"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...

Few things pizza me off worse than various organizations and associations
I
choose to belong to (or am compelled to belong to for professional
purposes)
making a decision about which political candidate they believe is "best"
for
the organization and steering my membership fees to their campaign.

Hmm. Do you feel the same way about unions?

On 08 Apr 2004 17:09:12 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

As this newsgroup so aptly illustrates, boating and politics are a difficult
mix.

===========================================

Truth is however, we as boaters need all the political support we can
get. Like it or not boaters are frequently categorized as "the rich",
and as a result considered fair game for all manner of ill advised
policies and taxes.

Right now I'd vote for any candidate that promised to get the Corps of
Engineers out of the "save the manatee" business, and back in the
business of approving my dock building permit. Come to think of it,
they really shouldn't be in that business either.

Couldn't wait to get back in the political BS, could you?
PLONK
Gordon

Too bad you won't see this Gordon.
Looks like you reacted emotionally, not intellectually.

Somebody asked, hypothetically, how we would feel it Boat US endorsed a
candidate.

I replied that I dislike organizations choosing candidates for me.

If you think that's "political BS", you're far too sensitive to hang around
rec.boats

I'm just passing through once in a while, and avoiding the political posts. The
question about BoatUS taking a stand in favor of a political candidate is a
boating related topic. Even in Sequim. I didn't agree or disagree with any
other aspect of the original post.

Plonk yourself.

Incidents like this remind me why I gave up on this kindergarten in the first
place.

My thoughts exactly. He comes back for two seconds and starts the
political baloney.

See my reply to Gordon, Wally.

The question: "What if BoatUS decided to endorse a political candidate" is a
boating related question. Especially if you're a member of Boat/US.

The comment, "I don't like organizations picking candidates for me" isn't
political baloney.

Am I not allowed to make any remark that encompasses potential political
activity by BOAT/US because I'm proud to be a liberal? Give me a break, I
didn't even mention your president or any of the several immensely discussable
"issues" of our time.

You'll want to apologize for your remark when you reevaluate my post. Don't
bother. Have a happy Easter instead.

On 08 Apr 2004 17:09:12 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Few things pizza me off worse than various organizations and associations I
choose to belong to (or am compelled to belong to for professional purposes)
making a decision about which political candidate they believe is "best" for
the organization and steering my membership fees to their campaign.

Wow, I never thought you'd be anti-union.

Steve

Wow, I never thought you'd be anti-union.

Steve

?????

Where did you get that?

In a discussion about whether it would be appropriate for BOAT/US to spend
members' money on specific political candidates, I commented-

Few things pizza me off worse than various organizations and associations I
choose to belong to (or am compelled to belong to for professional purposes)
making a decision about which political candidate they believe is "best" for
the organization and steering my membership fees to their campaign.


If I belonged to a union, (don't- and haven't for at least 25 years), I would
personally feel the same way as I do about some of the professional
organizations I belong to
endorsing and financially supporting candidates. I don't join an association to
be told how to vote, I don't want BOAT/US telling me how to vote, and I remain
independent from political parties for the same reason.

Would you think it a little strange if the board of directors at your yacht
club, country club, or what not voted to send several thousand dollars (or
more) to the campaign of a particular politician? The directors are free to
send their own personal money, as are the individual members, to the candidate
of their choice.

On 09 Apr 2004 15:57:38 GMT, Gould 0738 wrote:




If I belonged to a union, (don't-and haven't for at least 25 years), I
would
personally feel the same way as I do about some of the professional
organizations I belong to
endorsing and financially supporting candidates. I don't join an
association to
be told how to vote, I don't want BOAT/US telling me how to vote, and I
remain
independent from political parties for the same reason.

Would you think it a little strange if the board of directors at your
yacht
club, country club, or what not voted to send several thousand dollars
(or
more) to the campaign of a particular politician? The directors are free
to
send their own personal money, as are the individual members, to the
candidate
of their choice.


Spending money is one thing -- but what about saying "Mr. Smith is a good
guy, and we think he will work in our best interests" in their newsletter?


--
Jim

Gould 0738 wrote:
Wow, I never thought you'd be anti-union.

Steve


?????

Where did you get that?

In a discussion about whether it would be appropriate for BOAT/US to spend
members' money on specific political candidates, I commented-


Few things pizza me off worse than various organizations and associations I
choose to belong to (or am compelled to belong to for professional purposes)
making a decision about which political candidate they believe is "best" for
the organization and steering my membership fees to their campaign.


If I belonged to a union, (don't- and haven't for at least 25 years), I would
personally feel the same way as I do about some of the professional
organizations I belong to
endorsing and financially supporting candidates. I don't join an association to
be told how to vote, I don't want BOAT/US telling me how to vote, and I remain
independent from political parties for the same reason.

Would you think it a little strange if the board of directors at your yacht
club, country club, or what not voted to send several thousand dollars (or
more) to the campaign of a particular politician? The directors are free to
send their own personal money, as are the individual members, to the candidate
of their choice.



It's just another attempt by the right-wing trash to turn everything
into a black or white issue.

Spending money is one thing -- but what about saying "Mr. Smith is a good
guy, and we think he will work in our best interests" in their newsletter?

If BOAT/US, or anybody else, felt it was important for the membership to
understand the differences in candidate's positions on certain issues that
might effect something of interest to organization members, it would be more
appropriate to make a certain amount of space available in the newsletter for
the candidate to say his piece. It would also be fair (although there are fewer
rules requiring fair play these days) to allow the opposition an equal amount
of space.

Far too much editorializing gets shoveled under the crack in the door when a
newsletter editor makes a recommendation to the membership.

Whether it's Marine Trade Association, the
Yacht Brokers Association, Boat/US, or whatever....the main purpose of those
and similar organizations should be promoting the best interest of the entire
membership on a non-partisan basis. Not diverting membership dues to political
campaigns on *any* side of the spectrum.
Not even using the membership roster as a "mailing list" to pressure members to
contribute to the campaign of some gool ol' boy or another.

On 09 Apr 2004 15:57:38 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Wow, I never thought you'd be anti-union.

Steve

?????

Where did you get that?

I got that you were anti-union from your comment below, which you posted
again.


In a discussion about whether it would be appropriate for BOAT/US to spend
members' money on specific political candidates, I commented-

Few things pizza me off worse than various organizations and associations I
choose to belong to (or am compelled to belong to for professional purposes)
making a decision about which political candidate they believe is "best" for
the organization and steering my membership fees to their campaign.

That's exactly what many unions do. You're forced to pay union dues as
a requirement to work a job and then your dues are steered toward
candidates that the union believes is "best" for the organization. If
few things pizza you off worst than that, then few things pizza you off
more than the actions of unions.

Steve