Your stinky smoke! (was:what the hell is wrong with you people?)
Jerri Blavittł
Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:8r0cgv$b05$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
> "Magnulus" <magn...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
> news:20000928013336...@ng-fh1.aol.com...
>
> > I am beginning to think you all are not really smokers. Real smokers
> > wouldn't turn down a cigarette. You are just shills for the cigarette
> industry
> > (probably Philip Morris). You come in here whining about how you can't
> blow
> > smoke in folks' faces anymore. The days of Lucky Strikes, Bogart, and Joe
> Camel
> > are over. Nonsmokers don't think smoking is cool anymore, and they aren't
> going
> > put up with your smoke in their faces. If you stopped smoking for a few
> days,
> > air out your houses, you'ld realize how filthy smelling the average
> American
> > cigarette is anyways
>
> It's not that black and white. Most of the people here comment on the way
> the anti-tobacco war is fought. Based on non-reliable research and using the
> wrong axiomas. Fighting against repression as a solution for solving issues.
> Fighting against the narrow minded health people that only see physical and
> not the psychological and emotional basics of human beings.
>
> Many of us are reasonable people that won't lit a cig when there are people
> around that really have problems with the smoke.
>
Bzzzt. That is 95% of the problem, most smokers/addicts DO NOT respect
the airspace of others when in public, they erroneously think they
have some right to smoke in public, which of course they do not.
If your wretched addicted inconsiderate brethren would have been
as "reasonable" as you, there would be no need for the many new
laws, prohibitions and restrictions on smoking.
Smoke all you want at home, no body wants to stop that, but in public
places addicted smokers WILL refrain from fixing their drug addiction
or face the wrath of the non-smoking society and the laws and criminal
prohibitions that get foisted upon you for such offensive public behavior.
> But on the other side there are these people that think that they can impose
> their ideas on others and are not able to search for and find compromises.
In public, you bet. Just look around, there are new laws, prohibitions and
restrictions passed almost every single day, almost all due to offensive
smoking in PUBLIC.
It is you smokers, drug addicts, who are fooling yourselves into thinking
that society must somehow allow, tolerate or compromise to accommodate
your wretched, offensive drug addiction. No other drug addict groups are making
such ridiculous demands on the majority of society.
And like most of the smoking idiots in this group, you are squandering
the biggest compromise that society will ever offer you:
Smoke all you want in YOUR OWN HOME. or
continue to face more restrictions, laws, and prohibitions
if you continue to violate the PUBLIC PLACES with your
putrid effluent.
It really is quite simple.
>
> One of the best examples for that is the smoking bans in airplanes. It's
> totalitarian!
And needs to be, because it has been proven time and time again
that the drug addict cannot be trusted to moderate or consider others
when driven by, and pendant to, the monkey on their back.
>
> Or the sadists that like to see smokers go out in the cold so that they feel
> better themselves..
Or go out in the "warm", or simply contain you drug addiction to the
privacy of you own home, like most other junkies, heroin abusers,
crack addicts, etc etc. You don't hear them clamoring for some concession
to be able to fix-up in public places, legally protected.
Get real.
Wiel
"Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote in message
news:%DRA5.1010$GJ.2...@news.uswest.net...
> > around that really have problems with the smoke.
> >
>
> Bzzzt. That is 95% of the problem, most smokers/addicts DO NOT respect
> the airspace of others when in public, they erroneously think they
> have some right to smoke in public, which of course they do not.
95% of non-smokers are more tolerant than you are!
> Smoke all you want at home, no body wants to stop that, but in public
> places addicted smokers WILL refrain from fixing their drug addiction
> or face the wrath of the non-smoking society and the laws and criminal
> prohibitions that get foisted upon you for such offensive public behavior.
Non-smoking society is a situation that will NEVER exist. Unless you demolish
lots of buildings, prohibit cars, remove fire places from houses, forbid to
import incense, find a wat to totally prevent forest fires and much more.
> > But on the other side there are these people that think that they can impose
> > their ideas on others and are not able to search for and find compromises.
>
> In public, you bet. Just look around, there are new laws, prohibitions and
> restrictions passed almost every single day, almost all due to offensive
> smoking in PUBLIC.
Like 50 years ago it won't have a long life.
>
> It is you smokers, drug addicts, who are fooling yourselves into thinking
> that society must somehow allow, tolerate or compromise to accommodate
> your wretched, offensive drug addiction. No other drug addict groups are
making
> such ridiculous demands on the majority of society.
That's because they are such a big minority.
>
> And like most of the smoking idiots in this group, you are squandering
> the biggest compromise that society will ever offer you:
>
> Smoke all you want in YOUR OWN HOME. or
> continue to face more restrictions, laws, and prohibitions
> if you continue to violate the PUBLIC PLACES with your
> putrid effluent.
>
> It really is quite simple.
This way you'll loose 50% of your country's workforce...
>
> >
> > One of the best examples for that is the smoking bans in airplanes. It's
> > totalitarian!
>
> And needs to be, because it has been proven time and time again
> that the drug addict cannot be trusted to moderate or consider others
> when driven by, and pendant to, the monkey on their back.
REPEAT: See Air France
> > Or the sadists that like to see smokers go out in the cold so that they feel
> > better themselves..
>
> Or go out in the "warm", or simply contain you drug addiction to the
> privacy of you own home, like most other junkies, heroin abusers,
> crack addicts, etc etc. You don't hear them clamoring for some concession
> to be able to fix-up in public places, legally protected.
What's an addict? You have addicts that are able to work and addicts that
can't.
>
> Get real.
My last contribution to one of your posts.
Go Kill file...
Wiel
Jerri Blavittł
Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:8r1s75$djc$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
>
> "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote in message
> news:%DRA5.1010$GJ.2...@news.uswest.net...
> >
> > Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:8r0cgv$b05$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
> > > Many of us are reasonable people that won't lit a cig when there are people
> > > around that really have problems with the smoke.
> > >
> >
> > Bzzzt. That is 95% of the problem, most smokers/addicts DO NOT respect
> > the airspace of others when in public, they erroneously think they
> > have some right to smoke in public, which of course they do not.
>
> 95% of non-smokers are more tolerant than you are!
Nope, or there wouldn't be the avalanche of new laws and prohibitions
against public smoking, You inconsiderate smokers have abused and worn out
your welcome, now it's back to you own home to fix up, just like all the other
drug addicts ... or are you claiming that you should have some special right
that other drug addicts don't ?
>
> > Smoke all you want at home, no body wants to stop that, but in public
> > places addicted smokers WILL refrain from fixing their drug addiction
> > or face the wrath of the non-smoking society and the laws and criminal
> > prohibitions that get foisted upon you for such offensive public behavior.
>
> Non-smoking society is a situation that will NEVER exist.
Correct, smoke all you want, IN YOUR OWN HOME.
> Unless you demolish
> lots of buildings, prohibit cars, remove fire places from houses, forbid to
> import incense, find a wat to totally prevent forest fires and much more.
You're not paying attention, you can and should smoke, shoot, snort all
the drugs you want, IN THE PRIVACY OF YOUR OWN HOME.
Do you need further clarification Weil?
>
> > > But on the other side there are these people that think that they can impose
> > > their ideas on others and are not able to search for and find compromises.
> >
> > In public, you bet. Just look around, there are new laws, prohibitions and
> > restrictions passed almost every single day, almost all due to offensive
> > smoking in PUBLIC.
>
> Like 50 years ago it won't have a long life.
Wishful thinking.
>
> >
> > It is you smokers, drug addicts, who are fooling yourselves into thinking
> > that society must somehow allow, tolerate or compromise to accommodate
> > your wretched, offensive drug addiction. No other drug addict groups are
> making
> > such ridiculous demands on the majority of society.
>
> That's because they are such a big minority.
They still deserve no special rights that the other drug addict minorities
don't enjoy.
>
> >
> > And like most of the smoking idiots in this group, you are squandering
> > the biggest compromise that society will ever offer you:
> >
> > Smoke all you want in YOUR OWN HOME. or
> > continue to face more restrictions, laws, and prohibitions
> > if you continue to violate the PUBLIC PLACES with your
> > putrid effluent.
> >
> > It really is quite simple.
>
> This way you'll loose 50% of your country's workforce...
Do tell why?
>
> >
> > >
> > > One of the best examples for that is the smoking bans in airplanes. It's
> > > totalitarian!
> >
> > And needs to be, because it has been proven time and time again
> > that the drug addict cannot be trusted to moderate or consider others
> > when driven by, and pendant to, the monkey on their back.
>
> REPEAT: See Air France
Piss on France. They don't bathe, their olfactory senses are dead.
>
> > > Or the sadists that like to see smokers go out in the cold so that they feel
> > > better themselves..
> >
> > Or go out in the "warm", or simply contain you drug addiction to the
> > privacy of you own home, like most other junkies, heroin abusers,
> > crack addicts, etc etc. You don't hear them clamoring for some concession
> > to be able to fix-up in public places, legally protected.
>
> What's an addict? You have addicts that are able to work and addicts that
> can't.
You are an addict, you have admitted as much.
>
> >
> > Get real.
>
> My last contribution to one of your posts.
>
> Go Kill file...
That's the 5th time you have made the "last contribution" and
killfiled me ... can't deny the reality can you ?
Audrey
>
> Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:8r1s75$djc$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
> >
> > "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote in message
> > news:%DRA5.1010$GJ.2...@news.uswest.net...
> > >
> > > Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:8r0cgv$b05$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
> > > > Many of us are reasonable people that won't lit a cig when there are people
> > > > around that really have problems with the smoke.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Bzzzt. That is 95% of the problem, most smokers/addicts DO NOT respect
> > > the airspace of others when in public, they erroneously think they
> > > have some right to smoke in public, which of course they do not.
> >
> > 95% of non-smokers are more tolerant than you are!
>
> Nope, or there wouldn't be the avalanche of new laws and prohibitions
> against public smoking, You inconsiderate smokers have abused and worn out
> your welcome, now it's back to you own home to fix up, just like all the other
> drug addicts ... or are you claiming that you should have some special right
> that other drug addicts don't ?
Tobacco is legal <HEEHEE>. What other argument ya got?
> >
> > > Smoke all you want at home, no body wants to stop that, but in public
> > > places addicted smokers WILL refrain from fixing their drug addiction
> > > or face the wrath of the non-smoking society and the laws and criminal
> > > prohibitions that get foisted upon you for such offensive public behavior.
> >
> > Non-smoking society is a situation that will NEVER exist.
>
> Correct, smoke all you want, IN YOUR OWN HOME.
Guess what? I'm smoking right outside your front door <doin' a jig>.
> > Unless you demolish
> > lots of buildings, prohibit cars, remove fire places from houses, forbid to
> > import incense, find a wat to totally prevent forest fires and much more.
>
> You're not paying attention, you can and should smoke, shoot, snort all
> the drugs you want, IN THE PRIVACY OF YOUR OWN HOME.
>
Nope. I think I'll smoke in the smoking section of restaurants. You
won't come sit in my section will you? That would really ruin my meal.
> Do you need further clarification Weil?
>
Please. You haven't clarified a thing yet.
> >
> > > > But on the other side there are these people that think that they can impose
> > > > their ideas on others and are not able to search for and find compromises.
> > >
> > > In public, you bet. Just look around, there are new laws, prohibitions and
> > > restrictions passed almost every single day, almost all due to offensive
> > > smoking in PUBLIC.
> >
> > Like 50 years ago it won't have a long life.
>
> Wishful thinking.
>
Hmmmm, wonder why buildings are spending money to build smoking lounges
<pondering>.
> > >
> > > It is you smokers, drug addicts, who are fooling yourselves into thinking
> > > that society must somehow allow, tolerate or compromise to accommodate
> > > your wretched, offensive drug addiction. No other drug addict groups are
> > making
> > > such ridiculous demands on the majority of society.
> >
> > That's because they are such a big minority.
>
> They still deserve no special rights that the other drug addict minorities
> don't enjoy.
>
Tobacco is legal. Sheeeesh, you're so dense. And it ain't gonna be
illegalized either. Cash cow, ya know.
> > >
> > > And like most of the smoking idiots in this group, you are squandering
> > > the biggest compromise that society will ever offer you:
> > >
> > > Smoke all you want in YOUR OWN HOME. or
> > > continue to face more restrictions, laws, and prohibitions
> > > if you continue to violate the PUBLIC PLACES with your
> > > putrid effluent.
> > >
> > > It really is quite simple.
> >
> > This way you'll loose 50% of your country's workforce...
>
> Do tell why?
>
> >
> > > >
> > > > One of the best examples for that is the smoking bans in airplanes. It's
> > > > totalitarian!
> > >
> > > And needs to be, because it has been proven time and time again
> > > that the drug addict cannot be trusted to moderate or consider others
> > > when driven by, and pendant to, the monkey on their back.
> >
> > REPEAT: See Air France
>
> Piss on France. They don't bathe, their olfactory senses are dead.
And *this* <pointing to Jerri> is the ignorant dolt we're conversing
with. Keep it up Jerri. The lurkers are getting your full flavor now.
> >
> > > > Or the sadists that like to see smokers go out in the cold so that they feel
> > > > better themselves..
> > >
> > > Or go out in the "warm", or simply contain you drug addiction to the
> > > privacy of you own home, like most other junkies, heroin abusers,
> > > crack addicts, etc etc. You don't hear them clamoring for some concession
> > > to be able to fix-up in public places, legally protected.
> >
> > What's an addict? You have addicts that are able to work and addicts that
> > can't.
>
> You are an addict, you have admitted as much.
>
Lets's see <perusing today's newspaper>.... Hmmm, got an editorial
right here talking about Hollywood. And I quote.., "As Daily News film
reviewer Jack Mathews pointed out in a column yesterday, children ages
12 to 17 'represent a disproportionate percentage of Hollywood's
customers, and they have become habituated - if not addicted - to
contemporary big screen violence.' How many of you vote for "addicted?""
Seems that word "addicted" is applicable to just about anything if you
feel like using the word. Sort of loses it's meaning, dontcha think
Jerri?
According to you I'm about as addicted to my cigarette as I am to big
screen violence. Oh no, Mr. Bill!
> > > Get real.
> >
> > My last contribution to one of your posts.
> >
> > Go Kill file...
>
> That's the 5th time you have made the "last contribution" and
> killfiled me ... can't deny the reality can you ?
Only one more day to go in the month.
Alex W.
Jerri Blavittł <n...@never.no> wrote in message
news:%DRA5.1010$GJ.2...@news.uswest.net...
>
> Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8r0cgv$b05$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
are people
> > around that really have problems with the smoke.
> >
>
> Bzzzt. That is 95% of the problem, most smokers/addicts DO NOT
respect
> the airspace of others when in public, they erroneously think they
> have some right to smoke in public, which of course they do not.
>
> laws, prohibitions and restrictions on smoking.
>
> Smoke all you want at home, no body wants to stop that, but in
public
> places addicted smokers WILL refrain from fixing their drug
addiction
> or face the wrath of the non-smoking society and the laws and
criminal
> prohibitions that get foisted upon you for such offensive public
behavior.
>
>
>
can impose
> > their ideas on others and are not able to search for and find
compromises.
>
> In public, you bet. Just look around, there are new laws,
prohibitions and
> restrictions passed almost every single day, almost all due to
offensive
> smoking in PUBLIC.
>
thinking
> that society must somehow allow, tolerate or compromise to
accommodate
> your wretched, offensive drug addiction. No other drug addict groups
are making
> such ridiculous demands on the majority of society.
>
squandering
> the biggest compromise that society will ever offer you:
>
> Smoke all you want in YOUR OWN HOME. or
> continue to face more restrictions, laws, and prohibitions
> if you continue to violate the PUBLIC PLACES with your
> putrid effluent.
>
> It really is quite simple.
>
> >
airplanes. It's
> > totalitarian!
>
> And needs to be, because it has been proven time and time again
> that the drug addict cannot be trusted to moderate or consider
others
> when driven by, and pendant to, the monkey on their back.
>
> >
they feel
> > better themselves..
>
> Or go out in the "warm", or simply contain you drug addiction to the
> privacy of you own home, like most other junkies, heroin abusers,
> crack addicts, etc etc. You don't hear them clamoring for some
concession
> to be able to fix-up in public places, legally protected.
>
>
Listen, you little brown-shirted moron. You can rave and posture all
you want, but you will never, ever have a non-smoking society. You
will never have a drug-free society. There never was such a thing,
and there never will be. And half the trouble in society stems from
pea-brained brainwashed blinkered zealots like you who have never
bothered to read a book on history or contemplate human nature. Drugs
and vices have always been with us and will always be with us. No ban
or prohibition ever worked. So learn to deal with it. But you won't,
will you? That would mean adjusting your worldview. It would mean
practising tolerance, and doesn't that give you heartburn, you
wretched little bigot. You will never eradicate smoking or drug use;
the Chinese put their drug users up against a wall and shot them, and
it didn't stop drug use. Nothing you can do will eliminate smoking.
We're here to stay. So deal with it. Get used to it, fuckwit. We
will smoke at home and outside. We will wait for the time when the
mood will turn, and it will. Give it ten years, and smoking
restrictions will be scaled down. And we will be there, blowing smoke
in your piggish face. And you know something? I will enjoy doing it.
You have fucked with people for long enough, and you deserve your
comeuppance. No-one likes a prig, and you and your ilk qualify.
Overqualify. If I didn't already smoke, I'd take up the habit just to
annoy a bigot or two. And now I am off to the Munich Oktoberfest
where I will take great pleasure in seeking out disapproving Yanks to
fumigate. I will drink a few beers and listen for American voices.
When I hear them, I will enquire whether they are Canadians, and if
they are not, I will pull out my hoard of dogrockets and proceed to do
my level best to give each and every one of them lung cancer. And I
will enjoy every last second of it, thinking of you and your sour
face. So suck on that, you shitfaced little cocksucker (sorry,
Monica). I hope you choke and die, and I am being merciful. It must
be hell to be a wanker and impotent to boot. I'd pity you, but I'm
fresh out. All I have left is disgust and contempt; take your pick,
you miserable little creature. Ah, whaat am I talking about. I have
scraped stuff off my shoes that resembles you. Why do I bother
replying to the human equivalent of one of those little lumps of shit
stuck in my butt-hair? Whenever I read a post of yours, I am reminded
of the time when I had oyster poisoning and ended up practising
projectile vomiting and shitting -- simultaneously. Your life is
empty and sad, and it shows in your posts. It's almost as if you rail
at life in here and spewing your bile is the only thing keeping you in
this life. Well, don't let me keep you. End your misery. Kill
yourself. No-one will miss you. The tapestry of Life will be
brighter for it. Empty that bottle of Drano -- it's the suitable end
for you, your insides eaten up like your mind was corroded by all that
little-minded drivel you drown in. You have no life, so don't hog
precious resources for others. Do something right just once in your
life.
<This rant was brought to you courtesy of half a bottle of Bombay
Sapphire gin, the only gin for a G&T>
<remember: lime, not lemon!>
Jerri Blavittł
Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8r34ea$4bo$1...@sshuraac-i-1.production.compuserve.com...
<snipped off point quasi-literate intoxicated rambling>
What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
to have a problem understanding ....?
Uncooperative drug addicts WILL be legislated into compliance ...
or into prison!
Jerri Blavittł
Audrey <"102776,1270"@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:39D511CD...@compuserve.com...
> Jerri Blavittł wrote:
> >
> > Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:8r1s75$djc$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
> > >
> > > "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote in message
> > > news:%DRA5.1010$GJ.2...@news.uswest.net...
> > > >
> > > > Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:8r0cgv$b05$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
> > > > > Many of us are reasonable people that won't lit a cig when there are people
> > > > > around that really have problems with the smoke.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bzzzt. That is 95% of the problem, most smokers/addicts DO NOT respect
> > > > the airspace of others when in public, they erroneously think they
> > > > have some right to smoke in public, which of course they do not.
> > >
> > > 95% of non-smokers are more tolerant than you are!
> >
> > Nope, or there wouldn't be the avalanche of new laws and prohibitions
> > against public smoking, You inconsiderate smokers have abused and worn out
> > your welcome, now it's back to you own home to fix up, just like all the other
> > drug addicts ... or are you claiming that you should have some special right
> > that other drug addicts don't ?
>
> Tobacco is legal <HEEHEE>. What other argument ya got?
So it alcohol ... but you can't drink it in public (outside a bar/tavern)
now can you ?
Same with tobacco, it is a heavily restricted drug, and one of the restrictions
is rapidly forcing you to remain at home to fix up, because you abused
your welcome far too long ....
>
> > >
> > > > Smoke all you want at home, no body wants to stop that, but in public
> > > > places addicted smokers WILL refrain from fixing their drug addiction
> > > > or face the wrath of the non-smoking society and the laws and criminal
> > > > prohibitions that get foisted upon you for such offensive public behavior.
> > >
> > > Non-smoking society is a situation that will NEVER exist.
> >
> > Correct, smoke all you want, IN YOUR OWN HOME.
>
> Guess what? I'm smoking right outside your front door <doin' a jig>.
And I'm pissing on your head from the roof ... hurry look up!
>
> > > Unless you demolish
> > > lots of buildings, prohibit cars, remove fire places from houses, forbid to
> > > import incense, find a wat to totally prevent forest fires and much more.
> >
> > You're not paying attention, you can and should smoke, shoot, snort all
> > the drugs you want, IN THE PRIVACY OF YOUR OWN HOME.
> >
>
> Nope. I think I'll smoke in the smoking section of restaurants.
Not when they finish outlawing those sections...
> You
> won't come sit in my section will you? That would really ruin my meal.
No, I'll just vomit or urinate or defecate in your direction as soon as your
food is being served, 'cause after all "I have a right to urinate and vomit and
defecate", therefore I have a right to do it in public places, just like stinky
wretched addicted smokers.
>
> > Do you need further clarification Weil?
> >
>
> Please. You haven't clarified a thing yet.
Are you Weil now too ?
>
> > >
> > > > > But on the other side there are these people that think that they can impose
> > > > > their ideas on others and are not able to search for and find compromises.
> > > >
> > > > In public, you bet. Just look around, there are new laws, prohibitions and
> > > > restrictions passed almost every single day, almost all due to offensive
> > > > smoking in PUBLIC.
> > >
> > > Like 50 years ago it won't have a long life.
> >
> > Wishful thinking.
> >
>
> Hmmmm, wonder why buildings are spending money to build smoking lounges
> <pondering>.
Hmmmm, wonder why localities are continually passing new restrictions
and prohibitions on public smoking ... <not ponderous>
>
>
> > > >
> > > > It is you smokers, drug addicts, who are fooling yourselves into thinking
> > > > that society must somehow allow, tolerate or compromise to accommodate
> > > > your wretched, offensive drug addiction. No other drug addict groups are
> > > making
> > > > such ridiculous demands on the majority of society.
> > >
> > > That's because they are such a big minority.
> >
> > They still deserve no special rights that the other drug addict minorities
> > don't enjoy.
> >
>
>
> Tobacco is legal.
It is restricted as to manner and method of consumption, just like Alcohol.
> Sheeeesh, you're so dense. And it ain't gonna be
> illegalized either. Cash cow, ya know.
"illegalized" ... must be a mensa word ...
>
>
> > > >
> > > > And like most of the smoking idiots in this group, you are squandering
> > > > the biggest compromise that society will ever offer you:
> > > >
> > > > Smoke all you want in YOUR OWN HOME. or
> > > > continue to face more restrictions, laws, and prohibitions
> > > > if you continue to violate the PUBLIC PLACES with your
> > > > putrid effluent.
> > > >
> > > > It really is quite simple.
> > >
> > > This way you'll loose 50% of your country's workforce...
> >
> > Do tell why?
> >
> > >
>
>
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the best examples for that is the smoking bans in airplanes. It's
> > > > > totalitarian!
> > > >
> > > > And needs to be, because it has been proven time and time again
> > > > that the drug addict cannot be trusted to moderate or consider others
> > > > when driven by, and pendant to, the monkey on their back.
> > >
> > > REPEAT: See Air France
> >
> > Piss on France. They don't bathe, their olfactory senses are dead.
>
>
> And *this* <pointing to Jerri> is the ignorant dolt we're conversing
> with. Keep it up Jerri. The lurkers are getting your full flavor now.
How can they get my flavor over the wretch and puke of your putrid
stink ?
>
> > >
> > > > > Or the sadists that like to see smokers go out in the cold so that they feel
> > > > > better themselves..
> > > >
> > > > Or go out in the "warm", or simply contain you drug addiction to the
> > > > privacy of you own home, like most other junkies, heroin abusers,
> > > > crack addicts, etc etc. You don't hear them clamoring for some concession
> > > > to be able to fix-up in public places, legally protected.
> > >
> > > What's an addict? You have addicts that are able to work and addicts that
> > > can't.
> >
> > You are an addict, you have admitted as much.
> >
>
<nonsense snipped>
Wiel
feeling about this intolerant, anti-social nitwit like you did, Alex!
--
Wiel
"Alex W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8r34ea$4bo$1...@sshuraac-i-1.production.compuserve.com...
>
Audrey
>
> Audrey <"102776,1270"@compuserve.com> wrote in message
> news:39D511CD...@compuserve.com...
> > Jerri Blavittł wrote:
> > >
> > > Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:8r1s75$djc$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
> > > >
> > > > "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote in message
> > > > news:%DRA5.1010$GJ.2...@news.uswest.net...
> > > > >
> > > > > Wiel <wi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:8r0cgv$b05$1...@porthos.nl.uu.net...
> > > > > > Many of us are reasonable people that won't lit a cig when there are people
> > > > > > around that really have problems with the smoke.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Bzzzt. That is 95% of the problem, most smokers/addicts DO NOT respect
> > > > > the airspace of others when in public, they erroneously think they
> > > > > have some right to smoke in public, which of course they do not.
> > > >
> > > > 95% of non-smokers are more tolerant than you are!
> > >
> > > Nope, or there wouldn't be the avalanche of new laws and prohibitions
> > > against public smoking, You inconsiderate smokers have abused and worn out
> > > your welcome, now it's back to you own home to fix up, just like all the other
> > > drug addicts ... or are you claiming that you should have some special right
> > > that other drug addicts don't ?
> >
> > Tobacco is legal <HEEHEE>. What other argument ya got?
>
> So it alcohol ... but you can't drink it in public (outside a bar/tavern)
> now can you ?
Because it is an intoxicant. Next item! <bang gavel>
> Same with tobacco, it is a heavily restricted drug,
It's not an intoxicant.
and one of the restrictions
> is rapidly forcing you to remain at home to fix up,
Fix up? My hair? Yes, that I do at home. Smoking I do in front of
your house and in the smoking sections of restaurants.
because you abused
> your welcome far too long ....
'bout 100 years, huh?
> >
> > > >
> > > > > Smoke all you want at home, no body wants to stop that, but in public
> > > > > places addicted smokers WILL refrain from fixing their drug addiction
> > > > > or face the wrath of the non-smoking society and the laws and criminal
> > > > > prohibitions that get foisted upon you for such offensive public behavior.
> > > >
> > > > Non-smoking society is a situation that will NEVER exist.
> > >
> > > Correct, smoke all you want, IN YOUR OWN HOME.
> >
> > Guess what? I'm smoking right outside your front door <doin' a jig>.
>
> And I'm pissing on your head from the roof ... hurry look up!
>
Too short a hose to reach me. ::puff::
> > > > Unless you demolish
> > > > lots of buildings, prohibit cars, remove fire places from houses, forbid to
> > > > import incense, find a wat to totally prevent forest fires and much more.
> > >
> > > You're not paying attention, you can and should smoke, shoot, snort all
> > > the drugs you want, IN THE PRIVACY OF YOUR OWN HOME.
> > >
> >
> > Nope. I think I'll smoke in the smoking section of restaurants.
>
> Not when they finish outlawing those sections...
Nah, then I'll just go to all those buildings where they are in the
process of building smoking lounges. They're real nice too.
> > You
> > won't come sit in my section will you? That would really ruin my meal.
>
> No, I'll just vomit or urinate or defecate in your direction as soon as your
> food is being served, 'cause after all "I have a right to urinate and vomit and
> defecate", therefore I have a right to do it in public places, just like stinky
> wretched addicted smokers.
Heehee, that's all you losers have as a comparison. Must be tough
worked with such limitations.
> >
> > > Do you need further clarification Weil?
> > >
> >
> > Please. You haven't clarified a thing yet.
>
> Are you Weil now too ?
>
Can't believe that more than 1 person has the same ideals about smoking?
Infuriates you that we are a larger group than you think.
> > > >
> > > > > > But on the other side there are these people that think that they can impose
> > > > > > their ideas on others and are not able to search for and find compromises.
> > > > >
> > > > > In public, you bet. Just look around, there are new laws, prohibitions and
> > > > > restrictions passed almost every single day, almost all due to offensive
> > > > > smoking in PUBLIC.
> > > >
> > > > Like 50 years ago it won't have a long life.
> > >
> > > Wishful thinking.
> > >
> >
> > Hmmmm, wonder why buildings are spending money to build smoking lounges
> > <pondering>.
>
> Hmmmm, wonder why localities are continually passing new restrictions
> and prohibitions on public smoking ... <not ponderous>
>
Not pondering? That's your problem right there! I think you had
better. You're lulling yourself into a false sense of security.
> >
> > > > >
> > > > > It is you smokers, drug addicts, who are fooling yourselves into thinking
> > > > > that society must somehow allow, tolerate or compromise to accommodate
> > > > > your wretched, offensive drug addiction. No other drug addict groups are
> > > > making
> > > > > such ridiculous demands on the majority of society.
> > > >
> > > > That's because they are such a big minority.
> > >
> > > They still deserve no special rights that the other drug addict minorities
> > > don't enjoy.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Tobacco is legal.
>
> It is restricted as to manner and method of consumption, just like Alcohol.
Hardly. No one "cuts me off" because I've had one cigarette too many.
> > Sheeeesh, you're so dense. And it ain't gonna be
> > illegalized either. Cash cow, ya know.
>
> "illegalized" ... must be a mensa word ...
>
> >
Picking on vocabulary is an expression of no other ideas.
> > > > >
> > > > > And like most of the smoking idiots in this group, you are squandering
> > > > > the biggest compromise that society will ever offer you:
> > > > >
> > > > > Smoke all you want in YOUR OWN HOME. or
> > > > > continue to face more restrictions, laws, and prohibitions
> > > > > if you continue to violate the PUBLIC PLACES with your
> > > > > putrid effluent.
> > > > >
> > > > > It really is quite simple.
> > > >
> > > > This way you'll loose 50% of your country's workforce...
> > >
> > > Do tell why?
> > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One of the best examples for that is the smoking bans in airplanes. It's
> > > > > > totalitarian!
> > > > >
> > > > > And needs to be, because it has been proven time and time again
> > > > > that the drug addict cannot be trusted to moderate or consider others
> > > > > when driven by, and pendant to, the monkey on their back.
> > > >
> > > > REPEAT: See Air France
> > >
> > > Piss on France. They don't bathe, their olfactory senses are dead.
> >
> >
> > And *this* <pointing to Jerri> is the ignorant dolt we're conversing
> > with. Keep it up Jerri. The lurkers are getting your full flavor now.
>
> How can they get my flavor over the wretch and puke of your putrid
> stink ?
>
See how ignorant you continue to be?
> > > > > > Or the sadists that like to see smokers go out in the cold so that they feel
> > > > > > better themselves..
> > > > >
> > > > > Or go out in the "warm", or simply contain you drug addiction to the
> > > > > privacy of you own home, like most other junkies, heroin abusers,
> > > > > crack addicts, etc etc. You don't hear them clamoring for some concession
> > > > > to be able to fix-up in public places, legally protected.
> > > >
> > > > What's an addict? You have addicts that are able to work and addicts that
> > > > can't.
> > >
> > > You are an addict, you have admitted as much.
> > >
> >
> <nonsense snipped>
> > > > > Get real.
ROARRRRRRRRRRRRR!! You snipped the part that showed you what a maroon
you are. ROFL!! How pathetic!!
Here ya go.... so everyone can see what stumped you:
Lets's see <perusing today's newspaper>.... Hmmm, got an editorial
right here talking about Hollywood. And I quote.., "As Daily News film
reviewer Jack Mathews pointed out in a column yesterday, children ages
12 to 17 'represent a disproportionate percentage of Hollywood's
customers, and they have become habituated - if not addicted - to
contemporary big screen violence.' How many of you vote for "addicted?""
Seems that word "addicted" is applicable to just about anything if you
feel like using the word. Sort of loses it's meaning, dontcha think
Jerri?
According to you I'm about as addicted to my cigarette as I am to big
screen violence. Oh no, Mr. Bill!
> > > > My last contribution to one of your posts.
Anthony Cresap
Texas Rankings Under Bush: Do you Want Some of This? (See sources of data,
below.)
AUSTIN, TEXAS -- A look at Texas under Bush: National Ranking Among 50 States
The Education Governor of Texas
Teacher salaries at beginning of 1st term 36 (1)
Teacher salaries at beginning of 2nd term 38 (1)
% Change in Average Salaries 1989-99 constant $ -1.1% (1)
Teacher salaries plus benefits 50 (1)
High school completion rate 48 (2)
SAT scores - 1996 combined math & verbal: 995 44 (13)
SAT scores - 1997 combined math & verbal: 995 45 (13)
SAT scores - 1998 combined math & verbal: 995 44 (13)
Bush Family Values in Texas
Highest number of children living in poverty 2 (3)
Highest number of children without health insurance 2 (3)
Highest % of children without health insurance 1 (3)
Highest % of poor working parents without insurance 1 (3)
Highest % of population without health insurance 2 (3)
Highest number of people stripped of Medicare benefits 1 (10)
Highest teen birth rate 5 (4)
Per capita funding for public health 48 (4)
Delivery of social services 47 (4)
Mothers receiving prenatal care 45 (9)
Child support collections 45 (3)
Number of executions 1 (11)
Teen smoking - down nationally, flat in Texas (5)
Teen drug use - down nationally, up 30% in Texas w/ Bush (5)
Pollution in Texas
Pollution released by manufacturing plants 1 (6)
Pollution by industrial plants in violation of Clean Air Act 1 (6)
Greenhouse gas emissions 1 (6)
Quality of Life in Texas
Spending for parks and recreation 48 (7)
Spending for the arts 48 (7)
Public libraries and branches 46 (8)
Spending for the environment 49 (7)
Best place to raise children 48 (9)
Affordable Housing 48 (12)
Home ownership 44 (2)
Highest homes insurance rates in the nation 1 (11)
Spending for police protection 47 (12)
Sources: (1) National Education Agency, Rankings & Estimates: Rankings of the
States 1999 (2) U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research
and Development (3) U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Populations Trends (4)
U.S. Dept Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics
(5)1998 Texas School Survey of Substance Use Among Students: Grades 7-12,
Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse (6) U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution
and Prevention (7) Texas Observer (8) Statistical Rankings by State (9)
Children's Rights Council (10) Families USA
(11) National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(12) U.S. Bureau of Census, State Government Finances 1998 (13) College
Examination Board
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
"Kyoteee" <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:8s4bts8qao4tobk8p...@4ax.com...
> "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote:
>
> >What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
> >to have a problem understanding ....?
>
No, it'll just make it smell.
--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
msch...@carolina.rr.com.nospam
http://members.nbci.com/_XMCM/WorstNurse/
Audrey
>
> "Kyoteee" <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:8s4bts8qao4tobk8p...@4ax.com...
> > "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote:
> >
> > >What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
> > >to have a problem understanding ....?
> >
> > We'd rather smoking in *your* home. It'll make it smell better.
>
> No, it'll just make it smell.
>
"Smell" is in the nose of the beholder.
amused by pain
--
Success is counted sweetest
by those who ne'er succeed.
To comprehend a nectar
Requires the sorest need.
Jerri Blavittł
Audrey <10277...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:39D6907C...@compuserve.com...
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> >
> > "Kyoteee" <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > news:8s4bts8qao4tobk8p...@4ax.com...
> > > "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote:
> > >
> > > >What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
> > > >to have a problem understanding ....?
> > >
> > > We'd rather smoking in *your* home. It'll make it smell better.
> >
> > No, it'll just make it smell.
> >
>
> "Smell" is in the nose of the beholder.
>
Cancer is in the body of the smoker ....
hah ahhahah hahhahahh hahahah!
PS:
Do you know that if all the smokers were laid end to end
around the world, three quarters of them would drown?
--------------------
Jerri Blavittł
amused by pain <nos...@isp.com> wrote in message news:39D6D112...@isp.com...
> your point is?
>
--
---------------------
Audrey
Jerri Blavittł wrote:
>
> Audrey <10277...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
> news:39D6907C...@compuserve.com...
> > Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> > >
> > > "Kyoteee" <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > > news:8s4bts8qao4tobk8p...@4ax.com...
> > > > "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
> > > > >to have a problem understanding ....?
> > > >
> > > > We'd rather smoking in *your* home. It'll make it smell better.
> > >
> > > No, it'll just make it smell.
> > >
> >
> > "Smell" is in the nose of the beholder.
> >
>
> Cancer is in the body of the smoker ....
>
> hah ahhahah hahhahahh hahahah!
American Cancer Society says the lifetime risk for ANYONE getting cancer
is 1 in 2 for men and 1 in 3 for women.
Neaner, neaner, neaner... I've got a better chance than you do of not
getting any sort of cancer. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
You really should stop being in denial about death. You're gonna die,
ya know.
Steve George
<10277...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>Jerri Blavittł wrote:
>>
>> Audrey <"102776,1270"@compuserve.com> wrote in message
>> > Tobacco is legal <HEEHEE>. What other argument ya got?
>>
>> So it alcohol ... but you can't drink it in public (outside a bar/tavern)
>> now can you ?
>
>Because it is an intoxicant. Next item! <bang gavel>
>
>> Same with tobacco, it is a heavily restricted drug,
>
>It's not an intoxicant.
>
> and one of the restrictions
>> is rapidly forcing you to remain at home to fix up,
>
>Fix up? My hair? Yes, that I do at home. Smoking I do in front of
>your house and in the smoking sections of restaurants.
>
> because you abused
>> your welcome far too long ....
>
>'bout 100 years, huh?
>
Do these people LIE THROUGH THEIR TEETH, or WHAT...?
How could one MISS that little "intoxication" thing, but a LIAR...?(!)
While the PILOTS were EXEMPTED from the in-flight bans, no less..(!)
Sitting at the restaurant, "Gosh, that SHS is SOOO scarry, let's go
outside and choke down some SMOG!!!"
What SHIT PEOPLE. They ABSOLUTELY *DESERVE* the Death of Hospitality (and
ALL that goes with this).
Steve G
--
** Did you know that if all the antis were laid end to
** end around the world, they wouldn't get across the city of
** Memphis...? Of course, they never would get laid...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Steve George
kyo...@mindspring.com wrote:
>amused by pain <nos...@isp.com> wrote:
>
>>your point is?
>
>Who you talkin' to, boy?
(So many pointlesses to choose from...)
Steve George
<n...@never.no> wrote:
>Audrey <10277...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
>news:39D6907C...@compuserve.com...
>> Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>> >
>> > "Kyoteee" <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> > news:8s4bts8qao4tobk8p...@4ax.com...
>> > > "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
>> > > >to have a problem understanding ....?
>> > >
>> > > We'd rather smoking in *your* home. It'll make it smell better.
>> >
>> > No, it'll just make it smell.
>> >
>>
>> "Smell" is in the nose of the beholder.
>>
>
>Cancer is in the body of the smoker ....
>
>hah ahhahah hahhahahh hahahah!
>
>PS:
>Do you know that if all the smokers were laid end to end
>around the world, three quarters of them would drown?
>--------------------
Steve George
Audrey
Steve George wrote:
>
> In article <wDBB5.562$Oj3.6...@news.uswest.net>, "Jerri Blavittł"
> <n...@never.no> wrote:
>
> >Audrey <10277...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
> >news:39D6907C...@compuserve.com...
> >> Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Kyoteee" <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:8s4bts8qao4tobk8p...@4ax.com...
> >> > > "Jerri Blavittł" <n...@never.no> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > >What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
> >> > > >to have a problem understanding ....?
> >> > >
> >> > > We'd rather smoking in *your* home. It'll make it smell better.
> >> >
> >> > No, it'll just make it smell.
> >> >
> >>
> >> "Smell" is in the nose of the beholder.
> >>
> >
> >Cancer is in the body of the smoker ....
> >
> >hah ahhahah hahhahahh hahahah!
> >
> >PS:
> >Do you know that if all the smokers were laid end to end
> >around the world, three quarters of them would drown?
> >--------------------
Steve George
<n...@never.no> wrote (at Alex W.):
>What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
>to have a problem understanding ....?
YOUR rather presumptuous notion of a "right" to MANDATE such a thing...?
>Uncooperative drug addicts WILL be legislated into compliance ...
>or into prison!
Please inform the next Dr. Einstein -- we will strive to arrange that his
superior theoretical work can be transmitted to us over computer, thank
you.
Yeah, when parasites no longer need the money, and insects rule.
--
** Did you know that if all the antis were laid end to
** end around the world, they wouldn't get across the city of
** Memphis...? Of course, you could never get them laid... ( ;] )
Alex W.
Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
news:stgeorge-011...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> Hint: It's WORTH it, just to NOT be so bloody STUPID.
Can we stop hinting and start hitting him over the head with a fence
post?
Audrey
Steve George
W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
>news:stgeorge-011...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
>> Hint: It's WORTH it, just to NOT be so bloody STUPID.
>
>Can we stop hinting and start hitting him over the head with a fence
>post?
Yes, and I'll help. That was just for the audience's benefit, you really
think *I* think this joker's gonna take a hint...?
That's a fundamental problem, y'know. Explaining stupidity to the stupid.
S
Alex W.
Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> In article <8ra7hi$1li$1...@sshuraaa-i-1.production.compuserve.com>,
"Alex
> W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> >news:stgeorge-011...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> >> Hint: It's WORTH it, just to NOT be so bloody STUPID.
> >
> >Can we stop hinting and start hitting him over the head with a
fence
> >post?
>
> Yes, and I'll help. That was just for the audience's benefit, you
really
> think *I* think this joker's gonna take a hint...?
>
> That's a fundamental problem, y'know. Explaining stupidity to the
stupid.
>
> S
... and fundamentally futile.
They'll never get it.
They lack the capacity.
You can whip a donkey to the water, but you can drown him before he
will drink...
Alex
Steve George
W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
>news:stgeorge-031...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
>> In article <8ra7hi$1li$1...@sshuraaa-i-1.production.compuserve.com>,
>"Alex
>> W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
>> >news:stgeorge-011...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
>> >> Hint: It's WORTH it, just to NOT be so bloody STUPID.
>> >
>> >Can we stop hinting and start hitting him over the head with a
>fence
>> >post?
>>
>> Yes, and I'll help. That was just for the audience's benefit, you
>really
>> think *I* think this joker's gonna take a hint...?
>>
>> That's a fundamental problem, y'know. Explaining stupidity to the
>stupid.
>>
>> S
>
>... and fundamentally futile.
>They'll never get it.
>They lack the capacity.
>
>You can whip a donkey to the water, but you can drown him before he
>will drink...
>
>Alex
Suggesting there IS a God, heh heh...
Alex W.
Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> In article <8rc0j5$d49$1...@sshuraac-i-1.production.compuserve.com>,> >news:stgeorge-031...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> >> In article <8ra7hi$1li$1...@sshuraaa-i-1.production.compuserve.com>,
> >"Alex
> >> W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> >> >news:stgeorge-011...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> >> >> Hint: It's WORTH it, just to NOT be so bloody STUPID.
> >> >
> >> >Can we stop hinting and start hitting him over the head with a
> >fence
> >> >post?
> >>
> >> Yes, and I'll help. That was just for the audience's benefit,
you
> >really
> >> think *I* think this joker's gonna take a hint...?
> >>
> >> That's a fundamental problem, y'know. Explaining stupidity to
the
> >stupid.
> >>
> >> S
> >
> >They'll never get it.
> >They lack the capacity.
> >
> >You can whip a donkey to the water, but you can drown him before he
> >will drink...
> >
> >Alex
>
> Suggesting there IS a God, heh heh...
... and His name is Darwin.
Or is it just Karmic Justice?
Stupidity is a minority gene. Otherwise we'd never have made it this
far. So be optimistic...
Steve George
W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
>news:stgeorge-031...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
>> In article <8rc0j5$d49$1...@sshuraac-i-1.production.compuserve.com>,
>"Alex
>> W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
>> >news:stgeorge-031...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
>> >> In article <8ra7hi$1li$1...@sshuraaa-i-1.production.compuserve.com>,
>> >"Alex
>> >> W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
>> >> >news:stgeorge-011...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
>> >> >> Hint: It's WORTH it, just to NOT be so bloody STUPID.
>> >> >
>> >> >Can we stop hinting and start hitting him over the head with a
>> >fence
>> >> >post?
>> >>
>> >> Yes, and I'll help. That was just for the audience's benefit,
>you
>> >really
>> >> think *I* think this joker's gonna take a hint...?
>> >>
>> >> That's a fundamental problem, y'know. Explaining stupidity to
>the
>> >stupid.
>> >>
>> >> S
>> >
>> >... and fundamentally futile.
>> >They'll never get it.
>> >They lack the capacity.
>> >
>> >You can whip a donkey to the water, but you can drown him before he
>> >will drink...
>> >
>> >Alex
>>
>> Suggesting there IS a God, heh heh...
>
>... and His name is Darwin.
>Or is it just Karmic Justice?
Contempt for Mankind (Well-Earned) is my current "take." Not sure about
outcome-formation... But free will sure looks like a loser, for 'em.
Just not raised and schooled to be bright enough to remotely handle the
concept, and retain "society."
Let alone how they "do" each other, how glibly they betray, etc.
>Stupidity is a minority gene. Otherwise we'd never have made it this
>far. So be optimistic...
Well, OTOH, remember that when even a teen is slated for the firing squad
the next morning, you do tend to stop worrying about his education level.
IOW, it might not matter so much how WRONG we get it, if the returns are
pretty much already well in.
So cheer up, as they always say, it has to get worse, if even to get
better. ( ;] )
Civilization would prefer to preserve human life AND freedom, but it was
NOT intended to be suicidal, was it..?
Steve G
Steve George
W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
<snip to add'l point>
>Stupidity is a minority gene. Otherwise we'd never have made it this
>far. So be optimistic...
One thing I'll grant you here, Alex. If/when people ever wise up to form
(incl means) vs content (incl intent) issues, they might SEE that IF they
would LIE to you with speeches and presentations, billboards and handouts,
even chalk and blackboards, and ALL that, then WHAT do you think they're
gonna DO when they get their grubby little mitts on COMPUTERS..?(!!)
But what I LIKE is that there seem to be a whole lot MORE people who get
"really pissed OFF" when they DO it with the COMPUTERS.
Or, at least you can SEE a lot more OF these, heh heh...
Either way, it gives me much more cause for "optimism," yep.
Jerri Blavittł
Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> In article <awdB5.2261$Ih1.3...@news.uswest.net>, "Jerri Blavittł"
> <n...@never.no> wrote (at Alex W.):
>
> >What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
> >to have a problem understanding ....?
>
> YOUR rather presumptuous notion of a "right" to MANDATE such a thing...?
All other drug addicts are mandated and legislated to keep their
filthy addictions inside their own wretched abodes, or, like illegal
public smokers, risk arrest and imprisonment, and immediate cold-turkey
cure ....!
>
> >Uncooperative drug addicts WILL be legislated into compliance ...
> >or into prison!
>
> Please inform the next Dr. Einstein -- we will strive to arrange that his
> superior theoretical work can be transmitted to us over computer, thank
> you.
>
> Yeah, when parasites no longer need the money, and insects rule.
And building prisons to house illegal smokers is good for
blue collar workers .... you wouldn't "fuck people up on jobs"
over this would you Stevie ...?
Bruce Watson
>
>Bzzzt. That is 95% of the problem, most smokers/addicts DO NOT respect
>the airspace of others when in public, they erroneously think they
>have some right to smoke in public, which of course they do not.
Not true. Most smokers respect the rules when told to do so.
Yes, they moan and whine but they do it.
When airlines were banning smoking, Big Tobacco predicted a
"smoker rebellion" with the airlines backing down.
To their horror, it didn't happen. They moaned and whined and suffered
withdrawal and a very few went postal but the airlines are smokefree. It's
difficult to find any in the world who still permit it. And the smokers
obey the rule.
The belligerent ones were prosecuted and probably went through a
nightmare of nicotine withdrawal as a result of their punishment.
No smoker honestly wants to do that. Hence the compliance.
Bruce Watson
Jerri Blavittł <n...@never.no> wrote to Weil.:
>>
>> My last contribution to one of your posts.
>>
>> Go Kill file...
>
>That's the 5th time you have made the "last contribution" and
>killfiled me ... can't deny the reality can you ?
They just can't ignore the truth.
It's a cry for help.
Bruce Watson
Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
<Nazi reference deleted>
>You can rave and posture all
>you want, but you will never, ever have a non-smoking society. You
>will never have a drug-free society.
But we can drive it so far underground it will be nearly invisible.
Audrey
Alex W. wrote:
>
> Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> news:stgeorge-031...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> > In article <8ra7hi$1li$1...@sshuraaa-i-1.production.compuserve.com>,
> "Alex
> > W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > >Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> > >news:stgeorge-011...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> > >> Hint: It's WORTH it, just to NOT be so bloody STUPID.
> > >
> > >Can we stop hinting and start hitting him over the head with a
> fence
> > >post?
> >
> > Yes, and I'll help. That was just for the audience's benefit, you
> really
> > think *I* think this joker's gonna take a hint...?
> >
> > That's a fundamental problem, y'know. Explaining stupidity to the
> stupid.
> >
> > S
>
Audrey
Steve George
kyo...@mindspring.com wrote:
>anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
>
>>Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>><Nazi reference deleted>
>
>Why? Can't look yourself in the mirror, huh? Too accurate for you to
>deal with?
>
>>>You can rave and posture all
>>>you want, but you will never, ever have a non-smoking society. You
>>>will never have a drug-free society.
>>
>>But we can drive it so far underground it will be nearly invisible.
>
>How very Nazi of you to say that.
Hey, and relatively safe from all the new plane crashes, don't forget...
( ;] )
David MacLean
the same post. I guess that must be a challenge to those who think that
Bruce cannot walk and chew gum at the same time.
But not really.
"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
news:97061811...@irys.nyx.net...
David MacLean
experience with the odor.
<sarcasm>Pretty far underground, isn't it Bruce?<\sarcasm>
(Clean up on aisle six)
"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
news:97061996...@irys.nyx.net...
David MacLean
"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
news:97061966...@irys.nyx.net...
> In article <pP4B5.1990$Ih1.1...@news.uswest.net>,
> Jerri Blavitt³ <n...@never.no> wrote to Weil.:
David MacLean
"Kyoteee" <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:u0slts81ha66tf3bq...@4ax.com...
> anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
>
> >Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> ><Nazi reference deleted>
>
> Why? Can't look yourself in the mirror, huh? Too accurate for you to
> deal with?
>
> >>You can rave and posture all
> >>you want, but you will never, ever have a non-smoking society. You
> >>will never have a drug-free society.
> >
> >But we can drive it so far underground it will be nearly invisible.
>
David MacLean
"Steve George" <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
news:stgeorge-041...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> In article <u0slts81ha66tf3bq...@4ax.com>,
> kyo...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> >anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >>>
> >><Nazi reference deleted>
> >
> >Why? Can't look yourself in the mirror, huh? Too accurate for you to
> >deal with?
> >
> >>>You can rave and posture all
> >>>you want, but you will never, ever have a non-smoking society. You
> >>>will never have a drug-free society.
> >>
> >>But we can drive it so far underground it will be nearly invisible.
> >
> >How very Nazi of you to say that.
>
Steve George
<david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
>Why lookee here. Bruce cut and paste AND changed the subject line, all in
>the same post. I guess that must be a challenge to those who think that
>Bruce cannot walk and chew gum at the same time.
>
>But not really.
>
>"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
>news:97061811...@irys.nyx.net...
Monkey see, monkey doo-doo.
Jerri Blavittł
David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> coughed in message
news:8rf7gk$5nl$1...@dagger.ab.videon.ca...
> Audrey's work is never done. <grin>
>
That's all she is capable of, she has truly risen to her
station in life, not being able to reply/converse in entire sentences,
paragraphs, ideas and thoughts, she is reduced to the simpletons job
of cleaning lady, barely able to repost, merely able to change the
subject lines, but thinking she is somehow creating/doing something
useful/productive ...
Suck suck suck Audrey, it is your only skill ...
> "StinkyOtee" <kyo...@mindspring.com> stank in message
> news:u0slts81ha66tf3bq...@4ax.com...
> > anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
> >
> >
> > >Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > >>
> > ><Nazi reference deleted>
> >
> > Why? Can't look yourself in the mirror, huh? Too accurate for you to
> > deal with?
> >
> > >>You can rave and posture all
> > >>you want, but you will never, ever have a non-smoking society. You
> > >>will never have a drug-free society.
> > >
> > >But we can drive it so far underground it will be nearly invisible.
> >
Audrey
>
> Audrey shouldn't be the only one responsible for cleanup.
Awww, bwess you David :-) I'm starting to get dishpan hands.
> "Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
> news:97061966...@irys.nyx.net...
Audrey
>
> Audrey's work is never done. <grin>
<ggl>
> "Kyoteee" <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:u0slts81ha66tf3bq...@4ax.com...
> > anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
> >
> >
> > >Alex W. <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > >>
> > ><Nazi reference deleted>
> >
> > Why? Can't look yourself in the mirror, huh? Too accurate for you to
> > deal with?
> >
> > >>You can rave and posture all
> > >>you want, but you will never, ever have a non-smoking society. You
> > >>will never have a drug-free society.
> > >
> > >But we can drive it so far underground it will be nearly invisible.
> >
Alex W.
David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote in message
news:8rf787$7hc$1...@dagger.ab.videon.ca...
> Why lookee here. Bruce cut and paste AND changed the subject line,
all in
> the same post. I guess that must be a challenge to those who think
that
> Bruce cannot walk and chew gum at the same time.
>
> But not really.
Whoever said remedial education is a waste of money?
If you can teach Bruce new tricks....
Steve George
Watson) wrote:
>In article <awdB5.2261$Ih1.3...@news.uswest.net>,
>>
>> <snipped off point quasi-literate intoxicated rambling>
>>
>>What part of "DO IT IN YOUR OWN HOME" do you seem
>>to have a problem understanding ....?
>>
>>Uncooperative drug addicts WILL be legislated into compliance ...
>>or into prison!
>
>Smokers have already seen themselves smokeless at the office,
>in airplanes, in airports, in many restaurants (the number
>of which growing every day), and in bars in some places.
>
>It didn't used to be this way. The trend is clearly against
>public smoking.
>
>Jerri is not threatening you. Jerri is warning you of what
>you can expect.
>
>Learn to live with it or quit smoking.
>
>Those are your only choices.
BZZZZT!!! WE SMOKE AND WE VOTE, MORON. TOO BAD *YOU* WEREN'T AT GERZY'S
INTELLECTUAL LEVEL.
BUT WE KNOW, YOU'RE "USED TO IT."
--
** Oh Lordy, what are we gonna DO with out *nicotinnic* receptors NOW..?
** Or WITHOUT them..(!) Yep, that IS the *scientific* name for 'em.
** (TELL us how "God didn't make little green apples...")
Bruce Watson
Bruce Watson
David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
>Ten to one Bruce knows what burning marijuana smells like, and has recent
>experience with the odor.
>
><sarcasm>Pretty far underground, isn't it Bruce?<\sarcasm>
About three years ago I smelled marijuana smoke.
I smelled tobacco smoke today.
Audrey
Well then, how far underground does that tell you it has gone?
rumik
> anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
> >David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
> >>Ten to one Bruce knows what burning marijuana smells like, and has recent
> >>experience with the odor.
> >>
> >><sarcasm>Pretty far underground, isn't it Bruce?<\sarcasm>
> >
> >About three years ago I smelled marijuana smoke.
> >
> >I smelled tobacco smoke today.
>
> Did you put your cigarette out in a proper receptacle?
Umm ... I'd like to put my cigarettes out in ... er, ... *his* receptacle.
Make him scream with joy.
David MacLean
"Alex W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8rgbn2$h7a$1...@sshuraab-i-1.production.compuserve.com...
It comes down to a measure of the cost involved in that remedial education.
Case in point: it took six years for Bruce to learn to combine cutting and
pasting with changing the subject line. Multiply that by all the Bruce
clones on the anti-smoker side and you'll find that the world does not have
the resources to afford this remedial education.
David MacLean
Bruce, there's a very simple solution for your aversion to tobacco smoke.
Quit smoking.
Bruce Watson
Marijuana, very far.
Tobacco, not far enough.
But watch tobacco approach it.
Bruce Watson
David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
>
>"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
>news:97070575...@irys.nyx.net...
>Quit smoking.
Pretty lame, David.
You get my point, don't you?
The "drug war" is supposed to be such a big failure. Well, it's driven
drug use way underground. Even you have to admit that. The "war" on
tobacco can accomplish the same thing. That's pretty much the only thing
every nonsmoker wants.
Bruce Watson
David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
>
>Case in point: it took six years for Bruce to learn to combine cutting and
>pasting with changing the subject line.
I've changed subject lines years ago. I don't see it doing much
good. It is a bother. Gerzy will soon stop it, too.
I didn't change the subject line of this thread.
Are you all right, David?
You just don't seem to have the same pride you used to have. You
have descended to insults, one liners, and fabrications.
Is your son using your computer without your permission?
Or is someone forging these posts?
David MacLean
David MacLean
> In article <8rhrun$vmb$1...@dagger.ab.videon.ca>,
> David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
> >
> >"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
> >Quit smoking.
>
> Pretty lame, David.
>
> You get my point, don't you?
>
> The "drug war" is supposed to be such a big failure. Well, it's driven
> drug use way underground. Even you have to admit that. The "war" on
> tobacco can accomplish the same thing. That's pretty much the only thing
> every nonsmoker wants.
You're confusing nonsmoker with antismoker again, Bruce. And if you smelled
marijuana smoke even three years ago when you, as an old grouch, could
hardly be expected to frequent youth haunts, then drug use is not as
"underground" as you imagine.
But then, you are quite comfortable with your delusions, aren't you?
David MacLean
Make a serious effort to buy some, Bruce. It's not at all "very far".
>
> Tobacco, not far enough.
In your opinion. Your opinion and a token will get you a ride on the NY
subway.
>
> But watch tobacco approach it.
Actually, I'm quite relieved to here you say it, Bruce, as an outright
prognostication. Considering your track record, it means that smokers have
seen the worst.
Bruce Watson
David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
>
>"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
>> In article <8rhqk0$vfk$1...@dagger.ab.videon.ca>,
>> David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Case in point: it took six years for Bruce to learn to combine cutting
>and
>> >pasting with changing the subject line.
>>
>> I've changed subject lines years ago. I don't see it doing much
>> good. It is a bother. Gerzy will soon stop it, too.
>>
>> I didn't change the subject line of this thread.
>>
>> Are you all right, David?
>>
>> You just don't seem to have the same pride you used to have. You
>> have descended to insults, one liners, and fabrications.
>>
>> Is your son using your computer without your permission?
>>
>> Or is someone forging these posts?
>>
>
>Yes. No. No.
Then something is very wrong with David.
Steve George
Watson) wrote (to David MacLean):
>The "drug war" is supposed to be such a big failure. Well, it's driven
>drug use way underground. Even you have to admit that. The "war" on
>tobacco can accomplish the same thing. That's pretty much the only thing
>every nonsmoker wants.
Could you cite your source for THAT statement...?
Jerri Blavittł
Bruce Watson <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message news:97079014...@irys.nyx.net...
Interesting observation Bruce, it does appear as if David
has lost something close to his soul, his posts are decidedly
different ... perhaps the self loathing of addiction has caught up
with him ...?
--
"Did you really think we want those laws observed? said Dr. Ferris.
We WANT them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's
not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against.... We're after power
and we mean it .... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only
power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Well, when there aren't enough criminals one MAKES them. One
declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible
for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law
abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass
the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or
objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers--
and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system Mr. Reardon,
that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier
to deal with." --Ayn Rand
Steve George
Watson) wrote:
>In article <8ri0v8$3gn$1...@dagger.ab.videon.ca>,
>David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
>>news:97075277...@irys.nyx.net...
>>> In article <8rhqk0$vfk$1...@dagger.ab.videon.ca>,
>>> David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >Case in point: it took six years for Bruce to learn to combine cutting
>>and
>>> >pasting with changing the subject line.
>>>
>>> I've changed subject lines years ago. I don't see it doing much
>>> good. It is a bother. Gerzy will soon stop it, too.
>>>
>>> I didn't change the subject line of this thread.
>>>
>>> Are you all right, David?
>>>
>>> You just don't seem to have the same pride you used to have. You
>>> have descended to insults, one liners, and fabrications.
>>>
>>> Is your son using your computer without your permission?
>>>
>>> Or is someone forging these posts?
>>>
>>
>>Yes. No. No.
>
>Then something is very wrong with David.
Feeling a little *DESPARATE* now, Bruce...?
Sure looks like it.
David MacLean
> In article <8ri0v8$3gn$1...@dagger.ab.videon.ca>,
> David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
> >
> >"Bruce Watson" <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message
> >news:97075277...@irys.nyx.net...
> >> In article <8rhqk0$vfk$1...@dagger.ab.videon.ca>,
> >> David MacLean <david....@I.hate.spam.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Case in point: it took six years for Bruce to learn to combine cutting
> >and
> >> >pasting with changing the subject line.
> >>
> >> I've changed subject lines years ago. I don't see it doing much
> >> good. It is a bother. Gerzy will soon stop it, too.
> >>
> >> I didn't change the subject line of this thread.
> >>
> >> Are you all right, David?
> >>
> >> You just don't seem to have the same pride you used to have. You
> >> have descended to insults, one liners, and fabrications.
> >>
> >> Is your son using your computer without your permission?
> >>
> >> Or is someone forging these posts?
> >>
> >
> >Yes. No. No.
>
> Then something is very wrong with David.
No.
Bruce Watson
Jerri Blavittł <n...@never.no> wrote:
>
>Bruce Watson <anon...@nyx.nyx.net> wrote in message news:97079014...@irys.nyx.net...
>has lost something close to his soul, his posts are decidedly
>different ... perhaps the self loathing of addiction has caught up
>with him ...?
Mary Kerr, many moons ago, said that David had a "black soul."
I always thought he had a huge inferiority complex.
But recently his style has changed. He was always above
the personal insult. He almost always tried to make a point.
rumik
He has consistently made the point that YOU are inferior.
Couldn't agree with him more.
David MacLean
> In article <4WaD5.29239$cP6.4...@news.uswest.net>,
And she apologized once she got to read some of the drivel you spouted. Or
did you forget?
>
> I always thought he had a huge inferiority complex.
>
Projecting, Bruce?
> But recently his style has changed. He was always above
> the personal insult. He almost always tried to make a point.
And with you, always failed. The good thing about repeatedly banging your
head against a wall is that it feels so good when you stop.
But Bruce, you better take up smoking again, or at least wear the patch. It
seems that Alzheimers is about to claim you. I've been calling you an idiot
for nigh on six years now. You either do not deem that a personal insult
(which means that you're totally out to lunch) or you've forgotten.
Nicotine, Bruce. More nicotine.
You certainly are an idiot.
DirtyBugger
Smokers don't vote because we won't let the smoke in the polling places, and
they can't give it up long unough to cast their ballot. Besides, there are
many more non-smokers that CAN get the job done.
BTW, did you know your caps key is stuck?
DB
Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
news:stgeorge-041...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> In article <97070563...@irys.nyx.net>, anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce
> BZZZZT!!! WE SMOKE AND WE VOTE, MORON. TOO BAD *YOU* WEREN'T AT GERZY'S
> INTELLECTUAL LEVEL.
>
> BUT WE KNOW, YOU'RE "USED TO IT."
>
Jerri Blavittł
DirtyBugger <Dirty...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:8rlu66$16vu$1...@newssvr05-en0.news.prodigy.com...
>
> Smokers don't vote because we won't let the smoke in the polling places, and
> they can't give it up long unough to cast their ballot. Besides, there are
> many more non-smokers that CAN get the job done.
>
> BTW, did you know your caps key is stuck?
>
That's Screamin' Stevie, the jonesing Tourettes nicotine addict,
king of the blue collar slobs in action ....
He ALWAYS screams WHEN HE writes CAUSE no ONE pays
him much ATTENTION in *REAL* life!
> DB
>
> Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> news:stgeorge-041...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> > In article <97070563...@irys.nyx.net>, anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce
> > Watson) wrote:
> >
Steve George
<Dirty...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>Smokers don't vote because we won't let the smoke in the polling places, and
>they can't give it up long unough to cast their ballot. Besides, there are
>many more non-smokers that CAN get the job done.
Well, it sure sounds like YOU should be designing airplanes and
sattelites. You did well in school with this..?
>BTW, did you know your caps key is stuck?
Did you know that your diagnostic skills aren't worth the junk they're
printed on...?
>DB
<snip useless citation>
So, um, how do you eat, with forked tongue stuck in both cheeks that way...?
--
** ANTIS, JUST ONE MORE THING... PLEASE GET *EVERY* LAST BIT OF
** SMOKERS' WORK PRODUCT **OUT** OF YOUR HOMES, **OUT** OF YOUR LIVES.
** DO YOUR OWN, BACKSTABBING PARASITES. IT WILL BE FUN TO WATCH...
Steve George
kyo...@mindspring.com wrote:
>anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
>>
>>Mary Kerr, many moons ago, said that David had a "black soul."
>
>[bogus ng deleted]
>
>Yeah...and look what happened to her. David said, "Poof!" and off she
>went, never to be seen or heard from again. Perhaps she finally went
>to college to become the psychologist she claimed to be but wasn't?
Seemed also a nice "rationalizing precursor" to CPS workers who want to
take smokers' children away from them (over "child abuse" claims),
recall...? She had great difficulty counting the marriages when the
question of a *majority* of homes had at least one smoker in them back
when some 50% of the population smoked, which could tend to discredit this
"urgent need" (ie, for something to doo-doo for those gov't intrusion
bucks).
I'm watching for the insects to deduce that smokers must be forcibly
sterilized, too, inasmuch as their blatant mental derangements indicate a
perpetuity of their inability to "compete" (and backstabbers ARE
Darwinians, note).
S
Steve George
>Bruce Watson wrote:
>
>> In article <4WaD5.29239$cP6.4...@news.uswest.net>,
>> Mary Kerr, many moons ago, said that David had a "black soul."
>>
>> I always thought he had a huge inferiority complex.
>>
>> But recently his style has changed. He was always above
>> the personal insult. He almost always tried to make a point.
>
>He has consistently made the point that YOU are inferior.
>Couldn't agree with him more.
As the debate rages between Worthless and Useless....
Audrey
DirtyBugger wrote:
>
> Smokers don't vote because we won't let the smoke in the polling places, and
> they can't give it up long unough to cast their ballot. Besides, there are
> many more non-smokers that CAN get the job done.
>
> BTW, did you know your caps key is stuck?
>
> DB
>
> Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> news:stgeorge-041...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> > In article <97070563...@irys.nyx.net>, anon...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce
> > Watson) wrote:
> >
> > BZZZZT!!! WE SMOKE AND WE VOTE, MORON. TOO BAD *YOU* WEREN'T AT GERZY'S
> > INTELLECTUAL LEVEL.
> >
> > BUT WE KNOW, YOU'RE "USED TO IT."
> >
> > --
> > ** Oh Lordy, what are we gonna DO with out *nicotinnic* receptors NOW..?
> > ** Or WITHOUT them..(!) Yep, that IS the *scientific* name for 'em.
> > ** (TELL us how "God didn't make little green apples...")
> >
> >
Dave Hitt
>Audrey <10277...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>
>
>>DirtyBugger wrote:
>>>
>>> Smokers don't vote because we won't let the smoke in the polling places, and
>>> they can't give it up long unough to cast their ballot. Besides, there are
>>> many more non-smokers that CAN get the job done.
>>>
>>> BTW, did you know your caps key is stuck?
>>
>>Ermmm, Kyoteee? Ya think this might be TOTM incognito?
>
>That was my very first thought, Audrey, but I'm not sure It is that
>smart. If so, It picked a very self-descriptive moniker. What say
>you, Header Experts?
It's Blather, almost certainly.
Also note the subject changing behavior.
----
New in THMC: The Great Debate Debate:
http://www.davehitt.com/
-Dave Hitt hit...@bigfoot.spamblocker.com (Remove "spamblocker" to reply)
DirtyBugger
NOPE! New flesh.
DB
Dave Hitt <Boy....@Hate.spammers> wrote in message
news:39e628c4....@news1.newscene.com...
Steve George
(Dave Hitt) wrote:
>Kyoteee <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Audrey <10277...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>DirtyBugger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Smokers don't vote because we won't let the smoke in the polling
places, and
>>>> they can't give it up long unough to cast their ballot. Besides, there are
>>>> many more non-smokers that CAN get the job done.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, did you know your caps key is stuck?
>>>
>>>Ermmm, Kyoteee? Ya think this might be TOTM incognito?
>>
>>That was my very first thought, Audrey, but I'm not sure It is that
>>smart. If so, It picked a very self-descriptive moniker. What say
>>you, Header Experts?
>
>It's Blather, almost certainly.
>
>Also note the subject changing behavior.
You could well be right, but I think we should also consider that we might
get more mileage out of treating such as a "new person" anyway. With all
due process, of course...
Then later popping the weasel, and applying some "punitive damages" could
be good... ;]
Steve G
--
** ANTIS, JUST ONE MORE THING... PLEASE GET *EVERY* LAST BIT OF
** SMOKERS' WORK PRODUCT **OUT** OF YOUR HOMES, **OUT** OF YOUR LIVES.
** DO YOUR OWN, BACKSTABBING PARASITES. IT WILL BE FUN TO WATCH...
DirtyBugger
Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
news:stgeorge-061...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
> --
> ** ANTIS, JUST ONE MORE THING... PLEASE GET *EVERY* LAST BIT OF
> ** SMOKERS' WORK PRODUCT **OUT** OF YOUR HOMES, **OUT** OF YOUR LIVES.
> ** DO YOUR OWN, BACKSTABBING PARASITES. IT WILL BE FUN TO WATCH...
That's what we're trying to do! Get the stench of your smoke, the
destruction from your cigs and the burden you place on society when the
years of smoking finally catch-up to you out of our lives.
BTW Your caps key is stuck again.
DB
Jerri Blavittł
Screamin' Stevie still doesn't see the irony in the fact that we non-addicted who control
and run
society allow the peons and slaves their drug addiction to keep them compliant and
submissive.
Like we allowed, encouraged and profiteered from the opium addictions we *allowed* the
Chinese
slaves who toiled and died to build the backbone railroads of the USA .... then when they
were done,
we promptly outlawed their addiction, since we no longer had any use for these foreign
slaves, thereby
being able to control, arrest and deport them.
How much longer do you have in your *job* Stevie before you are no longer needed ...?
Alex W.
Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> >It's Blather, almost certainly.
> >
> >Also note the subject changing behavior.
>
> You could well be right, but I think we should also consider that we
might
> get more mileage out of treating such as a "new person" anyway.
With all
> due process, of course...
>
> Then later popping the weasel, and applying some "punitive damages"
could
> be good... ;]
"Popping the zit" might be more descriptive in this instance.
Is Blavitt still blavvering, btw?
Steve George
<Dirty...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
>That's what we're trying to do! Get the stench of your smoke, the
>destruction from your cigs and the burden you place on society when the
>years of smoking finally catch-up to you out of our lives.
>
>BTW Your caps key is stuck again.
>
>DB
Then what are you doing IN ours, Ass-Head...?
And as ever, you analytic skills wouldn't survive a walk on a short pier.
I'm YELLING at your mockery of a "conscience," TOAD.
--
** ANTIS, JUST ONE MORE THING... PLEASE GET *EVERY* LAST BIT OF
** SMOKERS' WORK PRODUCT **OUT** OF YOUR HOMES, **OUT** OF YOUR LIVES.
** DO YOUR OWN, BACKSTABBING PARASITES. IT WILL BE FUN TO WATCH...
Steve George
W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
>news:stgeorge-071...@dslstat374.fastq.com...
>> In article <39e628c4....@news1.newscene.com>,
>Boy....@Hate.spammers
>> (Dave Hitt) wrote:
>
>> >It's Blather, almost certainly.
>> >
>> >Also note the subject changing behavior.
>>
>> You could well be right, but I think we should also consider that we
>might
>> get more mileage out of treating such as a "new person" anyway.
>With all
>> due process, of course...
>>
>> Then later popping the weasel, and applying some "punitive damages"
>could
>> be good... ;]
>
>
>"Popping the zit" might be more descriptive in this instance.
In it's way, but weasel captures something different, too.
>Is Blavitt still blavvering, btw?
Probably. Just skipping his posts, myself. That moron is just too far
gone, and really has NO redeeming qualities. Psycho-Blather Inc.
Audrey
DirtyBugger wrote:
>
> Steve George <stge...@NOSPAMamug.org> wrote in message
> > --
> > ** ANTIS, JUST ONE MORE THING... PLEASE GET *EVERY* LAST BIT OF
> > ** SMOKERS' WORK PRODUCT **OUT** OF YOUR HOMES, **OUT** OF YOUR LIVES.
> > ** DO YOUR OWN, BACKSTABBING PARASITES. IT WILL BE FUN TO WATCH...
>
> That's what we're trying to do! Get the stench of your smoke, the
> destruction from your cigs and the burden you place on society when the
> years of smoking finally catch-up to you out of our lives.
>
> BTW Your caps key is stuck again.
>
> DB
>
> >
> >
Audrey
politicians to confront them about the bias they are promoting. Then I
send a copy to the newspapers. Politicians and the papers may not care
much when a smoker is attacked but when smokers AND an ethnic group are
attacked using the same breath?!!? I don't think they'd support the
person (who by golly is representing himself as an opposer of smoking),
thereby making it hard to support the group he stands for. It just
wouldn't look right politically. <SMIRK>
Steve George
<10277...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>Just had to note.... I love this stuff. I save it and send it to the
>politicians to confront them about the bias they are promoting. Then I
>send a copy to the newspapers. Politicians and the papers may not care
>much when a smoker is attacked but when smokers AND an ethnic group are
>attacked using the same breath?!!? I don't think they'd support the
>person (who by golly is representing himself as an opposer of smoking),
>thereby making it hard to support the group he stands for. It just
>wouldn't look right politically. <SMIRK>
<snip polluted citation>
Now you made me look at his sewage, dang you..(!)
Well, when First-Of-A-Kind Systems work, as a Mathematician and later
"Senior Programmer" under NASA/Mil-Contract, has become "blue collar"
stiff-labors in the current insectoid pantheon, you KNOW we're "almost
there." The anti slophouse squeaks for itself.
Vote Cheney, Bush won't hurt him.
Steve G
--
** Did you know that if all the antis were laid end to
** end around the world, they wouldn't get across the city of
** Memphis...? The bottle-feeders are as sparse as noisy.
Steve George
>> Screamin' Stevie still doesn't see the irony in the fact that we
non-addicted who control
>> and run
>> society allow the peons and slaves their drug addiction to keep them
compliant and
>> submissive.
On this one joke of a point, apparently this insect never saw either
Apollo 13 or Private Ryan.
Yeah, we're here to take orders from vegetables, right.
Nice try, but YOU are the ones who have proven NOT worth the effort, thank you.
And THAT Karma is ALL yours.
And please don't bother replying. You've got nothing on ANY of that anyway.
Audrey
>
> >Just had to note.... I love this stuff. I save it and send it to the
> >politicians to confront them about the bias they are promoting. Then I
> >send a copy to the newspapers. Politicians and the papers may not care
> >much when a smoker is attacked but when smokers AND an ethnic group are
> >attacked using the same breath?!!? I don't think they'd support the
> >person (who by golly is representing himself as an opposer of smoking),
> >thereby making it hard to support the group he stands for. It just
> >wouldn't look right politically. <SMIRK>
>
> <snip polluted citation>
>
> Now you made me look at his sewage, dang you..(!)
lol
> Well, when First-Of-A-Kind Systems work, as a Mathematician and later
> "Senior Programmer" under NASA/Mil-Contract, has become "blue collar"
> stiff-labors in the current insectoid pantheon, you KNOW we're "almost
> there." The anti slophouse squeaks for itself.
>
> Vote Cheney, Bush won't hurt him.
lol again :-)
Dave Hitt
>In article <39e628c4....@news1.newscene.com>, Boy....@Hate.spammers
>(Dave Hitt) wrote:
>
>>Kyoteee <kyo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Audrey <10277...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>DirtyBugger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Smokers don't vote because we won't let the smoke in the polling
>places, and
>>>>> they can't give it up long unough to cast their ballot. Besides, there are
>>>>> many more non-smokers that CAN get the job done.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, did you know your caps key is stuck?
>>>>
>>>>Ermmm, Kyoteee? Ya think this might be TOTM incognito?
>>>
>>>That was my very first thought, Audrey, but I'm not sure It is that
>>>smart. If so, It picked a very self-descriptive moniker. What say
>>>you, Header Experts?
>>
>>It's Blather, almost certainly.
>>
>>Also note the subject changing behavior.
>
>You could well be right, but I think we should also consider that we might
>get more mileage out of treating such as a "new person" anyway. With all
>due process, of course...
I disagree entirely. This asshole has done whatever it could to
disrupt us, and it would be foolish to allow it to continue. That
would be rewarding it's behavior.
Steve George
(Dave Hitt) wrote:
Has to do with the "benefits to the audience," David. The cops of the
world role has been largely vacated in network communications.
And there are probably fairly FEW availible, y'know. Rather use 'em
before we lose 'em. I sure wouldn't measure "reward" in it at all.
They'd still have to EARN that, how ludicrous.