Sheldon wrote:

Yoose don't want to know my opinions

Oh, wow. All those encouraging election results and now this.

Halluhl... hollyl...haulola... YAAAAY...

Pastorio

George wrote:
Andy wrote:
Wayne Boatwright said...

Oh pshaw, on Wed 08 Nov 2006 09:35:23a, Peter A meant to say...

It's been so many years since we had election results worth
celebrating. What are you doing?

Staying out of the way.

I went to the local diner after voting (as usual) and had the
mile-high stack-o-pancakes and the bottomless cup of coffee. De-caf.

A lot of political faces have changed in Pennsylvania. Even I crossed
party lines for the first time in ages.

I am from PA, understand the election was mostly an anti-Bush referendum
but I think it was a real mistake to elect the "I've never had a real
job and never performed/worked at all of the political offices I have
held and don't forget my father was governor guy.."

But, on consideration, a rubber tree, a '53 Packard hood
ornament, or a 2003 calendar with April and July missing
would still be better than Santorum. If nature abhors a
vacuum, how did he ever get elected in the first place?

Speaking of vacuums, George Allen being defeated made my
homemade onion soup taste 38% better.

THEY'RE ALL BUMS!!!!!!

And then there's that...

Pastorio

"Michael "Dog3" Lonergan" wrote in message
6.121...
snip

Yep, exacltly what you said. I've been to 3 celebration parties the past
2
days and late... late nights. I got very testy yesterday during a
celebration at a local bar in Kirkwood yesterday.
snip
Finally I turned to her, after her remark about her children's health, and
said "I will vote for a smoke free Kirkwood when they ban cell phones in
all public places. That failing, I will vote for a smoke free Kirkwood if
the following proposition is on the ballot; requiring bars/restaurants to
have smoking, non-smoking sections, cell phone and non-cell phone sections
and child and non-child sections." "Mini vans hurtling down Berry Road,
laden with children, with a stressed out soccer mom yapping on the cell
phone, careening all over the road is detrimental to everyone's health.
She
may cause and accident with serious injuries." "Your unruly children while
I'm dining out irritate me and the other diners as well." "It's not all
about YOU and what YOU want." Her jaw dropped to her knees and she
scurried
off. Did I go overboard... perhaps. Was I tired and bitchy? You
betchurass I was. I just didn't feel like listening to her rabid ranting
when she does things in public that irritate people just as much as
smoking
does.
snip
Michael

You forgot banning perfume. Gag. Talk about interferring with the right of
others to enjoy their own space. I've often thought the perfume and
cigarettes should be grouped together.
Janet

"Janet B." wrote:



You forgot banning perfume. Gag. Talk about interferring with the right of
others to enjoy their own space. I've often thought the perfume and
cigarettes should be grouped together.
Janet

There is a major difference in the application. Smokers either
don't realize it stinks or they don't care. The old girls who
douse themselves with perfume are under the impression that it
smells good.

I have a sister in law who smokes and uses perfume. I think that
she is under the impression that the perfume masks the tobacco
smell. It doesn't. It just overpowers it. It's like the stupid
old joke about the Avon lady who farts in an elevator and whips
out a can of pine scented air deodorizer. A drunk gets on the
elevator and sniffs a few times. The Avon lady asks if he likes
the small and he answers "Good god no. It smells like someone
shit in a pine tree"

Old Mother Ashby wrote:

What intrigues me is something I learned from The West Wing (a most
educational show). The Speaker is third in line after the President and
Vice President, even if they're not from the same political party. Weird!

Originally the Vice President was whoever came in second in the
Presidential election. They changed that with the 12th Amendment.
I think that was during Jefferson's administration.

Actually, the Electors could still choose a different VP than the
one chosen by the Presidential candidate. It would never happen
in practice, but it's technically possible.

The whole party system is not really built in to the Constitution.


Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

In article 1,
"Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan" wrote:

"Janet B."
:

You forgot banning perfume. Gag. Talk about interferring with the
right of others to enjoy their own space. I've often thought the
perfume and cigarettes should be grouped together.
Janet

LOL... *sigh* We could always ban everything in public places.

Michael

The only thing I'd like to see banned in public is people playing Tonsil
Hockey! I know it shouldn't but that just bugs the hell out of me!
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:12:44 -0500, The Cook
wrote:



What intrigues me is something I learned from The West Wing (a most
educational show). The Speaker is third in line after the President and
Vice President, even if they're not from the same political party. Weird!

Christine

This scares me silly.
Pan, a down in the dumps repub.

The Speaker of the House is an elected official. The Vice President
is the head of the Senate and can vote there to break ties. I don't
think that we want an appointed official in direct line for the
Presidency.

I think I am misunderstanding this. There is no appointed official in
line for the presidency.

In article 1,
"Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan" wrote:

The only thing I'd like to see banned in public is people playing Tonsil
Hockey! I know it shouldn't but that just bugs the hell out of me!

Please to explain what "Tonsil Hockey" is.

Michael - thinking maybe it's shouting across to someone else

Deep "necking".
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

Dave Smith wrote:
"Janet B." wrote:


You forgot banning perfume. Gag. Talk about interferring with the right of
others to enjoy their own space. I've often thought the perfume and
cigarettes should be grouped together.
Janet

There is a major difference in the application. Smokers either
don't realize it stinks or they don't care. The old girls who
douse themselves with perfume are under the impression that it
smells good.

I have a sister in law who smokes and uses perfume. I think that
she is under the impression that the perfume masks the tobacco
smell. It doesn't. It just overpowers it. It's like the stupid
old joke about the Avon lady who farts in an elevator and whips
out a can of pine scented air deodorizer. A drunk gets on the
elevator and sniffs a few times. The Avon lady asks if he likes
the small and he answers "Good god no. It smells like someone
shit in a pine tree"

Or they have 10 of those scented candles burning because they think the
odor from the candles somehow masks the odor of the smoke.

I can't deal with smoking. If I am in a place with smokers my eyes burn
for the next day.

Dave Smith said...

"Janet B." wrote:



You forgot banning perfume. Gag. Talk about interferring with the
right of others to enjoy their own space. I've often thought the
perfume and cigarettes should be grouped together.
Janet

There is a major difference in the application. Smokers either
don't realize it stinks or they don't care. The old girls who
douse themselves with perfume are under the impression that it
smells good.

I have a sister in law who smokes and uses perfume. I think that
she is under the impression that the perfume masks the tobacco
smell. It doesn't. It just overpowers it. It's like the stupid
old joke about the Avon lady who farts in an elevator and whips
out a can of pine scented air deodorizer. A drunk gets on the
elevator and sniffs a few times. The Avon lady asks if he likes
the small and he answers "Good god no. It smells like someone
shit in a pine tree"


LOL!!!

I never realized how bad cigarettes smelled until I gave them up! I can
smell smoke from a considerable distance now and it smells noxious!!!

Now if you really want to ban something, ban subwoofers in cars.

Andy
Smoke free since 9/1/04

In article , Andy q wrote:

Now if you really want to ban something, ban subwoofers in cars.

Andy

I agree with that one!!!!!
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

"Andy" q wrote

I never realized how bad cigarettes smelled until I gave them up! I can
smell smoke from a considerable distance now and it smells noxious!!!

The last hotel I stayed in was non-smoking ... I know more and more
of them are that way. Okay by me, if you think about it, there is a fire
hazard associated with it. At any rate, there was a sign, if you do smoke
in the room, you will be charged a $250 cleaning fee. Fair enough, how
can they say non-smoking then rent out a room that smells like cigarettes.

nancy

Pan Ohco wrote:
On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:12:44 -0500, The Cook
wrote:

The Speaker of the House is an elected official. The Vice President
is the head of the Senate and can vote there to break ties. I don't
think that we want an appointed official in direct line for the
Presidency.

I think I am misunderstanding this. There is no appointed official in
line for the presidency.

What do you call the Secretary of State, and the other
cabinet Secretaries? Those come in line after the Speaker.

Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

Nancy Young said...


"Andy" q wrote

I never realized how bad cigarettes smelled until I gave them up! I
can smell smoke from a considerable distance now and it smells
noxious!!!

The last hotel I stayed in was non-smoking ... I know more and more
of them are that way. Okay by me, if you think about it, there is a
fire hazard associated with it. At any rate, there was a sign, if you
do smoke in the room, you will be charged a $250 cleaning fee. Fair
enough, how can they say non-smoking then rent out a room that smells
like cigarettes.

nancy


nancy,

That's what the $250 cleaning fee is for, fumigating or something,
although $250 sounds excessive.

Some hotels create whole floors of rooms for smokers. So the non-smokers
never have to be bothered. A casino I stayed at in Atlantic City did
that.

Andy

"Andy" q wrote

Nancy Young said...

The last hotel I stayed in was non-smoking ... I know more and more
of them are that way. Okay by me, if you think about it, there is a
fire hazard associated with it. At any rate, there was a sign, if you
do smoke in the room, you will be charged a $250 cleaning fee. Fair
enough, how can they say non-smoking then rent out a room that smells
like cigarettes.

That's what the $250 cleaning fee is for, fumigating or something,
although $250 sounds excessive.

I can see the reasoning, I don't think the cleaning/fumigating/whatever
takes an hour and if it costs them a night's rental, that's how much the
room goes for. Having said that, as with many fines, it's meant to be a
deterrent.

Some hotels create whole floors of rooms for smokers. So the non-smokers
never have to be bothered. A casino I stayed at in Atlantic City did
that.

The last car I rented was supposed to be smoke free, but someone
smoked in that car. Nothing like a car I rented once, it was smothering,
the stench. Car only had about 40,000 miles on it, I have no idea how
you could get something to be so saturated with a smell. I grew up in
a smoking household, it's not like I faint at a whiff of smoke, the car was
so bad, you couldn't drive with the windows closed.

At any rate, you can't blame places (hotels, car rental) from trying to
protect the rentability of their property.

nancy