Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:12:02 -0400, HK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:46:51 -0400, HK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:53:17 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message
...
"John H." wrote
I agree, I would never agree with the cop or USCG at the time, if I
felt like my rights were violated, I would handle it after the fact.
Reggie, you need to take a bit more time proof reading your posts
before you hit that send bottom. Seriously.
(You're getting pretty picky!)
Maybe he's just trying to push someone's bottoms...

Or, perhaps he has a low transom.
I'm telling you - that is never going to end.

Never. :)
Saw a beautiful boat today parked in front of West Marine. It's owner
was in the store, shopping. It was a 2007 (I checked the transom)
Seacrat 23. Classic lines. Seen many of those around, Tom?
SeaCraft boats? Sure - Johnny Morris owns SeaCraft as part of the
Tracker Marine franchise.

Nice boats, but not what they used to be.
Is anything, except of course, for Parker?

Bass Cat probably is another - still family owned and a very nice bass
boat. In fact, if I were in the market for another bass boat, Bass
Cat would be first on the list believe it or not - over Ranger to
boot.

http://www.basscat.com/

Gambler is another one that build one hell of a bass boat.

http://www.gamblerboats.com/

Blue Fin is a great one off boat builder in Bristol RI that make a
solid boat.

http://www.bluefinboats.com/

North Coast, Cape Horn, Steiger, Contender, Regulator - all solid
boats and still built in the same fashion as they were originally -
all quality boats, guality components and built with style.

Can't really say anything about Parkers as I don't honestly believe
that I've ever seen one in the areas I run.


Well, you still have time for a good run in one. I probably won't have
her shrinkwrapped until just before Thanksgiving.

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:40:31 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:53:17 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message
...
"John H." wrote
I agree, I would never agree with the cop or USCG at the time, if I
felt like my rights were violated, I would handle it after the fact.

Reggie, you need to take a bit more time proof reading your posts
before you hit that send bottom. Seriously.

(You're getting pretty picky!)

Maybe he's just trying to push someone's bottoms...


Or, perhaps he has a low transom.

I'm telling you - that is never going to end.

Never. :)

Heh.

Dangerously low transom...

You know, this low transom stuff is serious business. Seriously.

:-)

Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:40:31 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:53:17 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message
...
"John H." wrote
I agree, I would never agree with the cop or USCG at the time, if I
felt like my rights were violated, I would handle it after the fact.
Reggie, you need to take a bit more time proof reading your posts
before you hit that send bottom. Seriously.
(You're getting pretty picky!)
Maybe he's just trying to push someone's bottoms...

Or, perhaps he has a low transom.
I'm telling you - that is never going to end.

Never. :)

Heh.

Dangerously low transom...

You know, this low transom stuff is serious business. Seriously.

:-)


Only to the newsgroup jackoffs. No names, of course.

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 23:21:25 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:49:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

But there is no law requiring you to get one. That is the basis for
the suits against "voter ID".

Here's what I don't understand about this whole voter ID thing.

Here in CT, a form of positive ID which essentially is a driver's
license is required. The ID has to show residency in the town or, in
matter of taxation, real estate in the town. No exceptions.

What's do hard about doing this at the Federal level?

The best I can tell they say it discriminates against homeless people.
The argument is the requirement results in a defacto poll tax since it
costs money to get the state ID.
I think it is dumb too but don't shoot the messenger.

If they receive state or federal benefits of one kind or another, then
they have to have a SSN. From there, it's a simple step to obtain an
ID.

With respect to homeless people, I doubt many of them vote anyway.

On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:04:39 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 23:21:25 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:49:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

But there is no law requiring you to get one. That is the basis for
the suits against "voter ID".

Here's what I don't understand about this whole voter ID thing.

Here in CT, a form of positive ID which essentially is a driver's
license is required. The ID has to show residency in the town or, in
matter of taxation, real estate in the town. No exceptions.

What's do hard about doing this at the Federal level?

The best I can tell they say it discriminates against homeless people.
The argument is the requirement results in a defacto poll tax since it
costs money to get the state ID.
I think it is dumb too but don't shoot the messenger.

If they receive state or federal benefits of one kind or another, then
they have to have a SSN. From there, it's a simple step to obtain an
ID.

With respect to homeless people, I doubt many of them vote anyway.

You'd be surprised what a guy might do for a carton of cigs or a pint of
Jim Beam!

On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:04:39 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 23:21:25 -0500, wrote:
|
|On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:49:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
|
|But there is no law requiring you to get one. That is the basis for
|the suits against "voter ID".
|
|Here's what I don't understand about this whole voter ID thing.
|
|Here in CT, a form of positive ID which essentially is a driver's
|license is required. The ID has to show residency in the town or, in
|matter of taxation, real estate in the town. No exceptions.
|
|What's do hard about doing this at the Federal level?
|
|The best I can tell they say it discriminates against homeless people.
|The argument is the requirement results in a defacto poll tax since it
|costs money to get the state ID.
|I think it is dumb too but don't shoot the messenger.
|
|If they receive state or federal benefits of one kind or another, then
|they have to have a SSN. From there, it's a simple step to obtain an
|ID.
|


Would that were true.....

You aren't supposed to be able to get a SSN unless you are an American
citizen, but....
http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10002.html#how

......as an illegal you can get many benefits.....
http://archive.gao.gov/d45t15/150100.pdf

....because in many instances it is illegal to ask immigration status
or it isn't required....

an ID is a piece of cake....

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------