Courier Connection: Recent Comments

Comment on Weekly Interview: Saco author weaves camp tales into first book (July 17, 2008)

Randy Randall — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:12:08 GMT

Thank you Gillian. I certainly enjoyed our time together talking about my book. You could not have picked a more perfect afternoon to come to the Saco River. I think you did a good job capturing the essence of what my little book is about. I've received many comments and congratulations since the paper came out on Thursday. Just wanted you to know I appreciate your time and the space in the paper. Thanks again.

Comment on Biddeford officials question multiple staff requests (July 17, 2008)

Karl Reed — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:37:35 GMT

is this even newsworthy?????

Comment on Letter: My opinion: Keep the airport open (July 10, 2008)

Steve — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:54:30 GMT

Great point. Find out exactly how much it will cost to close. Without the facts, I vote to keep it open

Comment on Survey: Smoking ban favored (June 26, 2008)

Karl Reed — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 00:29:35 GMT

Biddeford is turning back the clock and becoming more like isolationists. Ban's on personal rights and liberties make no sense......

I think Councilor Mills did a great job getting this Vote No added to this survey. What are they thinking? Anyone in the world can vote on this poll. How does it reflect the population of 20,000?

Comment on Letter: Cast vote to close the airport in Nov. (July 3, 2008)

Marv Apiego — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 07:47:49 GMT

Another interesting, but useless submission by Mr. Pelitier. When another organization or individual submits data concerning the airport, it's "made up." But, surprisingly, Mr. Pelitier has used the same methodology to support his stance on closing the airport. Now who are you going to believe? A disgruntled neighbor who knowingly buys a house next to an airport, or an international organization that is dedicated to preserving our rights and freedom to chose?

Comment on Survey: Smoking ban favored (June 26, 2008)

Jason — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:31:51 GMT

Thought not implying Biddeford, Maine would be as draconian as those about whom I am to state an historical fact, but Napoleon and Hitler both favored smoking-bans - both enacted bans and were anti-tobacco, anti-smoking.

It is ironic to go full-circle back to where we came from as in the early part of the last century, tobacco was illegal in something like 15 states - all smoking banned, eventually along with alcohol prohibition.

The point isn't to accuse Biddeford of being as ambitious as was Napoleon and Hitler - it isn't to draw parallels - but it is to bring into question, what parts of our psyche are we drawing upon, when we start imitating the same type of mean-spirited-ness that in past historical periods, were symbolic of eventual mayhem and general lack of freedoms that eventually resulted.

Is that really an American ideal and is it appropriate to sink back to that low a level that we seek to revive ideals that were once the province of Napoleon and Hitler, which is an actual historical fact.

Otherwise, the claims of SHS being harmful are dramatically overstated using cherry-picked data using pharmaceutical funding sources (mainly).

Even British Medical Journal as recent as 2006 was able to publish one of the most comprehensive "statistical studies" ever done, and yet no correlation was shown to exist between SHS and harm to non-smokers.

There has been a greater amount of politicking and a lesser amount of science done on this subject and usually, where there's a money motive, there's usually a smoking gun, hiding in the background, and in this case more than likely the pharmaceuticals making money selling non-taxed nicotine gums, lozenges and patches as well as making a mint in anti-depressants and Chantix.

For the record, I am a non-smoker, but the history and real science on this matter is something quite different than the popular hysteria drummed up by the media as of late - which of course - with all those drug ads on TV, you would think they get as much money from ad revenue these days from the drug companies as they once did from the tobacco companies.

That in itself tells a story too, as far as bias in reporting goes.

Comment on Survey: Smoking ban favored (June 26, 2008)

flex — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:14:02 GMT

Another state sponsored behavior modification attempt against smokers.
How much longer are We going to allow the
Pharmaceutical industry to finance this witch hunt against smokers to contenue?
The legal drug pushers in white coats have products to sell and We are allow them to take control of Our health institutions. This industry makes far more money to prolong an illness than to find a cure for it. Much, much more.
The created second hand smoke hysteria is very profitable for big pharma.
Health concerns about second hand smoke outside.
What a joke.
The health fascist movement is on the roll.

flex

Comment on Letter: Mills: Thanks to all who supported me (July 3, 2008)

Karl Reed — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:22:59 GMT

Keep on keeping the great work you do for our ward and the city

Comment on Survey: Smoking ban favored (June 26, 2008)

Thomas — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:30:51 GMT

There are two reasons for smoking bans

1. Quarantine/isolate the smoker.
2.De-normalize smoking.
Unfortuantely, the hospitality industry is caught in the cross-fire.

Comment on Letter: Cast vote to close the airport in Nov. (July 3, 2008)

Ben Dover — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:30:29 GMT

If someone is going to use the same argument over and over I would recommend they use some type of spell check.

The word is "guilty" not "quilty" unless you are making a flag for July th.

The airport is a valuable asset to the community. If you want much higher taxes then close it because the revenue for the city must come from somewhere. Unless of course the 4 people that want the airport closed will pay the cost themselves and save the taxpayers some money.