Smoke gets in her eyes
Jamie Jones, 23, of Blue Ash, couldn't wait to cast her votes: No on Issue 4, yes on Issue 5. "I can't wait for all restaurants to be non-smoking. It's very imporant to me," she said.
Submitted by Katie Clavey
|
|
|
Politics Extra Enquirer reporters give the scoop on what your politicians are doing |
 |
 Jessica Brown, Hamilton County reporter  Jon Craig, Enquirer statehouse bureau  Jane Prendergast, Cincinnati City Hall reporter  Malia Rulon, Enquirer Washington bureau  Carl Weiser, Blog editor  Howard Wilkinson, politics reporter Previous Posts
|
Tuesday, November 07, 2006 |
14 Comments:
at 9:35 AM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:44 AM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:45 AM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 9:52 AM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:02 AM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:13 AM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 10:40 AM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:08 AM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 11:24 AM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 12:32 PM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:00 PM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 2:32 PM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3:12 PM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 7:23 PM, November 07, 2006 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*Well Jamie, my vote just cancelled out your vote.
Do you realize that most restaurants WILL be smoke free if issue 4 passes? Issue 4 AND 5 will fix your smokey eyes, but issue 4 will allow the adult venues, such as bars, to continue to allow smoking in designated areas.
I voted the same way but I think it will be a battle. Every smoker is against a smoking ban. The tobacco companies did a good job of confusing people and supporting their "smoking ban" which increases the areas of public smoking. I would love it but working with 3 smokers in a 4 person office, I don't have my hopes up.
If a restaurant wants to be non-smoking, they should choose it themselves, not have nanny-statists force it down everyone's throat.
Yes on 4, NO on 5!
You have the right to smoke...in your own home. I have the right to not breath in your smoke....No on 4, Yes on 5!
Well I voted the same way, but the most important vote to me was the NO on 4. The last thing we need is a CONSTITUTIONAL AMMENDMENT over some like this.
I let restaurants know my displeasure with their smoking policy by not giving them my business.
vote no on both - 4 makes it so local governments can't decide and 5 wastes tax dollars on creating the smoke police.
Anonymous at 9:35am, 11/7, when Jamie's Issue 5 passes by one vote, that one vote will be hers.
Having a smoking section in a restaurant makes as much sense as having a peeing section in a public swimming pool. My right to breathe clean air supercedes anyone else's right to smoke, period. So I voted no on 4 (I don't believe in tinkering with the state Constitution) and yes on 5.
Can you say communist nation? Or close to it. Don't forget folks, us smokers pay A LOT of your taxes. Smoking ban equals increase in taxes for all. Don't come crying to me when they start upping the taxes to make up for the loss of tax money due to decreased smoking!
Anonymous 11:24: Don't come crying to me when you live longer and are able to taste your food again.
Issue 4 only allows smoking in a restaurant if the area is separated by an actual wall. Unlike the way it is now. Since most restaurant can't afford to put up a wall I'm sure they will just be smoke free.
at 11:08 AM, November 07, 2006 TNP said...
Anonymous at 9:35am, 11/7, when Jamie's Issue 5 passes by one vote, that one vote will be hers.
Ahhhhh...that's so touching. I almost want to cry NOT!
its obvious and unfortunate that no matter what happens, not many took the time to understand what the issues meant. after reading the responses here and hearing from others, i will vote no on both, but hope that something can be done to come closer to making both sides happy. "smoking police" and ammending the state constitution do not make sense, but giving the non smoker a smoke free option while giving the smoker and bar industry options would be perfect. perfection is unattainable.....
Hey Jamie if you cry about smoke in you eyes just imagine what our troops have encountered over the last 230 years in warfare. Focus on losing weight. Your perfume reminds me of ... ugly stuff, don't wear any.
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home