Skip to main content

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

Comment Preferences

  •  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.

      HTH.


      -----------
      /* 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.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site