What? ( Your statement needs explanation)

And that’s why laws passed purely by majority vote are a BAD thing.

Yep, there’s me. Someone has to pay for children’s health care, you know. And while I kind of miss smoking in a bar, I don’t miss having my clothes stink like an ashtray after a night out. I also don’t smoke inside my own home.

I lived in New York state for almost 5 years in the 1980s and early ’90s, and I had a better chance of running into Mario Cuomo at some farmers’ market in Cattaraugus County than I do of seeing RAM north of the canal. I met Jim Florio and Christie Todd Whitman in Jersey, and I didn’t even live there.

RAM could have pressured her Democratic cronies in the state senate to change their rules to end the desk-drawer veto. Could have made the cancer cluster information available. Conducted a real investigation at the DPC before the News Journal embarrassed her into it. She could have done a lot of things, but I think she happier as part of the old boys network in Dover.

As for golf courses, I haven’t played the new Rock, but I hear it’s worth it. Looking forward to playing Bayside next month, and perhaps White Clay as well.

That reminds me of a post that I have yet to write about how the libertarians have been getting on my nerves because the libertarian movement (if there is such a thing) came up so small in the George Bush years.

Here we had a classic example of all the things libertarians should have been getting fired up over – and all they can do complain about minutia.

Anon,

Ballot initiatives would shake things up here. (Maybe that can be a new PDD issue?)

I suppose the new libertarian trolls don’t like mine safety laws, either, which once were opposed on exactly the same terms — if miners don’t like the danger, they can find another job.

Other than that many of the more serious problems she faced were a result of conditions outside of her control. They affect the whole nation. So far her administration has been able to hold off the foreclosure tide and I feel that is a real improvement compared to other states.

The only other things I can think of is she could have been a more reserved in using our national guard for federal purposes and she should have prevented eminent domain for economic purposes.

We need to understand that the feds. often hold the funding and have used it against the state to get us to do what they want. So we should not be upset about that, but it is something we could have been more open about with the citizens and worked to change.

We need to cooperate a lot less with the feds. We do not need to go along and get along. We also do not need to be openly confrontational, just do our own thing- in the quiet way we always have.

Other than these issues, she has been our governor. And I think we should be more gracious to her service.

So how do we as a nation resolve our differences when members of our population can’t agree?

We vote. And by an overwhelming majority, non smokers stomped those that smoke.

The other arguments flat out don’t matter.

Excuse me then don’t complain if the State takes your house and gives it to a developer

A restaurant is property and covered under property rights. To open as a restaurant there may be licnses due to issues like zoning and codes for fire prevention and health safety to prevent illness from poor preparation.

So I would not call owning a restaurant a priviledge.

Reading the whole thread top to bottom brings illuminates the fallacy of logic quite clearly.

In essence, the argument FOR smoking is thus:

I WANT TO DO WHAT I WANT. DAMN EVERYONE ELSE.

Those like Cassandra who defend the smoking ban, have this as their core argument…..

I WANT TO DO WHAT I WANT. SORRY IF IT INTERFERES WITH YOUR LIFESTYLE.

That is the essence of both arguments. That is the core. Of course they are hidden in explanation of libertarian values, health, hypocritical statements, and marketplace economics, but they all boil down to this one thing.

Some people want to smoke in a restaurant. Some people want a smoke free restaurant.

So how do we as a nation resolve our differences when members of our population can’t agree?

We vote. And by an overwhelming majority, non smokers stomped those that smoke.

The other arguments flat out don’t matter.

You want to dine and smoke. Hurry off to another state.

Or even better, if you wish to change Delaware, get a candidate willing to carry your cross for you.

You could try Copeland. I hear he is out of good ideas. Struggling to break out of single digits, he may take up your cause…. It might work. If every smoker voted for him, he could get maybe 10%…..