CapitolFax.com - Latest Comments in Question of the day

Re: Question of the day

Eleni — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 04:35:50 -0000

interesting

Re: Question of the day

John S. — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 09:43:43 -0000

If they can ban smoking, they can ban dogs too. People don't control their dogs at sidewalk cafes in the city. It's a joke. When you ask them to control their dog, they look at you like you just asked them to get undressed.

They should pass a law like they have in Europe, all dogs in public places have to wear a muzzle.

Re: Question of the day

Loyal Whig — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 00:18:00 -0000

Next, dogs will be voting in the 42nd ward.

Re: Question of the day

NI80 — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 19:42:24 -0000

No. It's disgusting and unsanitary. Would you like to eat food that's just come off a counter that a cat was laying on?

Re: Question of the day

Disgusted — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 18:39:27 -0000

Have you folks ever taken a good look at the kitchens, cooks and servers in many restaurants and fast food places???? I'd rather have the dog serve my meal!!!

Re: Question of the day

Anonymous — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 18:01:57 -0000

I would much rather be eating at a table next to Fido, than put up with an undisciplined child and its irresponsible parents who think everything their kid does is "cute." Heck, I might even make room for Fido at my table and buy him a drink!

Re: Question of the day

312 — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:18:21 -0000

And its not just a 'Chicago thing' for the dogs. I've lived downstate (10+ years) the burbs and downtown Chicago --- and took our well-behaved pooches everywhere we could.

And if they were not behaving in public, we took them home, which more parents SHOULD do.

Re: Question of the day

312 Yuppie — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:14:49 -0000

YES, YES, YES!!! Ultimately, let the business owner decide --- We take our dog/s everywhere they're welcome, and they're MUCH cleaner, better behaved, and sociable than most children.

You should try going to White Sox Dog Day sometime --- Granted, you need to sign a zillion wavers that your dog won't hurt anyone, you won't sue the Sox if something happens, etc. I've been going for 8 years and have never seen an incident, and that's with 600 dogs in one place. Thank god they've stopped the fireworks for that game though!

Don't want a well-behaved dog near you in a cafe? Go somewhere else. YOU can eat at home!

AND Don't start dissing us 'yuppies'. If it wasn't for us, Chicago would be a ghost town. Who do you think has helped bring back this city so the tourists and suburbanites can visit safely? Not the Stepford-ville residents with their 'precious babies' that try to act 'street' the second Mommy + Daddy aren't looking. If it wasn't for Yuppies helping revive the city, Illinois would be Iowa.

We dine out a lot, and always ask for the 'non-shrieking' section --- I can't tell you how many times my dinner has been ruined by some obnoxious, pampered snot-nosed brat that mommy + daddy can't control.

Now if they would only ban the obnoxious children, homeless people and pigeons from the outdoor spots, life would be good.

Arg!

Re: Question of the day

Scooby Doo — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:46:24 -0000

Rikes! Rapa Regba is Risgusting!

Re: Question of the day

Papa Legba — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:56:20 -0000

Why not? Only idiots, the same ones who let their small children who run around restaurants, would bring their dog to a public area if it was unruly.

This is just another example of anal, puritanical American mentality. Topless beaches? Oh no! That will turn everybody into rapists and molesters. Dogs in outdoor cafes or pubs. Oh my God! I might be bothered by Fido lying quietly under a table.

I would rather eat next to someones dog than ride public transportation in Chicago. Morons sneezing on the back of your head, or in your face, yahoo's coughing up loogies and spewing God knows what.

I would rather lick a toilet seat than a hand rail on the CTA.

Sorry for digressing.

Re: Question of the day

anonymiss — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:40:06 -0000

every one just simmer down. if the gov signs the enabling state bill the city of chicago needed to do this, it doesnt become effective until jan 1, when outdoor cafes are closed anyway. much a-woof about nothing.

Re: Question of the day

Jerry — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:31:26 -0000

No dogs. I've seen enough large, unruly dogs at cafe's to know that they shouldn't be at a cafe. The last time I went out for brunch, the dog at the next table kept sneaking under the fence to try to get at my bacon. His owner had to keep jumping up and dragging him back around. Yes, the dog was leashed, but the leash was long enough for it to make a move toward my table. And that's far from the first time I've seen an unruly dog at an outdoor cafe.

Don't get me wrong, I love dogs (I wish I had a big enough apartment to get a Boxer), but they are not appropriate at a dining establishment. Too many dogs aren't trained well enough to resist the temptation to get at food.

Plus, dogs occasionally get in fights with one another, even well behaved ones. There's a risk of bites as well. Not to mention urine and feces.

And yes, were it possible, I'd be more than happy to have pigeons banned from outdoor cafes. Pigeons are nastier than dogs. But at least a pigeon isn't likely to go after your food or start a fight with another pigeon.

Restaurants are for people. If a restaurant wants to have a pole away from the dining area for people to tether their dogs to, that's fine. But not in the seating area.

Re: Question of the day

ZC — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:29:11 -0000

Isn't this a tempest in a teapot? If you have a problem with outdoor cafes that allow dogs, DON'T EAT AT THOSE CAFES. This isn't an ordinance, so far as I know, that mandates every outdoor cafe accept dogs - so some will, some won't. Can't we all get along?

Re: Question of the day

VanillaMan — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:16:48 -0000

Our wee widdle poopsie wouldn't hurt a fly. If you meanies won't let us eat with our little baby doll, then you aren't good enough to be with us.

So there!

Re: Question of the day

Way Northsider — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:51:38 -0000

Yes. This obsession with cleanliness is causing huge increases in allergies and various other health problems. Bacteria are vital. You cannot live in a bubble. You eat in the homes of people who have dogs. You walk past dogs on the street. What is the big deal with this? Dogs are not people. Dogs are dogs. However, people and dogs have coexisted peacefully for a very long time. There is no reason to make a huge issue of it. Dogs are everywhere anyway and they are at sidewalk cafes all across Europe. In years of patronizing these places I have never fallen ill or had any problems.

Re: Question of the day

47th Ward — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:36:32 -0000

Only if the dog is on the menu. Mmmmm, German Shepard pie...aaaaaaaahhhhh.

Re: Question of the day

Skeeter — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:24:30 -0000

Safety aspect to dogs?

I've been taking my Germ. Shep. to cafes for three years and have never had the slightest problem (although the dog did once start crying very loudly one day when my wife walked away for a minute -- luckily the high pitched screech didn't do any lasting harm).

Humans are a different matter. In those years I've seen plenty of dangerous drunks. Better to ban all alcohol than to ban dogs.

What's great about dogs in cafes -- for those of you not luckily enough to live in an area with them -- is the social aspect. People sit outside with their dogs and talk to neighbors as they walk by. There is a real sense of community, and the dogs play an important role. Without the dogs a lot of the people would never have met.

Bottom line: Don't like dogs? Find another cafe. If you are that uptight we probably don't want you hanging around near us anyway.

Re: Question of the day

BLAH — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:16:42 -0000

You're right YDD - we already banned foi gras to the amusement of the rest of the free world (and poor Hot Doug's) -why don't we start with banning everything else. Meanwhile, let's just forget about things that matter...like the ummm - budget, property taxes, schools, pensions, CTA!!

Re: Question of the day

Snoopy — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:16:11 -0000

YDD: There is a safety aspect with regard to dogs that maybe I did not emphasize enough. You are correct about the movies, but there are also "adults" that do not know how to behave in a theatre and never will. Try watching a movie in a theatre in Hillside or North Riverside. (Thank you, DVD industry.) Belle is correct. I will add that I have seen parents completely non-discipline their kids, especially on the North Shore. They are all Democrats too; I wish I was kidding about that.

Re: Question of the day

Yellow Dog Democrat — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:02:23 -0000

"Dogs are inherently unpredictable, unsanitary and dangerous."

You just described people.

Things I'd rather see banned:

Children under 12 in movie theatres for showtimes starting after 8 pm.

Cell phones in restaurants.

Cell phones in Wrigley.

Bulk mail.

"Dibs" on shoveled parking spots.

Re: Question of the day

Snoopy — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 13:16:34 -0000

No. Dogs are inherently unpredictable, unsanitary and dangerous. "Every dog gets one bite?" If that was you or your child permanently disfigured from that bite you would think differently. Feed your dogs at home. And eat out of their bowl if you think they are better than or more valuable than humans.

Re: Question of the day

i d — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 13:03:49 -0000

Leave it up to the business owner. I wouldn't take my dog because she would turn her nose up if someone other than family offered her food.

Re: Question of the day

VanillaMan — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:58:34 -0000

Oh, waiter!
That guy's dog just bit me!
Yeah, that one. The one that is fighting and barking with that other one at table 7.
Watch out!
Don't trip over that leash!
Hey!
Who brought the Ferret?!

Re: Question of the day

Carl Nyberg — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:49:35 -0000

What human diseases do dogs carry besides rabies?

Keep in mind that it's not like restaurants are like sanitary wards in hospitals. We already allow large mammals in restaurants that do carry human diseases (Homo sapiens). And it's policy not to deny diseased Homo sapiens in restaurants.

So, I'm having a hard time buying that allowing dogs in restaurants provides significant new disease vectors that don't already exist.

It seems like this is largely an aesthetic issue. Therefore, I'm inclined to support allowing the restaurant owners to establish their preferred aesthetics at their restaurants.

Re: Question of the day

Potty Mouth — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:49:34 -0000

YDD--in some civlized countries they actually eat dogs. "My Hot dog as a first name, it's F-I-D-O..." Boy, that's tasty.