Roanoke Times and Dan Casey strikes again

imported post

So, I've been following the blog of Dan Casey at the Roanoke Times, and he seems to be at it again. If it wasn't so sad, it might be amusing.

http://blogs.roanoke.com/rtblogs/dancasey/2009/06/27/actual-stories-concealed-carry-death-andor-mayhem/

imported post

:banghead:


I think you said it best: "If it wasn't so sad, it might be amusing." :?

imported post

You can't polish a turd.

imported post

ProShooter wrote:

You can't polish a turd.

Click to expand...

Actually it would be easier to polish a turd than understand his twisted logic.

Mythbusters made some rather shiny polished turds :lol:

imported post

If you really want to change opinions, contact their advertisers and let them know you won't be buying from a company that supports this garbage.

imported post

People like this should be put to sleep. They are specifically and exactly what is wrong with FREE society today.

They WANT to be ruled. They NEED to be told what to do. Otherwise, their heads would explode from having to make too many decisions on their own.

And they figure that everyone else must be just like them, so let's impose our own morality (or, rather, lack thereof) on the rest of humanity because we're weak-minded simpletons.

imported post

Any wonder with tripe like this that newspapers are losing their audience?

Yata hey

Disclaimer: Poster is not literally intended.

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Any wonder with tripe like this that newspapers are losing their audience?

Yata hey

Disclaimer: Poster is not literally intended.

Click to expand...

Actually, I've been reading some of his responses in the comments thread. I always like it when the author makes comments to reader's comments. He seems fairly objective, albeit starting from a very "anti" starting point. He says he's going to post links to events where CC saved someone's life that someone had emailed him. We'll see if he does and what he has to say about that....

PS: Our issue really isn't with "journalists" but with "journalists" that aren't really being journalists :^). Just the facts ma'am....

imported post

Neplusultra wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Any wonder with tripe like this that newspapers are losing their audience?

Yata hey

Disclaimer: Poster is not literally intended.

Click to expand...

Actually, I've been reading some of his responses in the comments thread. I always like it when the author makes comments to reader's comments. He seems fairly objective, albeit starting from a very "anti" starting point. He says he's going to post links to events where CC saved someone's life that someone had emailed him. We'll see if he does and what he has to say about that....

PS: Our issue really isn't with "journalists" but with "journalists" that aren't really being journalists :^). Just the facts ma'am....

Click to expand...

I agree completely. A journalest should always be objective:what:


http://news.oldva.org/blogroll/a-double-ox-butt-award-for-tim-kaine/
A double Ox Butt award for Tim Kaine

Kaine, will you please go away!

Kaine said about the anti smoking bill today:
“Once it happens you don’t see a move to go backwards andI think it is because people will get the experience and realize that this a good thing for health and just for aesthetic enjoyment of people eating out,” said Kaine.
You are too dumb to be dogcatcher, let alone Governor! This is Tobacco Country and you just won a double Ox Butt award!

imported post

In Dan Casey's Bio is states that "he knows a little bit about allot of things, but not allot about anything in particular". It shows. :lol:

imported post

peter nap wrote:

Kaine said about the anti smoking bill today:
“Once it happens you don’t see a move to go backwards andI think it is because people will get the experience and realize that this a good thing for health and just for aesthetic enjoyment of people eating out,” said Kaine.

Click to expand...

In the old days, when people still had property rights, there was this custom when you walked into a restaurant, the waitress would ask you, "Smoking or non-smoking?" She would then seat you in the section reserved for what you chose. That way everyone was happy. The non-smokers enjoyed the flavor of their food and their clothing remained fresh smelling. The smokers got their nicotine fix which allowed them to enjoy their meal. And restaurant owners were happy because they got the business of both groups. Ahhh. Those were the days :^).

The only ones that weren't happy were the over zealous do-gooders who would see the smokers smoking on the other side of the restaurant. But who cares about them :^)?

imported post

Neplusultra wrote:

peter nap wrote:

Kaine said about the anti smoking bill today:
“Once it happens you don’t see a move to go backwards andI think it is because people will get the experience and realize that this a good thing for health and just for aesthetic enjoyment of people eating out,” said Kaine.

Click to expand...

In the old days, when people still had property rights, there was this custom when you walked into a restaurant, the waitress would ask you, "Smoking or non-smoking?" She would then seat you in the section reserved for what you chose. That way everyone was happy. The non-smokers enjoyed the flavor of their food and their clothing remained fresh smelling. The smokers got their nicotine fix which allowed them to enjoy their meal. And restaurant owners were happy because they got the business of both groups. Ahhh. Those were the days :^).

The only ones that weren't happy were the over zealous do-gooders who would see the smokers smoking on the other side of the restaurant. But who cares about them :^)?

Click to expand...

Even here up in NoVA, we have NON SMOKING RESTAURANTS! Golly, the FREE MARKET figured out that people didn't want to eat in smoke filled filth! And guess what, no law needed to be passed!

Crazy how that free market works!

imported post

hsmith wrote:

Neplusultra wrote:

peter nap wrote:

Kaine said about the anti smoking bill today:
“Once it happens you don’t see a move to go backwards andI think it is because people will get the experience and realize that this a good thing for health and just for aesthetic enjoyment of people eating out,” said Kaine.

Click to expand...

In the old days, when people still had property rights, there was this custom when you walked into a restaurant, the waitress would ask you, "Smoking or non-smoking?" She would then seat you in the section reserved for what you chose. That way everyone was happy. The non-smokers enjoyed the flavor of their food and their clothing remained fresh smelling. The smokers got their nicotine fix which allowed them to enjoy their meal. And restaurant owners were happy because they got the business of both groups. Ahhh. Those were the days :^).

The only ones that weren't happy were the over zealous do-gooders who would see the smokers smoking on the other side of the restaurant. But who cares about them :^)?

Click to expand...

Even here up in NoVA, we have NON SMOKING RESTAURANTS! Golly, the FREE MARKET figured out that people didn't want to eat in smoke filled filth! And guess what, no law needed to be passed!

Crazy how that free market works!

Click to expand...

I think I resent that remark....even though I agree with it
:banghead:

imported post

Neplusultra wrote:

peter nap wrote:

Kaine said about the anti smoking bill today:
“Once it happens you don’t see a move to go backwards andI think it is because people will get the experience and realize that this a good thing for health and just for aesthetic enjoyment of people eating out,” said Kaine.

Click to expand...

In the old days, when people still had property rights, there was this custom when you walked into a restaurant, the waitress would ask you, "Smoking or non-smoking?" She would then seat you in the section reserved for what you chose. That way everyone was happy. The non-smokers enjoyed the flavor of their food and their clothing remained fresh smelling. The smokers got their nicotine fix which allowed them to enjoy their meal. And restaurant owners were happy because they got the business of both groups. Ahhh. Those were the days :^).

The only ones that weren't happy were the over zealous do-gooders who would see the smokers smoking on the other side of the restaurant. But who cares about them :^)?

Click to expand...

I'm fully aware that this is not the smoking-in-restaurants-forum, but you really have left out what I suspect is the largest group of folks, the very unhappy "non-smokers who were seated just a few feet away from a 'magic line' that was somehow supposed to keep their food tasting fine, and their hair and clothes smelling fresh, but since smoke obeys the laws of physics, and disperses randomly with the air currents, and does not follow 'magic lines' drawn on seating charts in a restaurant, their food still tasted nasty, and their hair and clothes ended up smelling nasty as well" group.

Trust me, I am no fan of Kaine, but if we get this one good thing from him, perhaps it will be one less evil he will be punished for in the after-life...

Barring a closed room and separate ventilation system, you can't get around the age-old saying: "A smoking section in a restaurant is like a peeing section in a swimming pool."



TFred

imported post

TFred wrote:

Neplusultra wrote:

peter nap wrote:

Kaine said about the anti smoking bill today:
“Once it happens you don’t see a move to go backwards andI think it is because people will get the experience and realize that this a good thing for health and just for aesthetic enjoyment of people eating out,” said Kaine.

Click to expand...

In the old days, when people still had property rights, there was this custom when you walked into a restaurant, the waitress would ask you, "Smoking or non-smoking?" She would then seat you in the section reserved for what you chose. That way everyone was happy. The non-smokers enjoyed the flavor of their food and their clothing remained fresh smelling. The smokers got their nicotine fix which allowed them to enjoy their meal. And restaurant owners were happy because they got the business of both groups. Ahhh. Those were the days :^).

The only ones that weren't happy were the over zealous do-gooders who would see the smokers smoking on the other side of the restaurant. But who cares about them :^)?

Click to expand...

I'm fully aware that this is not the smoking-in-restaurants-forum, but you really have left out what I suspect is the largest group of folks, the very unhappy "non-smokers who were seated just a few feet away from a 'magic line' that was somehow supposed to keep their food tasting fine, and their hair and clothes smelling fresh, but since smoke obeys the laws of physics, and disperses randomly with the air currents, and does not follow 'magic lines' drawn on seating charts in a restaurant, their food still tasted nasty, and their hair and clothes ended up smelling nasty as well" group.

Trust me, I am no fan of Kaine, but if we get this one good thing from him, perhaps it will be one less evil he will be punished for in the after-life...

Barring a closed room and separate ventilation system, you can't get around the age-old saying: "A smoking section in a restaurant is like a peeing section in a swimming pool."



TFred

Click to expand...

Fred, you do have a point but as just pointed out, there are a number of non smoking restaurants.

If you don't want to see naked women, don't go to a nudie bar.

The bad news for non smokers that want to go to smoking restaurants is, most of the places I eat in on a regular basis, have talked to their lawyers and plan to put signs up that say NO SMOKING. Then ignore the ban.

The police sure aren't going to enforce it and the owner has covered his butt. So don't expect to go anywhere you want and have a smoke free environment.

I may start a new forum. OSDO (Open Smokers Dot Org):lol:

imported post

Neplusultra wrote:

Our issue really isn't with "journalists" but with "journalists" that aren't really being journalists :^). Just the facts ma'am....

Click to expand...

Casey doesnt claim to be a journalist. He claims to be a columnist, thus, the article slants in whichever direction he wishes.

imported post

ProShooter wrote:

Neplusultra wrote:

Our issue really isn't with "journalists" but with "journalists" that aren't really being journalists :^). Just the facts ma'am....

Click to expand...

Casey doesnt claim to be a journalist. He claims to be a columnist, thus, the article slants in whichever direction he wishes.

Click to expand...

Glad you brought it back on topic. I was wondering how long it would be, before someone ordered a rope!:lol:

imported post

I found this and had to laugh. I don't think you need to be a big fan of Spinal Tap to get a chuckle out of Jason's posting:



In the brilliant movie This is Spinal Tap, the band's manager explains to their dim-witted* guitarist that the small bread on their hors de oeurve platter is not too small, you just have to fold the meat to fit it. Nigel can't grasp the concept, even after having the meat folded to fit the bread, he stares and replies, "But if you keep folding it..." He then folds the mini-sandwich until it breaks.

Dan: Legal concealed carry in bars is a bad idea!
Jason: Dan, they have done it that way all over the country for years and it hasn't been a problem.
Dan: But alcohol + guns is a recipe for disaster.
Jason: Well yeah, it might seem that way at first, but there's no evidence that it's true.
Dan: Have you ever been in a bar? You can't have guns in there!
Jason: [Starting to cry] Dan, they already do!
Dan: Drunks are in bars. Drunks shouldn't have guns.
Jason: [Sobbing] Stop it Dan! You know you could see if this is a problem, why won't you look?!
Dan: But if you keep folding it....

*Unlike Nigel, Dan is not dim-witted. Dan is however married to an idea and he's holding onto that gal no matter how much she lies to him.

imported post

buster81 wrote:

Dan is however married to an idea and he's holding onto that gal no matter how much she lies to him.

Click to expand...

I'm really not looking forward to what kind of spin he will put on the column/blog he's supposedly writing that details/lists links to stories of how legal carry of firearms has saved lives. I think it's going to be something worthy of two, maybe even three, of the ":banghead:" emoticons.


:uhoh:

Maybe he'll surprise us and give an unbiased approach... doubtful, but maybe he'll do it through gritted teeth just to try and show proof that he is capable of not being ridiculously slanted.

imported post

Dan: Legal concealed carry in bars is a bad idea!

Click to expand...

Can't be no worse than illegal concealed carry in bars, and that's been going on for decades. Didn't hear anyone complaining about it then.

BTW, am I wrong or are Virginians already allowed to OC in bars?