Skip to main content

View Diary: Washington State Election Night Open Thread (263 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Eh (4.00)
    The folks complaining about the 25 foot rule seemed like whiners to me. They were never bothered when other folks complained about them smoking indoors.

    I don't think this is something that should be left up to the market. Smokers should not be allowed to light up around people who don't want them to. It's that simple. Either they are responsible, or they're forced to be responsible.

    Of course the 25 foot rule will be selectively enforced. Show me a law that isn't.

    I'm not part of a redneck agenda - Green Day

    by eugene on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 08:05:17 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Again, I will ask you to ask NY (none)
      and DE bars how much they like the bans.

      In this place that I call home, my brain is the cliff and my heart's the bitter buffalo

      by bebacker on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 08:11:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  We LOVE it (none)
        Everyone I know (I really don't know any smokers) loves being able to come home frim the bars without reeking of smoke.  It's great, I don't have to sacrifice a set of clothes to have a couple of beers with my friends.  I don't have to worry about someone lighting up next to me at the lunch counter.  

        I would fight like hell if they tried to reverse the smoking ban in NY.

        •  I said the BARS not you! (4.00)
          Also, if you don't like coming home smelling like smoke, go somewhere else! jesus christ. Next we will have people who don't drink saying how great the alcohol ban in bars is. "I used to haaaaaate coming home smelling of beeeeer...."(in the best whiney voice one can muster). Gee, ya hate smoke yet you still went out to places where you knew ahead of time that people would be smoking and you KNEW that you would go home smelling of smoke? Sounds rather stupid of you to me.

          In this place that I call home, my brain is the cliff and my heart's the bitter buffalo

          by bebacker on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 08:59:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  We said the EMPLOYEES not the patrons (4.00)
            And if you read back a few posts, you'd see that when the bans have gone into effect elsewhere, the businesses have seen an increase in sales.  Non smokers finally start coming in and smokers order and go cuz they need their fix.  

            Tell me one bar or restaurant that doesn't like turning over tables?

            This is win-win.  You smokers can go whine all you want about it.

            •  hmmmm, don't know any bar (none)
              that is looking for turnover! You may be thinking of eating establishments. Take a look at the DE Pa border. oops. And if non-smoking bars did sooooooo well, um, wouldn't the free market take care of it. Would we not see a bunch of smoke-free places popping up all over the place? Oh, right, right. IT doesn't and they aren't

              In this place that I call home, my brain is the cliff and my heart's the bitter buffalo

              by bebacker on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 09:16:43 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Also, asshat, my comment was replying (1.00)
              to hardleft. SEE WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT. NExt time you wanna jump in, feel free to pay attention. Thanks

              In this place that I call home, my brain is the cliff and my heart's the bitter buffalo

              by bebacker on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 09:17:51 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  "go somewhere else" (none)
            Geez, I am so tired of hearing this from smokers!
            I have serious asthma.  A few years ago my husband and I got tickets to see a band at the Tractor in Seattle, one we had wanted to see for a long time. We got a babysitter, took the ferry over to Seattle. And after about a half hour sitting listening to the opening band, a group of smokers came into the bar. About 10 minutes later, I was outside wheezing and coughing so much I could hardly breathe. I tried to listen from the open door, but it was cold outside. I tried to go back in, but even with my rescue inhalers, I still had to leave within 5 minutes. So we left. Blew at least $75 that night, and I coughed and wheezed for another 2 weeks.
            How is that fair ????
            I am really looking forward to being able to go places without worring that some dumbass smoker is going to light up and spoil the party for me.
            It isn't a matter of choice for me, it is a matter of being able to breathe.
            And the alcohol analogy is just plain stupid. If the drinkers forced it down your throat, that would be another thing...
            •  hmmm. Those evil smoker gangs! (none)
              Yeah, they travel in packs they do! I think there is a song about those evil smoker gangs. Again, sorry about your asthma but, you knew this going in.

              In this place that I call home, my brain is the cliff and my heart's the bitter buffalo

              by bebacker on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 11:30:58 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  "Fight like hell" huh. Yeah, you (none)
          really sound like someone I would invite to a bar. NEXT

          In this place that I call home, my brain is the cliff and my heart's the bitter buffalo

          by bebacker on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 09:00:59 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  You know, now that I think about it (3.50)
          I can't stand people eating popcorn at movies. I always have to wash my clothes when I get home because they smell of that fake butter shit. Plus that fucking noise of people shoving kernals into their mouth and the chewing and chewing. UGH. I understand that few people find this annoying enough to "fight like hell" for, but I gotta tell ya, I may just try to put this up for a vote. I WANT ALL SNACKS BANNED FROM MOVIE THEATRES!!! And I will "fight like hell" to get it passed.

          In this place that I call home, my brain is the cliff and my heart's the bitter buffalo

          by bebacker on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 09:06:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  been in a lot of NYC bars (none)
        where after midnight people start lighting up.

        including bartenders.

        and only a wee bit was crack.

        the question is really, who enforces this? and do they have better things to do?

        (-6.88, -8.31)-- "fuck your war... and your president."--Snake Plissken

        by binFranklin on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 10:22:33 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Oh for Christ's sake (4.00)
      The 25 foot rule is ridiculous. Where are people supposed to smoke, exactly? In the middle of the street?

      I-901 is ridiculous anyway, but that's the whopper that pushes it over the edge from weenies hand wringing their hands that someone out there might be doing something they don't like to just being mean spirited.

      There are non-smoking bars if it bothers you so much. Go hang out there.

      /* You are not expected to understand this. */

      by ct on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 08:12:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not my problem (3.71)
        Where they smoke is their problem. All I know is they should not and must not be allowed to do it in any place open to the public. It's really not that difficult. They don't get to dictate to the rest of us we have to breathe unclean air.

        It's time Washington joined NYC, Conn., RI, Del., California, and Ireland - in short, joined the rest of the progressive world. Smokers can smoke on their own time in their own homes and cars, but they are no longer going to be able to assault other people with it. They can deal with it.

        I'm not part of a redneck agenda - Green Day

        by eugene on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 08:16:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It *is* my problem, however. (3.25)
          I am a smoker, so I am rather concerned, and rightly so, whether or not I can partake in a legal activity in a business that allows it.

          Also, I'm not sure what "progressive" folks you run around with, but 90% of the progressive folks I know smoke (including almost all the bartenders I know, those poor folks this initiative is "helping").

          The hyperbole the anti-smoking folks engage in gets to me too. "Assault"? For fuck's sake, it's not "assault". Normal people can deal with being around smokers. Maybe someday you'll be able to too.

          /* You are not expected to understand this. */

          by ct on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 08:22:05 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I notice (none)
            that smokers & non-smokers alike tend to choose their friends, lovers and leisure time hangouts from among those who do or don't have the habit, same as themselves.

            Maybe that's why you are surrounded by other smokers. "Ninety percent" is a very high figure.


            •  An outrageous stereotype (none)
              That type of hollow generalizing ("Smokers and nonsmokers just don't naturally commingle") is eerily reminiscient of the early arguments in favor of segregation.  Honestly, I am amazed at how ready many people are to identify with platforms of equality and yet turn around and revile a large segment of the population with an even greater fervor than Republicans hate gays.  

              Look out anyone who's overweight: the anti-smoking crowd has their eye on you next.  

          •  Medically speaking (none)
            second hand smoke is a health risk.  Subjecting others to it in public places (such as sidewalks or streets) seems pretty unacceptable to me.  

            We legislate the crap out of any number of things - alcohol, narcotics, marijuana and so on and so forth.  In this case Washingtonians said that while choosing to smoke is your right you don't have the right to do it wherever you choose.  I may want to have sex on my neighbor's lawn or on the sidewalk but (to my knowledge) in WA that's not allowed.  Infringing on my rights?  I guess I'm willing to give up a bit for the greater good.

            •  Breathing in an industrial area or... (none)
              ... near a well traveled road is a health risk too.

              Your point?

              What a piece of work is man, in form and moving... ...quintessence of dust. and all that

              by Erevann on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 09:15:42 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You really are quite irritable! (none)
                My point is that while people do have individual rights those rights do not include injuring those around them.  I think industry and vehicle emissions should be regulated as well.  I think you're more libertarian than me - I believe in regulations for the common good, you just want to smoke wherever you like.
                •  oh no... so sorry... (4.00)
                  this issue gets me a bit riled, I'll admit.

                  You've been quite a bit more respectful, and I'm sorry if I came off so hostile.

                  It's just being pushed more amd more out of society, being discrimiated against, again. Well, it hurts, especially from many people I respect and agree with on so many other issues.

                  It's not that I want the right to injure anyone, I wouldn't hurt anyone without provocation. I just try so damn hard to be a respectful smoker, to be polite about it, and I really do curb myself whenever ANYONE asks.

                  But it kind of seems like the whole damn world is out to shun me, simply because I smoke. And now, who knows what's going to happen. I sit downtown, in Westlake park many evenings, drink my chai, read my book, and have a smoke. I love it, it allows me to interact with strangers, and relax in the world. In the place and city I've come to love so much.

                  Now that city wants to discriminate against me, when I try so hard, EXPLICITLY, to avoid offending people with my smoking.

                  It's... well... emotionally disturbing to be a pariah. I just want freedom.

                  And leftyboy down there really got my dander up good.

                  My apologies if I offended.

                  PS - I consider myself a bit more anarcho-syndicalist than libertarian, though I'm sure it bleeds over a bit. :)

                  What a piece of work is man, in form and moving... ...quintessence of dust. and all that

                  by Erevann on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 10:22:42 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  smoke is a health risk (none)
              so is breathing in cooking fumes, but i really don't see anyone voting for safe working conditions on that one.

              fuck, capitalism is a health risk.

              (-6.88, -8.31)-- "fuck your war... and your president."--Snake Plissken

              by binFranklin on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 10:29:25 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Normal People Dealt With It in the 1970's (none)
            The trend is for normal people to be increasingly intolerant of it.

            It's legal to play bagpipes too, but normal people have pretty tight limits on their ability to deal with that.

            We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy....--ML King, "Beyond Vietnam"

            by Gooserock on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 09:32:14 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  In the middle of the street (3.00)
        That's exactly where you should smoke. Who the fuck are you to ruin my lungs?

        I don't care if you smoke (really, you're welcome to do so), but your right to smoke ends in the privacy of your own home, buddy. You have no right to ruin my health.

        •  This argument comes up so often. (none)
          It's simple, really: If you don't want to be in a smoky bar, don't go to smoky bars. I promise I won't smoke in your gym or whatever you non-smokers do, and you promise not to be self-righteous in my bar.

          How's that?

          Besides, if people can't smoke in bars, then they'll have to smoke outside, where it's more likely your tender lungs will collapse from being around cigarette smoke.

          /* You are not expected to understand this. */

          by ct on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 08:28:02 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm sorry (none)
            but it's a public health issue, not a freedom of choice issue.  I have to work in bars all the time and I hate the smoke, as do my co-workers.  We're all going to be glad to have the smoke gone.  Smokers are drug addicts who cost society billions in medical costs.
            •  oh well (none)
              i guess it's back to smack.

              never heard of secondhand smack problems. i mean except for the cigarette burns, and now that's taken care of.

              oh god, what if the republicans hear me?

              (-6.88, -8.31)-- "fuck your war... and your president."--Snake Plissken

              by binFranklin on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 12:21:24 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well (none)
                tell me what part of my statement is not true.  Is tobacco not a drug, and are not people totally addicted to it?

                I've had my share of substance problems, including tobacco so I do speak from personal experience.  Last time I looked you couldn't shoot up in a bar either.

        •  Then stop driving... (none)
          stop flying in aircraft.
          stop living anywhere near a shipping port.
          stop living near a city.

          Stop burning the damn muffins.


          What a piece of work is man, in form and moving... ...quintessence of dust. and all that

          by Erevann on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 08:43:48 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Who are you to doom someone to immediate death? (none)
          You would see sooner condemn a human being to the "middle" of a street (where she would assuredly perish in a vehicular tragedy) than have that person smoke a cigarette in your presence?  To even suggest that the cigarette harms you anywhere remotely near as much as an instant immediate death by automobile would be scientific blasphemy.  
        •  I'm so sorry to hear that (none)
          just the slightest smell of smoke outdoors ruins your lungs. You need to have that checked out.

          And another thing. The pro 901 TV ad that was run is a good indication of where the minds of the vehement maniacal anti-smokers are.

          I mean, there's this woman with her husband and two kids at a restaurant. A couple of guys, several tables away, light up and this wacky bitch breaks out a humongous industrial size fan and blows the two smokers completely out of the restaurant. How nice of her. Her kids will probably grow up to be smokers and get thrown over the rail at the space needle for lighting up some day.

          Really, there is a woman who is very anti-smoking but she would rather drag around a ten foot industrial fan to blow people out the door when they light up than to call ahead and ask if it's a non-smoking place. Even if she didn't have a phone handy, why didn't she leave the place before she sat down and ate there? She could have asked about it or smelled it. But NOOO, she would rather break out the old industrial size fan and brutalize the two poor schmucks who knew it was a smoking place.

          So what I'm saying is that the pro-901 ad is encouraging illegal brutal action against people who aren't breaking any law. Yeah, I know, those smokers deserved it. If you pro-901'ers had any sense of concern for anyone other than yourselves, you would feel sorry for the poor smokers who are hurting their own health. No one is forcing you to smoke or be around it. You don't need to get violent about it.

          Freedom's Angels ~Cindy/Bunny/Sibel~

          by Skylor on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 11:15:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  They are supposed to smoke (none)
        wherever their toxic carcinogens will not harm other people.
      •  Here's a thought (2.50)
        Why don't you stop whining about it and just stop smoking?  Then you won't fucking care how far the ban extends to and you'll be saving the state money on your healthcare for you fucking stupidity.
        •  Spoken like someone who's never smoked. (none)
          In a magical fairy world, quitting smoking would be easy. My wife puts the screws to me all the time about it. In the meantime, until such time as I decide to yield to The Man and quit smoking, I'll continue to smoke, and I'll continue to find self-righteous non-smokers annoying.


          /* You are not expected to understand this. */

          by ct on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 09:18:36 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well said. (4.00)
            I'm an ex-smoker, and I voted against 901.  Just because I no longer smoke doesn't give me any justification to be self-righteous about it; I'd rather let people have their places to do what they want to do.  But before I was a smoker, I never would have voted this way, and probably would have been one of those self-righteous pricks.

            People who've never smoked have absolutely no idea what this is about.  Sorry, but it's just that simple.  The problem is not that they don't understand (there are many things that most of us don't understand about each other), it's the fact that they generally (not always, but generally) don't even try to, they pretend like they don't need to, and thus they believe that the issue is as cut and dried as they mistakenly believe it to be in their narrow view of the world.  Usually this narrow view is somewhere along the lines of "I've never smoked, smoking is disgusting, I don't know why anyone does it, they shouldn't do it, there's no justification for it, ..." and so on.  All this while never having ever had a single milligram of nicotine enter their body.

            Non-smoking progressives can understand empathy in so many other things; why they can't in this case, I have no idea.  Nobody is forced to go to a smoky bar, and I can't remember the last time I was here in a bar in Seattle where the bartenders didn't smoke too, so where's the real problem here?

            I mean, really, how can you self-righteous non-smokers make grandiose claims about your rights in this, when they're not really being infringed (and any general-air-quality infringement is only likely to be increased by forcing more smokers outside from the bars they'd prefer to be in and that you probably don't visit anyway)... and then turn around and call a bunch of conservative Republican initiatives as holier-than-thou?  Sorry, but it's hypocritical as hell.

            If you're really THAT concerned about air quality, spend some time protesting that poisonous JP-8 jet fuel or something.  Otherwise, your concern is half-hearted and begins and ends with the extent of your own selfish convenience, so you can feel pompous hanging out in a bar that you previously felt you "couldn't".  Oh, what an accomplishment.  And I'm sure all those non-smoking bartenders (as mythical as a unicorn around these parts) will be oh so happy to welcome you into their newly sanitized establishment.

            You don't like it when Bible-belt conservatives vote for anti-gay-marriage initiatives, when the people voting for them probably don't even know any gay people at all, let alone have any understanding of why they might want to marry and how this wouldn't hurt the straight folks at all.  So why would you vote for a one-size-fits-all indoor smoking ban that wouldn't just affect the establishments you visit, but also establishments supported by smokers who are all cool with it, establishments that you would be loathe to ever set foot in?  This is hypocritical and just as bad as the gay-bashers, because it is the exact same thing: You are passing judgement on a lifestyle choice that you do not understand, and pronouncing that judgement to an area beyond the immediate scope of your day-to-day world.

            If you voted for I-901, and you consider yourself a "progressive" who thinks one-size-fits-all decisions on lifestyle choices are not the way to move forward, then you need to take a good hard look in the mirror.

            •  i like cig smoke, but... (none)
              I sympathize with smokers, and hate anti-smoker zealots, but
              I also support smoking bans because the bans save lives, and because big tobacco sucks.  

              It's pretty simple.  Big-tobacco= another GOP death machine.  

              I had my own blog for a while, but I decided to go back to just pointless, incessant barking. --Cartoon Dog, The New Yorker

              by markymarx on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 11:11:18 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  There is a point to be made there... (none)
                which is why I get mine elsewhere. Minus as many of the chemicals and crap they throw in those damn Camels. :)

                But regardless, I also enjoy smoking shisha, at middle eastern establishments. So much for THAT!

                What a piece of work is man, in form and moving... ...quintessence of dust. and all that

                by Erevann on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 11:26:44 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Now wait a second. (none)
                Banning cigarette smoking in public might not save as many lives as you might think. All the taxes that are being paid by smokers are being used to save lives. Aren't they? And if all the smokers stop paying those taxes, you non-smokers are going to be asked to pick up the slack.

                So if you would rather raise your own taxes than smell a whiff of cigarette smoke outside on the sidewalk, I've got a lot of other things I'm sure you will buy.

                Freedom's Angels ~Cindy/Bunny/Sibel~

                by Skylor on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 11:36:47 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  I smoked for 10 years and quit (none)
              And if I can do it, anyone can.  So qwitcherbitchin.

              Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam

              by moe99 on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 11:13:42 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I did a lot worse than that... (none)
                for a bit longer than that and quit too.

                Smoking helps me cope and stay sober. No bitching, just a placebo.

                What a piece of work is man, in form and moving... ...quintessence of dust. and all that

                by Erevann on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 11:27:58 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  find another placebo man (none)
                  there are so many options out there:  hypnosis, the patch, actually hard candies and not drinking helped me stay off of them.  I also started jogging.  You could try yoga.  You just have to care for yourself more.

                  Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam

                  by moe99 on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 11:43:25 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  You missed my point, indicated in the phrase... (none)
                ..."lifestyle choice".  Nowhere in my post did I suggest that every smoker involved in this equation wants to quit, nor should they feel they have to.

                I am NOT opposed to having a lot of smoke-free indoor places.  I am VERY opposed to forcing every single indoor place to be smoke-free even when neither the owners nor the patrons are bitching about it.  Under I-901, every single person in a bar could be a smoker and it'd still be illegal.  That is utterly ridiculous and nowhere close to "liberal".

                That said, when I was a smoker I tried to be courteous, and smoke outside away from other non-smokers when possible, etc.  I didn't smoke anywhere near a doorway or a window, just so the smoke wouldn't be a nuisance... I think I did my part.  But 25 friggin' feet?  That only serves to rule out designated outdoor smoking areas in addition to indoor ones, and is nothing but a slap in the face.

                There are ways to approach smoking regulations that may actually be reasonable compromises for both sides... but I-901 not only isn't such a compromise, it's nowhere even close to one; it's one of the strictest smoking bans in the country.  There's nothing "liberal" about it.

                I don't smoke anymore, but I sure as hell enjoyed it when I did it, while trying to be courteous to those who didn't necessarily share my view on the issue.  In exchange, we get holier-than-thou crap like this.

                As far as I'm concerned, the people who voted for this can go to the same dogmatic hell that the social conservatives can go to.

        •  I've been stupid a lot in my life, (none)
          but I take exception to the term "fucking stupidity" having been raised around smokers who were definitely not stupid.  I don't have a problem with not smoking in bars, as I have pretty much quit smoking after thirteen years of it.  I am not disagreeing that, even if for "our own good" we should be forced not to smoke in public places.  But there are many, many factors that go in to why people smoke, and "fucking stupidity" I doubt is in the top five.
      •  25 foot rule (none)
        25 feet is a good thing. I am tired of holding my breath when I walk into a place with a bunch of nicotine addicts hanging around the door getting their fix. If you can inject it and not pollute my lungs, fine. No PROBLEM.
        So I wouldn't mind if you smoked around the doors. Just hold the cigarette in your hand so the smoke doesn't escape, and DON"T EXHALE!
        •  Oh my fucking Christ, I have seen the light! (none)
          The way you have wittily suggested I do the impossible has put me in my place. Never again will I engage in a perfectly legal activity on the off that it might inconvenience someone. Halle-motherfucking-lujah! In fact, I'm going to go go around and bother people for the greater good right now!

          You! Get out of flavor country! I don't care you're at a place that people go to smoke!

          You! The one keeping out of the rain! I don't care if you get pneumonia, you need to go further away!

          Jesus H. Goatse, I feel better already!

          /* You are not expected to understand this. */

          by ct on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 10:58:53 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  How very (none)
      Nu Labour of you.

      The smoking ban strikes me as progressive in a very Tony Blair, nanny-state sort of way.

      Ben P

    •  Oh ,common. (4.00)
      If there is any health concern about smoking outside but closer than 25 ft to the door, what is it?

      Just how many people have died from smelling a cigarette in the open air? I don't like the smell of outdoor charcoal grills but it is foolish to make a law against it or to get ridiculously offended by it.

      I've learned that when you smell something you don't like, like vomit, bus fumes or a fart, you walk the other direction away from it. You don't need to make a law against bad smells. If you did, the whole city of Tacoma would be illegal.

      Freedom's Angels ~Cindy/Bunny/Sibel~

      by Skylor on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 10:10:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  i've worked (none)
      in dozens of non-smoking places.

      never bothered my coworkers or customers.

      i've served people whose perfumes and colognes have, literally (proper useage), made my eyes swell shut.

      I ride my bike to work passed by thousands of single occupant cars, breathing in their climate destroying fumes.

      i've also been forced to see alot of really shitty bands.

      i'm not whining...  i just feel that more laws hardly creates a more civil society. maybe if  Sidran had been behind this people would have had a knee-jerk in the other way... who knows.  

      a world with less choices, so much better for everyone.

      whatever... but don't doubt that the law will be enforced  in a highly selective manner.. just like NYC and the rest of the 'progressive' world...

      but, listen everbody,  don't hide behind workers it's not doing us any favours.

      (-6.88, -8.31)-- "fuck your war... and your president."--Snake Plissken

      by binFranklin on Tue Nov 08, 2005 at 10:17:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site