Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx


The court didn't do this without a kick in the ass from someone else. Who is
the owner of the foot?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx


The court didn't do this without a kick in the ass from someone else. Who is
the owner of the foot?




No details, and who is doing the on-camera interpretation?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx


The court didn't do this without a kick in the ass from someone else. Who
is the owner of the foot?

Environmentalist groups. But a court shouldn't be beholden to any special
interests.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...
In message , Gene Kearns
sprach forth the following:

On 01 Jun 2007 13:42:33 GMT, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:

In message hlink.net,
NOYB sprach forth the following:

This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx

Encourage your elected representatives to support HR 2550, the
Recreational Boating Act of 2007.

Here is the Act:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/.../~c110qDJssC::

Now, isn't this a confusion! Do you really want to support a bill
sponsored by one of them "liebral democrats?"

GovTrack puts his ideology right-of-center. This took me TWO SECONDS to
find, dumbass.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400399

And the co-sponsor is a Republican from Michigan.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"HK" wrote in message and who is doing the
on-camera interpretation?

The editor in chief of boattest.com is interviewing the President of the
NMMA.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message and who is doing the
on-camera interpretation?

The editor in chief of boattest.com is interviewing the President of the
NMMA.




Thanks. I figured it wasn't anyone who really understood the legislative
or legal systems. It was too Chicken-Little-ish.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx


The court didn't do this without a kick in the ass from someone else. Who
is the owner of the foot?

Environmentalist groups. But a court shouldn't be beholden to any special
interests.


If you sue someone, YOU are the special interest. What's the opposite of "be
beholden"? Make up these ideas themselves?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Jun 1, 5:44 am, "NOYB" wrote:
This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx

Where ya been?

Repost from last March.........



Waterfront Watch, Mar 21

Don't Pump the Baby Out with the Bilge Water


Maybe we should send up a collective flare and hope that somebody will
notice. Once again it appears that well-intentioned Great and Powerful
Wizards (please pay no mind to that man behind the curtain) have
entirely overlooked the interests of pleasure boaters while seeking to
protect the environment.

A recent court decision in a lawsuit filed against the US
Environmental Protection Agency by a Portland, Oregon group known as
the Northwest Environmental Advocates could potentially require all
pleasure boaters to purchase "discharge permits" from state
governments. The newly regulated discharges in question have nothing
to do with untreated human waste, engine oil, trash and garbage, or
other nasty stuff that any responsible boater will voluntarily contain
and dispose of appropriately ashore. Anything passing from a boat
into the surrounding waters will be considered a discharge.

Want to wash your boat? You will need a permit for the wash and rinse
water to "discharge" through your scuppers and into the sound.

Too much water in the bilge? Too bad. You may not be able to switch on
that bilge pump without a state permit.

So fed up that you're ready to start your engine and motor off to some
country with more reasonable regulations? Not so fast, that cooling
water cycling through the raw water side of your system becomes a
"discharge". (We won't even be allowed to escape without a permit!)

Despite the draconian potential effects of the legal ruling, there
wasn't actually a conspiracy against pleasure boaters. The Northwest
Environmental Advocates sued to address a worthy issue: the discharge
of ballast water from foreign vessels in US ports.
Ships entering American waters from overseas ports often travel with
enormous amounts of water in the bilge to serve as ballast.
Unfortunately, when a ship takes on ballast water huge numbers of
marine plants and animals are scooped up in the process and will be
released whenever and wherever the vessel pumps its bilges. Most of
the foreign organisms die in the new environment, but certain species
discover that they have been introduced to an area where they have no
natural predators.

With natural balance disrupted, many of these immigrant life forms
(such as the zebra mussel) tend to compete too efficiently for food
and habitat and can ultimately eliminate native species that have long
served as integral links in important eco-system relationships. A new
species supplanting a native species may no longer be considered
edible by predators higher on the food chain. Organisms at the top of
the food chain (such as humans), have a vested interest in sustaining
a healthy eco-system with co-dependent plants and animals that thrive
in the local environment.

The Northwest Environmental Advocates demanded that states issue
permits to any vessel planning to discharge into waters of the state.
Presumably, the states aren't going to issue permits to all applicants
without some level of prior inspection, and perhaps even requiring
that a state inspector be on hand when the material in question is
being discharged. When the court ruled in favor of the Northwest
Environmental Advocates, it omitted any specification that the ruling
applied only to commercial shipping. Similar previous regulations have
always specifically exempted recreational boaters, but no such
exemption is included in the regulations mandated by the court
decision.

States typically lack the will, and most certainly lack the manpower,
to enforce a regulation that would require pleasure boaters to apply
for permits prior to starting an engine, pumping a bilge, taking a
shower, or washing the highway and industrial soot from the house and
decks. Washington State alone would need thousands, if not tens of
thousands, of inspectors and permit processors to monitor every single
discharge of any material from all vessels of any description. The law
would be routinely ignored, but perhaps not entirely.

The potential risk is that some zealous environmental extremist could
seize upon the court's oversight. In the ultimate fantasies of some
fanatics, the waters of the Pacific NW would be unsullied by any human
activity afloat. Leaping salmon, cavorting porpoises, and spouting
whales wouldn't be obliged to dodge around any boats or ships, (with a
possible exception for limited numbers of extensively regulated and
duly licensed kayaks, of course). It would never rain, the sun would
never set, beribboned unicorns and Technicolor rainbows would be seen
everywhere, and the gentle breezes would always be warm. With a
glaring defect in the newly refined law, the opportunity remains for
such an extremist to seek a court injunction or other legal avenue to
disrupt pleasure boating.

Most boaters make conscientious environmental choices. The few that
persist in dumping holding tanks in inland waters or pumping the bilge
after an oil change "accident", deserve to be ostracized by the
responsible majority. Our recreational enjoyment depends upon
maintaining acceptably clean waterways and a healthy fishery.
Environmental activists on the radical fringes of that movement would
do well to recognize that the average pleasure boater isn't a serious
threat to the eco-system.

We can indeed send up a flare by contacting our congressional
representatives and urging them to exempt pleasure vessels from the
court ruling mandating that all vessels apply for discharge permits.
Let's not pump the baby out with the bilge water.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Jun 1, 7:31�am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in . 128...





In messagenews:36a0631mkhsn8np0js1un0nvk75bad2n6c@4ax .com, Gene Kearns
sprach forth the following:

On 01 Jun 2007 13:42:33 GMT, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:

In as.earthlink.net,
NOYB sprach forth the following:

This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx

Encourage your elected representatives to support HR 2550, the
Recreational Boating Act of 2007.

Here is the Act:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/.../~c110qDJssC::

Now, isn't this a confusion! Do you really want to support a bill
sponsored by one of them "liebral democrats?"

GovTrack puts his ideology right-of-center. *This took me TWO SECONDS to
find, dumbass.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400399

And the co-sponsor is a Republican from Michigan.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you saying you wouldn't support a bill that's good for boating if
it were only sponsored by a Democrat (possibly not judged by some
rating service to be right of center) and not co-sponsored by a
Republican?

If so, that's pretty dogmatic.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

Gene Kearns wrote:
On 01 Jun 2007 14:22:10 GMT, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:

In message , Gene Kearns
sprach forth the following:

On 01 Jun 2007 13:42:33 GMT, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:

In message hlink.net,
NOYB sprach forth the following:

This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx
Encourage your elected representatives to support HR 2550, the
Recreational Boating Act of 2007.

Here is the Act:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/.../~c110qDJssC::
Now, isn't this a confusion! Do you really want to support a bill
sponsored by one of them "liebral democrats?"
GovTrack puts his ideology right-of-center. This took me TWO SECONDS to
find, dumbass.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400399

ROFLMAO.... you are such a piece of work! I had already looked at that
before I posted and discounted it as unsupported!

So.... let's look at your source of information. A political website
run by a pedant working toward a degree in Linguistics.... a guy that
feels that "I've always been a little troubled by the fact that I
exist. "
http://razor.occams.info/

However, assuming that he *does* exist, should I adopt his opinion of
" right-of-center" as my own opinion? Sorry, Fred Garvin, Male
Prostitute-of-Borg, I don't let other people do my thinking for me.

Dr. Kervorkian is out of the slam. Maybe he can put Fred out of our misery.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message and who is doing the
on-camera interpretation?

The editor in chief of boattest.com is interviewing the President of the
NMMA.




Thanks. I figured it wasn't anyone who really understood the legislative
or legal systems. It was too Chicken-Little-ish.

Sometimes you have to go a little over the top to get people to act, because
people by nature only react to histrionics.


Just look at the Global Warming hysteria.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message and who is doing the
on-camera interpretation?

The editor in chief of boattest.com is interviewing the President of the
NMMA.



Thanks. I figured it wasn't anyone who really understood the legislative
or legal systems. It was too Chicken-Little-ish.

Sometimes you have to go a little over the top to get people to act, because
people by nature only react to histrionics.


Just look at the Global Warming hysteria.






None of the sources I consider are hysterical about global warming.
Perhaps you need to consider sources that are not the equivalents of
reich-wing radio.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx


The court didn't do this without a kick in the ass from someone else.
Who is the owner of the foot?

Environmentalist groups. But a court shouldn't be beholden to any
special interests.


If you sue someone, YOU are the special interest. What's the opposite of
"be beholden"? Make up these ideas themselves?

Courts shouldn't allow frivolous suits to proceed that attempt to circumvent
the legislative process and create legislation from the bench.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jun 1, 7:31?am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
. 128...





In messagenews:36a0631mkhsn8np0js1un0nvk75bad2n6c@4ax .com, Gene Kearns
sprach forth the following:

On 01 Jun 2007 13:42:33 GMT, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:

In as.earthlink.net,
NOYB sprach forth the following:

This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx

Encourage your elected representatives to support HR 2550, the
Recreational Boating Act of 2007.

Here is the Act:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/.../~c110qDJssC::

Now, isn't this a confusion! Do you really want to support a bill
sponsored by one of them "liebral democrats?"

GovTrack puts his ideology right-of-center. This took me TWO SECONDS to
find, dumbass.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400399

And the co-sponsor is a Republican from Michigan.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you saying you wouldn't support a bill that's good for boating if
it were only sponsored by a Democrat (possibly not judged by some
rating service to be right of center) and not co-sponsored by a
Republican?

If so, that's pretty dogmatic.

No. I'm saying that a LIBERAL Democrat would never put forth a bill that
protects boater's rights over the wishes of a wacko environmentalist group.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message and who is doing the
on-camera interpretation?

The editor in chief of boattest.com is interviewing the President of
the NMMA.



Thanks. I figured it wasn't anyone who really understood the legislative
or legal systems. It was too Chicken-Little-ish.

Sometimes you have to go a little over the top to get people to act,
because people by nature only react to histrionics.


Just look at the Global Warming hysteria.






None of the sources I consider are hysterical about global warming.

LOL. algore's Hollywood production wasn't hysterical?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...
In message ups.com,
Chuck
Gould sprach forth the following:

Where ya been?

Repost from last March.........

The legislation (HR 2550) was just introduced last week.

There's not much you can do about anything while it's in the court system.
And until the court made the silly ruling that it did, there was no need for
the legislative branch to act. Now there is.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message and who is doing the
on-camera interpretation?

The editor in chief of boattest.com is interviewing the President of
the NMMA.



Thanks. I figured it wasn't anyone who really understood the
legislative or legal systems. It was too Chicken-Little-ish.

Sometimes you have to go a little over the top to get people to act,
because people by nature only react to histrionics.


Just look at the Global Warming hysteria.






None of the sources I consider are hysterical about global warming.

LOL. algore's Hollywood production wasn't hysterical?


Since that's the only source you're familiar with, it stands to reason you
would mention it over and over and over and over......

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

Courts shouldn't allow frivolous suits to proceed that attempt to
circumvent the legislative process and create legislation from the bench.


Someone has to keep the sleezy self-serving politicians in check......and
don't say the people will serve justice on the next election.
twiddle dee...twiddle dum.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message and who is doing the
on-camera interpretation?

The editor in chief of boattest.com is interviewing the President of
the NMMA.



Thanks. I figured it wasn't anyone who really understood the
legislative or legal systems. It was too Chicken-Little-ish.
Sometimes you have to go a little over the top to get people to act,
because people by nature only react to histrionics.


Just look at the Global Warming hysteria.





None of the sources I consider are hysterical about global warming.
LOL. algore's Hollywood production wasn't hysterical?


Since that's the only source you're familiar with, it stands to reason you
would mention it over and over and over and over......




I haven't seen Gore's film.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

Total change of subject. I'm curious about something, Harry. If you hear the
term "the special relationship", in a political context, what do you think
of first? No googling, please.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
Total change of subject. I'm curious about something, Harry. If you hear the
term "the special relationship", in a political context, what do you think
of first? No googling, please.




Well, the first thing I would think of is the relationship between the
United States and the United Kingdom. It is often referred to as *the*
special relationship.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
Total change of subject. I'm curious about something, Harry. If you hear
the term "the special relationship", in a political context, what do you
think of first? No googling, please.


Well, the first thing I would think of is the relationship between the
United States and the United Kingdom. It is often referred to as *the*
special relationship.

You get a gold star and a Kermit the Frog sticker. I've been wondering if I
read too much, or some cranks in another newgroup were illiterate. Answer:
Illiterate.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
Total change of subject. I'm curious about something, Harry. If you hear
the term "the special relationship", in a political context, what do you
think of first? No googling, please.

Well, the first thing I would think of is the relationship between the
United States and the United Kingdom. It is often referred to as *the*
special relationship.

You get a gold star and a Kermit the Frog sticker. I've been wondering if I
read too much, or some cranks in another newgroup were illiterate. Answer:
Illiterate.



Blame it on my liberal arts education and catholic reading lists.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Jun 1, 8:22�am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

ups.com...
On Jun 1, 7:31?am, "NOYB" wrote:





"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
. 128...

In messagenews:36a0631mkhsn8np0js1un0nvk75bad2n6c@4ax .com, Gene Kearns
sprach forth the following:

On 01 Jun 2007 13:42:33 GMT, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:

In as.earthlink.net,
NOYB sprach forth the following:

This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:
http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx

Encourage your elected representatives to support HR 2550, the
Recreational Boating Act of 2007.

Here is the Act:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/.../~c110qDJssC::

Now, isn't this a confusion! Do you really want to support a bill
sponsored by one of them "liebral democrats?"

GovTrack puts his ideology right-of-center. This took me TWO SECONDS to
find, dumbass.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400399

And the co-sponsor is a Republican from Michigan.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you saying you wouldn't support a bill that's good for boating if
it were only sponsored by a Democrat (possibly not judged by some
rating service to be right of center) and not co-sponsored by a
Republican?

If so, that's pretty dogmatic.

No. *I'm saying that a LIBERAL Democrat would never put forth a bill that
protects boater's rights over the wishes of a wacko environmentalist group.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Nonsense.

I'm far more liberal than most Democrats, and if I were in Congress
I'd be proud to introduce or support this bill.

It's about equity. It's perfectly OK to have a law that says foreign
ships can't dump ballast water in US ports, but it's bad law as well
as nuts to
apply that same standard to some guy in a 28-foot Trophy who wants to
flush his bait tank. It's absurd to apply it to engine cooling water,
etc.
Taken to the next step, we'd be required to collect any rain that fell
on deck to be sure it didn't become "contaminated" as it drained off
into the water below.

And, for the record, the "environmental wackos" absolutely did not set
out (at least in this case) to destroy recreational boating. Their
issue was the ballast water. The judge stated hat he couldn't find
anything in the law that permitted the EPA to exempt discharges from
private vessels, and that's really all Congress needs to do: pass
legislation that specfically permits the EPA to exempt private
discharges and get GWB to sign it.

Do you favor the dumping of ballast water from commercial vessels?
It's possible that there are people who would, based on the practice
making it more difficult or expensive to be in the shipping business
and the subsequent decrease in dividends to shareholders.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Jun 1, 8:21?am, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:
In oglegroups.com, Chuck
Gould sprach forth the following:

Where ya been?

Repost from last March.........

The legislation (HR 2550) was just introduced last week.

The ruling that NOYB cites occured last fall.

It's because of the public outcry generated by several months of
publicity from thousands of industry voices and the NMMA that congress
is considering HR 2550 at all. There's been a very active campaign all
spring.

(When I mentioned this here last March, I seem to recall taking a
ration of crap
from a couple of guys because I was supporting the NMMA position on
this issue. Rec.boats can be a funny place some times)

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Jun 1, 8:24�am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in . 128...

In oglegroups.com,
Chuck
Gould sprach forth the following:

Where ya been?

Repost from last March.........

The legislation (HR 2550) was just introduced last week.

There's not much you can do about anything while it's in the court system.
And until the court made the silly ruling that it did, there was no need for
the legislative branch to act. *Now there is.

The ruling was made in the fall of 2006.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

Nonsense.

I'm far more liberal than most Democrats, and if I were in Congress
I'd be proud to introduce or support this bill.

---------------------------------------------------
Care to wager which side of the roll call vote the liberal Democrats will
fall on this bill?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 11:28:24 -0400, HK wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message and who is doing the
on-camera interpretation?

The editor in chief of boattest.com is interviewing the President of
the NMMA.



Thanks. I figured it wasn't anyone who really understood the
legislative or legal systems. It was too Chicken-Little-ish.
Sometimes you have to go a little over the top to get people to act,
because people by nature only react to histrionics.


Just look at the Global Warming hysteria.





None of the sources I consider are hysterical about global warming.
LOL. algore's Hollywood production wasn't hysterical?


Since that's the only source you're familiar with, it stands to reason you
would mention it over and over and over and over......




I haven't seen Gore's film.

You've missed a lot of hysterics.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...
In message , Don White sprach
forth the following:

Someone has to keep the sleezy self-serving politicians in check......and
don't say the people will serve justice on the next election.
twiddle dee...twiddle dum.

Which one do you characterize Ron Paul as?

Sorry...don't know him.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Jun 1, 9:22?am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

Nonsense.

I'm far more liberal than most Democrats, and if I were in Congress
I'd be proud to introduce or support this bill.

---------------------------------------------------
Care to wager which side of the roll call vote the liberal Democrats will
fall on this bill?

Do they now vote as a single block, with a common mind?
I think you'll find D's and R's on both sides of the issue.

There shouldn't be any problem passing a bill that authorizes the EPA
to exempt pleasure vessels' "discharges incidental to the normal
operation of a boat" from the more stringent- and proper- regulations
prohibiting foreign ships from dumping tons of organisms with ballast
water. Most of the enviro-groups seem to realize they will have to
live with this exemption if they want the overall law to stand.

You're as likely to find some R's who might oppose the bill in an
effort to get the ban on foreign bilge dumping lifted entirely. That
additional expense and inconvenience can't be good for the bottom line
of the various corporations that run shipping lines to US ports.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Jun 1, 9:15�am, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:
In ooglegroups.com,
Chuck Gould sprach forth the following:





On Jun 1, 8:24�am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
messagene
...

In oglegroups.com,
Chuck
Gould sprach forth the following:

Where ya been?

Repost from last March.........

The legislation (HR 2550) was just introduced last week.

There's not much you can do about anything while it's in the court
system. And until the court made the silly ruling that it did, there
was no need
for
the legislative branch to act. *Now there is.

The ruling was made in the fall of 2006.

God you're ****ing dense.

THERE WAS NO LEGISLATION REGARDING WHICH CITIZENS COULD CONTACT THEIR
ELECTED OFFICIALS UNTIL MAY TWENTY-FOURTH.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm dense??

Go back and read the title of the thread. It has to do with the
"ruling", and that was last September. Agreed?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Jun 1, 9:15�am, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:
In ooglegroups.com,
Chuck Gould sprach forth the following:





On Jun 1, 8:24�am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
messagene
...

In oglegroups.com,
Chuck
Gould sprach forth the following:

Where ya been?

Repost from last March.........

The legislation (HR 2550) was just introduced last week.

There's not much you can do about anything while it's in the court
system. And until the court made the silly ruling that it did, there
was no need
for
the legislative branch to act. *Now there is.

The ruling was made in the fall of 2006.

God you're ****ing dense.

THERE WAS NO LEGISLATION REGARDING WHICH CITIZENS COULD CONTACT THEIR
ELECTED OFFICIALS UNTIL MAY TWENTY-FOURTH.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

(PS, it's OK to contact your elected official to ask for legislation
to be introduced. You don't have to wait until something is introduced
to express a concern about an issue.)

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jun 1, 9:15?am, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:
In ooglegroups.com,
Chuck Gould sprach forth the following:





On Jun 1, 8:24?am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
messagene
...

In oglegroups.com,
Chuck
Gould sprach forth the following:

Where ya been?

Repost from last March.........

The legislation (HR 2550) was just introduced last week.

There's not much you can do about anything while it's in the court
system. And until the court made the silly ruling that it did, there
was no need
for
the legislative branch to act. Now there is.

The ruling was made in the fall of 2006.

God you're ****ing dense.

THERE WAS NO LEGISLATION REGARDING WHICH CITIZENS COULD CONTACT THEIR
ELECTED OFFICIALS UNTIL MAY TWENTY-FOURTH.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

(PS, it's OK to contact your elected official to ask for legislation
to be introduced. You don't have to wait until something is introduced
to express a concern about an issue.)

+++++++++++++++++++++++=

That would require a little effort and a stamp. And, it might remove one's
reason for whining. Who would want that to happen?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...
In message oups.com,
Chuck Gould sprach forth the following:


(PS, it's OK to contact your elected official to ask for legislation
to be introduced. You don't have to wait until something is introduced
to express a concern about an issue.)

What legislation has been enacted as a result of you doing so?

This is my doing, although I suspect a few other people yelled, too:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...:@@@L&summ2=m&

How about you?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On Jun 1, 11:08?am, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:
In ooglegroups.com,
Chuck Gould sprach forth the following:



(PS, it's OK to contact your elected official to ask for legislation
to be introduced. You don't have to wait until something is introduced
to express a concern about an issue.)

What legislation has been enacted as a result of you doing so?


Follow along, please.

1. Last fall, Federal judge rules that the EPA does not have authority
to exempt recreational vessel discharges from the permitting and
enforcement process.

2. In Jan/Feb of 2007, NMMA begins spearheading an effort to convince
congress to draft legislation that would allow the EPA to exempt
recreational vessels.

3. Letters and calls from thousands of boaters (voters) around the
country bring the issue to the attention of congress.

4. The HR was introduced.

My point is simply that one doesn't have to wait until there's a bill
before the House or Senate to lobby for congressional action.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...
In message , JoeSpareBedroom sprach
forth the following:

"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...
In message oups.com,
Chuck Gould sprach forth the following:


(PS, it's OK to contact your elected official to ask for legislation
to be introduced. You don't have to wait until something is introduced
to express a concern about an issue.)

What legislation has been enacted as a result of you doing so?

This is my doing, although I suspect a few other people yelled, too:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...:@@@L&summ2=m&

Do you know what "enacted" means?

Yep. But, that's not the point of your asking "What legislation....", now is
it?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jun 1, 9:22?am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

Nonsense.

I'm far more liberal than most Democrats, and if I were in Congress
I'd be proud to introduce or support this bill.

---------------------------------------------------
Care to wager which side of the roll call vote the liberal Democrats will
fall on this bill?

Do they now vote as a single block, with a common mind?
I think you'll find D's and R's on both sides of the issue.

OK. So which side of the issue will most Democrats vote? And most
Republicans?

I already know, and so do you. But are you man enough to admit it?

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jun 1, 9:22?am, "NOYB" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

Nonsense.

I'm far more liberal than most Democrats, and if I were in Congress
I'd be proud to introduce or support this bill.

---------------------------------------------------
Care to wager which side of the roll call vote the liberal Democrats
will
fall on this bill?

Do they now vote as a single block, with a common mind?
I think you'll find D's and R's on both sides of the issue.

OK. So which side of the issue will most Democrats vote? And most
Republicans?

I already know, and so do you. But are you man enough to admit it?



Man enough? Let's see if you are sober enough to back up your idiotic
comment.

A list of senators is he
http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

By noon on Saturday June 2nd, I want you to present the list here in a
message, with a Y or N indicating how you think each senator will vote.
Then, you will get back here and remind us when the vote happens, so we can
compare your drunken prediction with the reality.

Liberal 9th Circuit Court ruling could kill boating
 

On 01 Jun 2007 16:21:42 GMT, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:

In message , Don White sprach
forth the following:

Someone has to keep the sleezy self-serving politicians in check......and
don't say the people will serve justice on the next election.
twiddle dee...twiddle dum.

Which one do you characterize Ron Paul as?

Lyndon LaRouche clone.