"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 19:15:00 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

Pity you didn't comprehend what Roger wrote.

Pity you lack the capacity to comprehend what I comprehend. . .

I repeat: pity you didn't understand what Roger wrote.

And, you're an idiot! Here is a copy and paste of what Roger wrote:

"the HR 2550 bill, despite the appearance of the bill itself, IS
intended to
prevent recreational boats from being dragged into a permit system that
Boat
US indicates could cost several hundred dollars a year.

"Sounds like we'd better hope this passes. Permits would be state run
under
federal mandate. This might not be a problem in places like Maine where
boating is recognized as essential to the tourist economy but some
states
might see the revenue generated by such a permit system as a quick
soak-the-rich fiscal fix."

Now, here's why he's still confused. The first paragraph is correct. The
second is wrong. Permits would not be run by states under federal
mandate - not for recreational boats at least, as this legislation
exempts recreational boats. In other words nothing would change for
recreational boats. It would be status quo. In other words that federal
judge who legislated from the bench would have his hand slapped by
congress. And, that's the way it SHOULD be.

Now, try and get a clue! How can you be a lawyer when you're such a
dolt?

Wilbur Hubbard