Posted on 07/19/2006 4:47:01 AM PDT by xrp
Marriott to make all US, Canada hotels non-smoking
Wednesday July 19, 6:34 am ET
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Marriott International Inc. (NYSE:MAR - News) on Wednesday said it will make all of its hotels in the United States and Canada entirely non-smoking, beginning in September.
The company said the policy change, which it called the largest in its industry, covers more than 2,300 hotels and corporate apartments with nearly 400,000 rooms.
Marriott, based in Bethesda, Maryland, said more than 90 percent of its guest rooms are already non-smoking. It said more customers have been demanding non-smoking rooms.
The change covers such brands as Marriott, Ritz-Carlton, Renaissance, Courtyard, Residence Inn and Fairfield Inn. Marriott has nearly 2,800 lodging properties in the United States and 67 other countries.
"EXCUSE ME??? You know, I'm a little sick and tired of fellow FReepers telling us that we are "LOW CLASS" and not the "brightest of the lot!"
They cant help it, its from years and years of anti tobacco brainwashing.. this is how the antis attack smokers now.. if you smoke you must either be "dumb" or "low class". I tend to think its aimed at the younger people in an attempt to make smoking "uncool"
Sorry.. but it wont float with me.. I know plenty of people who smoke and are NOT low class or stupid.
Some of us who still smoke.. could care less what the latest anti "propaganda du jour" says about our lifestyle. :) We will keep smoking and ENJOY the fact that our smoking ticks off the antis.. lol
Thanks for the ping btw.. looks like I wont be spending any money with Marriot
Thank you! I'm glad the word is finally getting out! :)
I suppose you insist on the "right" to force me and others to inhale your vile smokey excrement just so you can indulge your habit of choice?
You militant smokers assume you should just be able to blow your smoke in everyone's faces and and no one should be allowed to complain about it. Narcissm in its most advanced form.
So, it's appeasement that yer calling for, eh? That's likely to win over the anti-smoking terrorists?
So, when smoking was outlawed in Government buildings and smokers complied, that was the end of the anti-smoking terrorism campaign? Not by a longshot!
But you need to understand how the world works. Now that they made the change, they will put pressure on federal and local governments to enact smoking bans in every area they have a hotel or restaurant.
======
What planet do you live on? Don't you understand P.C corporate speak, when you hear it. I know many, many people in the hotel business. As long as you and the rest of the ilk bought the speel, good for them. They're having a good chuckle at your expense. They are going to throw out every pipe, cigar, doobie, and cigarette smoker who are paying top dollar to appease a single sniveler like you ? Puleeeeeze. These are private rooms. If you don't like the smell of Rush's cigar coming out of his 1500.00 a night suite, or some rock stars cigarette or doobie, they'll be happy to escort you someplace else. Bank on it. Hotels hate busybodies.
People should be allowed to smoke, if they so choose.
People should be allowed to smoke in public, if they so choose.
People who go into casinos, bars, poll halls, strip joints, juke joints, etc. know they will encounter smoking there and just have to deal with it, like grown ups do. It would be ludicrous for a non-smoker to go into such places and demand to be accomodated by everyone else.
But, smokers who willfully light up in confined spaces (or in other public places where they know their smoke is unwelcome) because they are under the bizarre delusion that their "right" to smoke trumps everyone else's right to breath are rude a-holes and deserve to be called on it.
Like I said: Simple human courtesy. Funny that should be so controversial.
People smoke in no smoking rooms all the time.
I'm waiting for no-poking rooms.
80% of the adult population does not smoke though...so I don't understand the money argument...
Smokers have yet to adopt behavior that considers the nonsmoker. They simply smoke wherever and whenever they can. That is the attitude that is their downfall.
Keep digging. Your laughable responses only paint you further into a corner.
Your response to which I'm replying demonstrates that you have nothing left. It may be funny sounding, sort of like a Dan Ratherism, but it is meaningless. Simply stating something doesn't make it so, however much you may wish it to be.
Once again, I'm not an anti-smoker, which should be clear from the fact that I admitted to smoking. Perhaps you can't read.
Look and you will find posts where I rail against the government passing laws against smoking and Internet tobacco sales or passing laws establishing "sin" taxes. I tend to be quite libertarian in my views.
I may not be anti-smoking, but I AM anti-rude jerk. Why? Because people like you are the ones who ultimately cause our freedoms to be restricted. Your initial reply to which I responded qualified for a calling out.
Now, your label no longer works, so let's dispense with your cute Dan Ratherism next:
I demonstrated that you were generally an anti-social jerk in my initial reply to your ridiculous, overly defensive tirade towards a poster who merely stated that smoke enters non-smoking rooms via ventilation systems.
Your response proved you to be a liar with your silly attempt to back pedal on your statemsnts. I pointed out that your own citation in the initial post contradicted your statements in a follow-up reply.
Next, I demonstrated how you were a hypocrite in your accusations concerning victimhood, since your inital post was nothing more than your own whining and crying about being a victim.
You now know that you can't lie or make blatantly hypocrtical statements in your own defensive victimhood.
Your last resort is to lie, and issue a cute one-liner with no meaning or demonstrable basis in truth.
Given your final non-response and general retreat, who now is actually the one that is "all hat and no cattle" in this exchange? Who is backing away, beaten down, unable to put together a logical argument at this point?
I really do not expect to educate you or win you over. I'm merely demonstrating for others what you are. Pure bluster, with no basis for it.
If it stinks and ruins my clothes, it is pollution to me. Just move away, keep it outside and don't blow it in my face, and we will get along. I might even join you outside for smoke.
The anti-cigarette campaign is a movement by the lawyers, of the lawyers, for the lawyers.
Yes, I'm well aware of this. I'm an advocate of tort reform and believe the lawyers who get rich off suing companies on behalf of "victims" who are merely victims of their own choice, should be strung up and tortured.
I'm not asking for laws, lawsuits or even general shunning of smokers. I'm merely asking for a little decency. I can do it, so can you.
Now go back and read my posts and be more careful with your assumptions.
That is your right and I support you, as I do others who won't spend $65 for a room that smells. We all vote with our wallets and each niche can be filled. No politicians or lawyers are needed.
Formerly known as the hospitality industry.
They are free to make their choice ... and so am I. No Marriot rooms for me anymore.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.