, right? Maybe more. But at least, smoking a cigarette doesn't make me pass out on the couch. Or burp.
Do you think the emotional/mental changes that occurred with nicotin deprivation indicated an addiction to nicotin?
No more disgusting than cleaning up cat puke in the hallway or dog poop in the back yard.
I have been smoking for about 30 years and have NEVER, repeat NEVER had a cigarette related fire in any of the places I live.
I'm not saying it doesn't happen but like, IMO, MOST fires it is carelessness that starts the fire.
Depends on the place and the situation.
I have never refused a polite request to extinguish my smoking materials, whether it was in a place where smoking was allowed or not.
On the other hand, if someone gets in my face about smoking somewhere that it's allowed, I might just tell them to go to he!!.
The burden of smokers longterm healthcare costs on our social safety nets is costing me money. That makes it my business.
ahhhhhhh I don't DRINK beer. I hate that stuff. It stinks. heh!
$8 dollars for a suitcase is cheap beer? Is that what your saying? I don't know, because I hate that damn stuff. LOL!
It's getting to the point were I'm just sayin' freakit and coming right out of the box swinging.
or maybe its just a pen...
WHOA!!!!! Those are fightin words! Smokers are not a financial burden as you imply: Smoking-related healthcare costs are a pittance to overall healthcare costs (8% in my state of Wisconsin). If every smoker quit, healthcare costs would go down only temporarily and then rise above the amount you are complaining about now, because nonsmokers get sick too and for more years. Smokers more than make up for their extra cost by dying (their choice-not yours) sooner; collecting less social security and pensions, and less time in nursing homes. The state tax on cigarettes is all gravy. This is all backed up by facts. You should know this if you're going to play with numbers. Not only did the Congressonal Research Service, at the request of rabid anti-smoker Henry Waxman, determine that smokers pay far more into the system than they cost the system, even the New England Journal of Medicine said the same. additionally the Master Settlement Agreement between the states and the tobacco companies was ossensibly to repay the states for "smoking related medical expenses" and that is paid 100% by smokers, not by the tobacco companies. Smokers not only pay "their own damn bills," they pay the bills for a whole hell of a lot of nonsmokers as well. And they/we have since at least 1994 when taxes were a lot lower than now. The only way you can conclude that smokers cost society is to make the assumption that no one else ever gets sick, has an accident, or dies. You've been hornswoggled by the anti juggernaut.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.