Smoking Policy from a Brits point of view!

[AllieInMD]

I don't take it personally, it's an intellectual debate on a hot topic *shrug*

 

 

I learned a long time ago not to take things too personal on CC though Its hard not to sometimes.I think responding on these smoking threads is a game to a lot of CC veterans and most of the time I'm having fun and I assume Allie,64,Don ,Shipyard and others are just enjoying the competition though it may get a bit heated at times----------------BT

[aloha43]

You obviously can't tell the difference between determination and desperation.

 

Yes I can tell the difference, and you have both. But it sounds more desperate by your tone.

 

Do I know everything? Heck no - I know my limitations - but I do know how to read the outcome of a scientific study.

 

Hmm, haven't seen any smoker on this thread say they want to quit to be disassociated with me -

 

No-one else said that....that was me saying that.

 

I've laughed when someone said something laughable.

 

Only laughable to you, it can seem almost insulting to others.

 

If you have COPD you don't belong in a smoking area, and if you are - who's fault is that? What did that COPD patient do to get there - and why should *I* be responsible for it?

 

No it isn't me that has COPD. It is a friend. Someone who has only been exposed by SHS by her husband. She has never smoked. She has lived in the same town all of her life, which is in Northern California right on the coast. Because of the offshore flow, we have some of the most pristine air in the US. (And please don't accuse me of being a doo-gooder just because I live in CA, I am not.) I never said "you" were responsible for that.

 

I don't work in a hospital - I have in the past - I work in an office for a company that owns 8 hospitals and a bunch of diversified businesses. My daughter does work in a hospital ER.

 

My mistake, I'm sorry.....but if you and your daughter work in the "industry", then you should know how bad SHS can be.

 

I too am surprised the thread wasn't poofed by the time I got home from work.

 

And why should what I wrote be Poofed, but not for some of the things you have said. We are all debating here.....I'm not trying to be mean to you, just giving my opinion as you are to me.

 

Again, I am sorry if I have insulted you, I don't mean to.

[crt37]

You can't find the study they commissioned on their site - they were too embarrassed by it and don't link to it (like the ALA won't tell you where they got their figure) - it's on the National Institutes of Health site - they didn't pull it.

 

 

Why don't you post the link so everyone can read what you refer to? No one is going to take your word for it. Your credibility went out the window several hundred posts ago on the topic of smoking. Others here have posted links...why don't you? Post the links to all this research of which you speak if you have nothing to hide.

[AllieInMD]

LOL. It was published by WHO and then withdrawn - the Wall Street Journal called the WHO out on burying the study! Is the WSJ in cahoots with me? Or I should say were they back in 1998. There was no tobacco company involvement - they may have seized upon the stupidity of the WHO of commissioning a study that proved their case, but they had nothing to do with the study. Of course it's no longer on the WHO site - it embarrassed them and proved their entire public policy on SHS was flawed. That is not just MY opinion, it was reported in legitimate newspapers. And why won't the ALA provide where they get their 'statistics'? If it looks like a scam...

 

As for the post of links you gave - I did say I'd look at them in depth (only been home a few hours) - but from a cursory glance - there is no scientific data there - just people's claims but no fact.

 

That last statement from the WHO - was 10 YEARS ago - is the study still temporarily unavailable? If it proves their claims on SHS as they say - why don't they publish it on their site? If they told you that air conditioning in your home would kill you - but told you that the study proving it was temporarily unavailable - and 10 years later it's still not published by them - would you believe them? And it was reviewed and published by the National Institutes of Health.

 

I'm not interested in what the tobacco company perspective is - we all know they are biased - I'm only looking for objective independent data.

 

It's you my dear that believes whatever anyone tells you without looking past the surface. You believe any statement you wish to agree with spoonfed to you without any supporting facts. Facts - not opinion, not unsupported statements, not policy pieces - facts.

 

Before I got into taking a stand on this in the last year or two I really didn't have any facts and I've have agreed that SHS was dangerous etc and I was - and still am - a considerate smoker - but through actually researching FACTS I found out I had been believing the same spoonfed stuff you are.

 

 

 

 

 

Actually, the issue that Allie wrongly brings up about the WHO, is the disinformation that is spread by the Tobacco industry. Allie has admitted to not being able to find her information on the WHO site and it is no wonder....it is not there.....never was.

 

However here is a link to one group that has research some of the disinformation from tobacco companies that some of the smokers have latched on to as gospel and coming from the WHO. I wish some on this thread practice what they preach and I quote:

 

"You can believe all the PC junk you've been spoon fed. Me? I prefer to look at what actual SCIENTISTS say - from a study by actual SCIENTISTS - commissioned by the World Health Organization.

( http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=800370&page=9 ).

 

Now I posted several links to the WHO or supporting organizations on this topic. (page 13 post #243 ) ( http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=800370&page=13 ). Will this lead to a change of heart. As I posted originally, I doubt it as it does not support the behavior. However I hope it will lead to the end of citing in almost every other post, disinformation concerning the WHO.

 

Fo those of you interested in a perspective on disinformation from the tobacco industry, here is a link for your perusal.

 

http://www.tobaccoscam.ucsf.edu/Secondhand/Secondhand_iih_internal_1.cfm

 

Also from the WHO itself:

 

http://www.who.int/inf-pr-1998/en/pr98-29.html

[crt37]

As for the post of links you gave - I did say I'd look at them in depth (only been home a few hours) - but from a cursory glance - there is no scientific data there - just people's claims but no fact.

 

Where are your links? Let's see this scientific research you talk so much about. We'd like to read it but we can't if you don't provide any links.

[AllieInMD]

Well, I wouldn't call him as low as he can get, but throwing up smoke and mirrors (pun intended) rather than look at actual facts and science and independent reporting is just being in denial because he can't answer simple questions that prove him wrong - like....if that WHO study proved SHS was so dangerous, why won't they proudly put it on their site? And why won't the ALA willingly provide any data they base their statements on? Sure sounds like slimy politician behavior to me. But thanks for pointing out how wrong it is for him to put out false information and ignore facts.

 

 

Thanks for bringing this information to our attention. For someone to knowingly and willingly spread false information on the health aspects of second hand smoke is really about as low as a person can get. But as many have already pointed out on this thread, drug addicts will stop at nothing to perpetuate and justify their habit no matter who they have to trample to accomplish it.

[AllieInMD]

Hi Amy - nice to meet you :) Congrats on quitting!

 

Although I don't personally know you, I can amend my statement to "I know one person who used perfume to mask smoke smell".

 

My statement was to a poster who never has anything of substance on the topic, just attacks on smokers over the smell of them. Frankly, his obsession with sniffing unknown females (never mentions men and cologne) to be a bit creepy.

 

Yes, the EPA has determined that perfume and scents added to everyday items contain many toxins and even carcinogens. The reality is that you will either die of air pollution (but they will say it's because you smoked X years ago regardless of proof) or live a very very long life and pass peacefully in your sleep.

 

Nice to meet you :)

 

 

Hi! I would like to introduce myself- although I have recently quit smoking, I used perfume to hide the smell of smoke for ...gulp... 19 years. I cant believe I smoked that long...

Anyway, I just wanted to introduce myself. Oh, and I can vouch for at least a half a dozen other girls in my life who have done the same.

Now I am horrified to find out that when I get cancer, it wont be from the 1/2 a pack a day I used to inhale, but the copious amounts of fragrance I used afterwards... I never knew that KOOLS could smell healthier than my perfume.

 

I have to agree about keeping a distance. duh.... I guess I do find myself successfully avoiding smoking sections. If I catch a whiff, I walk faster.

[VAHockeymom]

So, I'm finally at the end of the like 16 pages of posts on this subject...Whew!

 

I'm so entrigued about the sheer number of almost militant posts here. I sincerely wish that the energy that has been expounded could be used to solve some of the larger issues facing our great nation; ie. fuel prices, economic downturn, lack of even adequate healthcare for more than 4 MILLION Americans, etc etc. I realize that everyone on both sides of this issue are very passionate about their opinions and to that I give you all a big "kudas". There are several issues that far outweigh the merits of smoking/non-smoking. To Allie, I love your passion and ability to find stats that back your point. Please run for office or work for your local politician (not being sarcastic here at all). Our government could certainly benefit from someone with your debate abilities. For those of you that persist in being sarcastic and condscendiing, tisk tisk....shame on you. This board is supposed to be used for intelligent adult debate, the insults have no place here.

 

With this said, smokers ~ smoke where it's allowed and non-smokers ~ avoid those areas. Sorry, but that's the only answer here. Incidently, this thread was started to address the issue of inconsistency in the UK brochure. I think it's gotten WAY off topic.

[AllieInMD]

Another "I was only kidding post"? ;)

 

I don't think it's a right wing conspiracy - stereotypically and in general the right wing is for individual rights and the left wing is about near socialist nanny-states. (look at NY and a ban on a food!) But I don't think that's really got much to do with it (translation - let's not drag politics into it too!) - it's about people (generalization) who accept whatever is told to them by someone perceived as an "authority" or expert.

 

You think I'm wrong about that part of society's mentality? History is full of it - why do you (general, not you specifically) think that you are so much better that you can't be fooled like the last few thousand years of humanity? Are you (general, not personal) really that arrogant? I'm not.

 

You want some examples of 'the people' being fooled by the medical/scientific 'authority'?

 

• racial superiority
  
• quite a few claim that 9/11 was an 'inside job' and Bush ordered the planes to crash
  
• the universe revolves around the earth
  
• the earth is flat
  
• ***** causes blindness
  
• ***** causes mental illness
  
• lobotomy will cure mental illness and make the patient healthy and happy
  
• heroin and cocaine cures everything (and is available at the local drugstore)
  
• infants/newborns can't feel pain so no anesthesia during surgery
  
• women should be knocked out while giving birth

Those are just a few - some very recently in the scope of humanity. People are gullible - suspend all rational thought or ability or look at things objectively - when someone 'in the know' or an 'authority' or an expert states something. Heck, about a month ago a bunch of folks believed about the airline charging pax by pound - for their bodies. That journalist or researcher convinced people of a long lost tribe in SA with photos just in the last month. How many times did google and microsoft and other companies and organizations pull practical jokes on most of the world with fake press releases and products?

 

My mother would have been dead at 42 if she'd listened to the "medical authority" - because she questioned it - and continued to question it - and encouraged her children to question anything they read or heard - she lived to be 70 - watch all her kids graduate, get married, lived to see 6 grandchildren born and several of them graduate high school and go to college.

 

Do I give blind faith to what any 'authority' says? No - they better have the facts and science/data to back it up. I don't comprehend why anyone would voluntarily abdicate their right to be educated with facts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How about this.

 

Non-somkers are part of a right wing conspiracy to stamp out smokers rights.

 

The same folks woh started that phoney globel warming thing.

 

They are all in cahoots:D

 

Am I getting close:confused:

[AllieInMD]

Well, you hold the record - I've never known anyone that smoked 3 packs a day - if you sleep 8 hrs - that's still like a cig every 15 minutes - even I would be sick from that.

 

Personally I don't think that is the majority that smoke that much, but I don't discount your life experience.

 

That's really funny to me. I smoked for 35 years (I'm 54). Up to 3 packs a day at times. I couldn't sleep at night because I was up hacking and coughing all night until my eyes felt like they were going to blow out of their sockets. It kept my wife and kids awake too. I couldn't walk a mile or do any physical labor without running out of breath and huffing and puffing. My wife and kids complained about smelling like smoke all the time.

 

I quit. I took me several tries but I did. I quickly gained 20 lbs but I made up my mind and lost that plus another 55 pounds. I work out every day and run at least a mile every other day. I feel fantastic and 20 years younger. So, not everyone is as miserable as your friends that quit. Most of my friends that have quit are much happier. I promise you I'm much happier. I'm ready to live a longer life.

 

I'm also happy about the money I save so I can cruise more :D

[AllieInMD]

Of course - smokers are an easy target - doesn't require them to do anything but point their finger at others rather than face their bigger risk factors, and their contribution to them.

 

The delicious irony here is that the same folks posting their "second hand smoke kills" rhetoric are the same people who don't mind sucking benzene - a known class-A carcinogen - into their lungs each and every time they gas up their car. I still don't see anyone volunteering to give up driving.

 

That's just a lone example of daily life where one is exposed to various toxic crap. I haven't even touched upon the food you eat and other mundane stuff.

[AllieInMD]

LOL - the study I referenced was tobacco propaganda - too rich. Uh, the WHO commissioned the study and paid for it to prove the dangers of SHS - not tobacco companies. The National Institutes of Health published it on their website.

 

The other links in this thread I've reviewed are policy pieces and position statements - not studies - not data - not science. Those same 'authorities' could say the moon is made of green cheese, doesn't make it true or fact :)

 

I know it's popular hysteria to claim everything is the work of the evil tobacco companies but try to remain calm - the WHO is one of the most vigilant anti-smoking organizations out there and have created a plan to stamp out smoking world wide - it was the study they commissioned and paid for that I linked to. Yes, they tried to bury it and won't put it on their site as it's an embarrassment but the study still exists. Oh, and I also linked to the court case where the federal court threw out the EPA study that started all this as biased junk science (paraphrasing the court).

 

 

 

 

Who's calling World Health Organization Voodoo Science???????:confused:

Not Me

They have had extensive studies that are available in our schools library and have been referenced to on this thread that point out the dangers of second hand smoke.The stuff you reference was propaganda issued by the RJR toadies to try to trick the innocent to smoke

[AllieInMD]

Nope, we're adults who choose to engage in a legal activity we enjoy. Just like many enjoy gambling or drinking - are they all sheep to the casinos and booze makers? How about they make choices as adults on legal activities. The tobacco companies told us for decades smoking wasn't bad for us - did I listen to an obviously biased group? Nope.

 

What I don't buy is that social exposure to SHS (like on a cruise ship) causes cancer or any real health risk to the average person. You're sucking in more dirt and pollution getting off the boat in some of these 3rd world countries than you would if you shared a smoking cabin with me for a week. Not to mention traffic or airports getting to port - all those cars in parking lot - buses - tractor trailers loading on stuff (do they EVER turn those things off??)

 

 

But aren't Smokers sheep?Sheep to Tobacco Companies

[AllieInMD]

So glad facts entertain you :D

 

I find your post entertaining.:D

[AllieInMD]

Oh please - as that one guy says - your solution (and RCCL's) doesn't allow them to whine and complain *roll eyes*

 

 

AMEN SISTER! I too have been reading this post and yet to chime in because I always get flammed on the smoking threads. I couldn't agree with you more. If someone smokes and abides by the rules of the given situation then it is the fault of the non-smoker who puts themselves in a position to be exposed to the smoke...their CHOICE.

 

I just don't understand what the big debate is always about here. RCI allows smoking on balconies and on one side of the ship by the pool and sometimes in the casinos. Very few bars allow it at all. And, before someone flames me about the balcony smoke coming into their next door cabin etc. Consider that this too is a temporary situation. Close the door and wait 10 minutes....poof all gone. The ship is well ventilated and if you don't want to be around smoke, then don't go there. Simple...problem solved. I don't like being around obnoxious (sp?) drinkers and there's ALWAYS plenty of them to be found on the ships even with drink prices as high as they are. I also don't appreciate the over-bearing fat guy that insists on getting on the already full elevator, but it is what it is and it's all temporary. If someone is bothering me, I simply go elsewhere. These ships are HUGE and you can always find another place if you are bothered by someone else's choices.

 

Bottom line, as long as smoking is legal and allowed in designated areas, people will smoke. If you prefer not to be around it, then don't. Or opt to sail on a smaller line that doesn't allow it at all or even one of the "smoke-free" cruises that RCI offers several times a year.

 

Just my humble opinion.

[Sue L]

 

Bottom line, as long as smoking is legal and allowed in designated areas, people will smoke. If you prefer not to be around it, then don't. Or opt to sail on a smaller line that doesn't allow it at all or even one of the "smoke-free" cruises that RCI offers several times a year.

 

Just my humble opinion.

 

What smoke free cruises does RCCL offer, never have heard of them, or seen ANY sort of advertising to the effect?

[AllieInMD]

Yes I can tell the difference, and you have both. But it sounds more desperate by your tone.

-That’s your opinion – doesn’t make it fact. -

Only laughable to you, it can seem almost insulting to others.

-If they are that sensitive and their feelings are so easily hurt maybe they shouldn’t put themselves in the middle of a hot topic debate on a public internet board. There are thousands of other threads to participate in. Just a thought.-

 

No it isn't me that has COPD. It is a friend. **snip for length** I never said "you" were responsible for that.

-And for every person like your friend who lived with a smoker there’s one that did and didn’t get cancer or COPD and one that was never around smoke and got lung cancer. Regardless, she made her choice and now lives with the consequences. My SO isn’t bothered by my smoking, he’s made his choice. I feel for your friend – but if as you say ‘I’ am not responsible – which I take to mean society in general or smokers in general – what was the point of the story? Not that I'm sayin you shouldn't relay a personal experience - just wondered if I did miss the point.

 

My mistake, I'm sorry.....but if you and your daughter work in the "industry", then you should know how bad SHS can be.-

-Actually, we know the facts and science. As for being in the ‘business’ – I work non-clinical tho have some clinical colleagues. My daughter does work in the hospital I used to – and still tons of employees – clinical employees too – smoke – especially cardiologists and respiratory techs oddly enough. Heck, BakinCakes here says she and her hubby are doctors – I don’t know, only know her on this board, but even they don’t believe anyone is gonna die from occasional exposure to SHS and hold the same belief that the research supports – it’s the pollution from cars and industry that will kill you if anything. (speak up Bakin if I misrepresent your position).-

 

And why should what I wrote be Poofed, but not for some of the things you have said. We are all debating here.....I'm not trying to be mean to you, just giving my opinion as you are to me.

-I didn’t say anything YOU said should have made it go poof – I meant I have never seen them let one go this long/far. You were just the first I read after I got home that mentioned the fact that it had not and I commented on it.

 

Again, I am sorry if I have insulted you, I don't meanto.

-I wasn’t insulted in the least – it’s an intellectual debate – amazingly free of the usual personal attacks that usually get them POOF’d

 

 

And why should what I wrote be Poofed, but not for some of the things you have said. We are all debating here.....I'm not trying to be mean to you, just giving my opinion as you are to me.

 

Again, I am sorry if I have insulted you, I don't mean to.

[cruisinMike]

LOL. It was published by WHO and then withdrawn - the Wall Street Journal called the WHO out on burying the study! Is the WSJ in cahoots with me? Or I should say were they back in 1998. There was no tobacco company involvement - they may have seized upon the stupidity of the WHO of commissioning a study that proved their case, but they had nothing to do with the study. Of course it's no longer on the WHO site - it embarrassed them and proved their entire public policy on SHS was flawed. That is not just MY opinion, it was reported in legitimate newspapers. And why won't the ALA provide where they get their 'statistics'? If it looks like a scam...

 

As for the post of links you gave - I did say I'd look at them in depth (only been home a few hours) - but from a cursory glance - there is no scientific data there - just people's claims but no fact.

 

That last statement from the WHO - was 10 YEARS ago - is the study still temporarily unavailable? If it proves their claims on SHS as they say - why don't they publish it on their site? If they told you that air conditioning in your home would kill you - but told you that the study proving it was temporarily unavailable - and 10 years later it's still not published by them - would you believe them? And it was reviewed and published by the National Institutes of Health.

 

I'm not interested in what the tobacco company perspective is - we all know they are biased - I'm only looking for objective independent data.

 

It's you my dear that believes whatever anyone tells you without looking past the surface. You believe any statement you wish to agree with spoonfed to you without any supporting facts. Facts - not opinion, not unsupported statements, not policy pieces - facts.

 

Before I got into taking a stand on this in the last year or two I really didn't have any facts and I've have agreed that SHS was dangerous etc and I was - and still am - a considerate smoker - but through actually researching FACTS I found out I had been believing the same spoonfed stuff you are.

 

I present links to the WHO. You have not. Can you please provide links to your assertions. Otherwise you can refrain from your condescending "it is you my dear" statements. You would like me to believe you without any documentation. I present documentation that clearly shows you are passing along disinformation. Now you choose to ignore that.

 

You said you would abide by WHO scientists. Again I provided links. But as I said, now they don't match your behavior so you choose to not believe. When you provide links to your wild assertions of the WHO, you will look as if you are not just a tobacco industry parrot. Otherwise, you sound like the price discrimination people....but I digress.

[AllieInMD]

*** ok, I put what could be considered a personal attack here - as warranted as it was -I don't want to cause the thread to get POOF'd so will resist and not post it.***

 

I don't care what you think of my credibility - you probably least of any poster here.

 

I posted the links - more than one I think - but definitely at least once - to both the Federal Court case that got the EPA study tossed and to the WHO study on NIH site. I've done your research for you already once, if you are unable to read or keep up, I'm not doing your homework for you - again.

 

Why don't you post the link so everyone can read what you refer to? No one is going to take your word for it. Your credibility went out the window several hundred posts ago on the topic of smoking. Others here have posted links...why don't you? Post the links to all this research of which you speak if you have nothing to hide.

[AllieInMD]

Asked and answered - I gave the links - if you can't follow or keep up - that would be your problem.

 

Here's a hint for you - before you toss down the gauntlet and tell someone they didn't post any links you might want to actually check and see that they did before you try to call them out on it. Just a thought.

 

Where are your links? Let's see this scientific research you talk so much about. We'd like to read it but we can't if you don't provide any links.

[AllieInMD]

Thanks for the compliment. I am becoming more active in fighting for smoker's rights - and so is my SO.

 

The thread may have gotten so off topic but this is the longest running smoking thread I've seen here - not been POOF'd - rather impressive that ALL sides could keep it away from the personal attacks that get them POOF'd.

 

 

So, I'm finally at the end of the like 16 pages of posts on this subject...Whew!

 

I'm so entrigued about the sheer number of almost militant posts here. I sincerely wish that the energy that has been expounded could be used to solve some of the larger issues facing our great nation; ie. fuel prices, economic downturn, lack of even adequate healthcare for more than 4 MILLION Americans, etc etc. I realize that everyone on both sides of this issue are very passionate about their opinions and to that I give you all a big "kudas". There are several issues that far outweigh the merits of smoking/non-smoking. To Allie, I love your passion and ability to find stats that back your point. Please run for office or work for your local politician (not being sarcastic here at all). Our government could certainly benefit from someone with your debate abilities. For those of you that persist in being sarcastic and condscendiing, tisk tisk....shame on you. This board is supposed to be used for intelligent adult debate, the insults have no place here.

 

With this said, smokers ~ smoke where it's allowed and non-smokers ~ avoid those areas. Sorry, but that's the only answer here. Incidently, this thread was started to address the issue of inconsistency in the UK brochure. I think it's gotten WAY off topic.

[cruisinMike]

Asked and answered - I gave the links - if you can't follow or keep up - that would be your problem.

 

Here's a hint for you - before you toss down the gauntlet and tell someone they didn't post any links you might want to actually check and see that they did before you try to call them out on it. Just a thought.

 

Actually, no, you didn't give any WHO links on your wild assertions. I have provided the WHO documentation for that time period you refer to that refutes your assertions. You choose to parrot the disinformation of the tobacco industry. If I'm wrong, I'd like to see your link to the WHO.

[TexCruise371]

Well, you hold the record - I've never known anyone that smoked 3 packs a day - if you sleep 8 hrs - that's still like a cig every 15 minutes - even I would be sick from that.

 

Personally I don't think that is the majority that smoke that much, but I don't discount your life experience.

 

LOL...I said "at times". For instance during harvest, sitting on a combine 16 hours a day for a couple of months can cause you to do lot's of things.....like have 2 cigarettes going at the same time. Did it many times :confused: . Chain smoker, it's not that hard to do Allie.

 

I'll have to agree with the other poster. Though we differ on some subjects and thoughts, I admire your passion. ;)

 

I'm certainly not against smokers. It's getting tougher to be one in today's society.

[rubrrick]

Thanks for the compliment. I am becoming more active in fighting for smoker's rights - and so is my SO.

 

The thread may have gotten so off topic but this is the longest running smoking thread I've seen here - not been POOF'd - rather impressive that ALL sides could keep it away from the personal attacks that get them POOF'd.

 

 

Allie........

 

I started this thread because my friend in England is very pro smoking.....and pointed out to me the UK brochure showing that smoking is allowed in cabins.

 

Altho I'm not a Brit.........their brochure states flatly that there will be " no no smoking cabins". Either that would be a typo........with 2 no's, or it's OK to smoke in any cabin.

 

Then when we arrive at the vessel........every cabin has a "no smoking" symbol next to, or on the door.:eek:

 

I asked my friend today if she had followed up with RCL UK to find the correct answer............alas she had a death in the family that she needs to tend to, so no chance to talk to RCL UK.

 

Maybe someone over there can ask on her behalf!

 

Rick

[Davey Interweb]

I'm so entrigued about the sheer number of almost militant posts here. I sincerely wish that the energy that has been expounded could be used to solve some of the larger issues facing our great nation; ie. fuel prices, economic downturn, lack of even adequate healthcare for more than 4 MILLION Americans, etc etc.

 

No doubt. I also find quite alarming the sheer number of people who so willingly accept the propaganda - and I'm not talking about tobacco research - that's spoon-fed to them on a daily basis, and who can't be bothered taking the time away from American Idol to instead expend their energy on such mundane things as "critical thinking". While it's nice to see that people here in either side of the fence are passionate about something, I too wish it could be put to better use but I know that this is unlikely in today's apathetic and disinterested society. Too bad.