Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 20:39:06 GMT, Reginald P. Smithers XXI penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 10:25:01 -0500, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 09:03:15 -0500, Reginald P. Smithers III penned
the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

HK wrote:
I am truly sorry if I offended any of you fellas.
Love you,
Harry Krause

Next thing you will be doing to calling some a Black Loser, or a
Wet-Back Loser.... you really should be ashamed of yourself.

You've been had.

(1) Harry didn't post that and then (2) the actual OP then chimed
back
into this thread with his stick to stir things up.

When are you guys going to learn?

Learn what?

Well, basically, that you shouldn't be as stupid as a fish and bite on
every troll or re-troll.....

When the OP actually mungs the "from," you guys still don't get it and
pile on. Geeze, guys, you are going after a straw man (uh, lure). Then
the OP (with no real attempt at stealth) chums the water with more
trolling.... and there is a feeding frenzy. There is no shortage of
straw lures and no shortage of energy to attack same.

Instead of being such idiots, you could have helped me and the wife
compound and polish one side of the boat. We could have gotten done in
time to float it and hit the best watering hole on the ICW.... a view
of the water, hottie little waitresses, shrimp burgers, and the
coldest Red Stripes on earth. With any luck we could have hooked up
with D-unit and company. But n-o-o-o-o-o-o-o you guys want to snipe at
each other.

Ok, I have an advantage. It was 70 degrees here today. You guys still
have icicles hanging from your, uh..... well....... uh.... whatever
they hang from up there.... and you are suffering from cabin fever.

I sure hope it warms up for you guys, soon......

..... hey, sweetheart...... another Red Stripe, please...... ok guys,
gotta go, see ya......

--

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


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 080209-0, 02/09/2008
Tested on: 2/9/2008 4:31:41 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com



How hard it must be to resist ragging Harry when the opportunity
presents itself. Give us all a break. Lets move on. Enjoy your Red
Stripe Mon.


Ahhh...another boating-related missive from the current chair of the
"obsessed with harry" club, and most likely another boatless loser,
just like most of the rest of them.

You forgot to capitalize yourself.
Want some more love letters from your fan club, Harry? Google yourself
on google groups. You have amassed quite a following.

He reads every post here. His condition prevents him from ignoring
*any* posts.

On Feb 9, 5:54�pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 15:53:02 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:34?am, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 06:24:38 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:08?am, wrote:
On Feb 9, 9:03?am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here

wrote:
HK wrote:
I am truly sorry if I offended any of you fellas.
Love you,
Harry Krause

Next thing you will be doing to calling some a Black Loser, or a
Wet-Back Loser.... you really should be ashamed of yourself.

Only if they think it will help in the elections.. The democrats have
been pulling this "tolerant party" farce for decades, the drift
between Obama and Billary has really opened up the curtains to the
blatant bigotry and pandering that is the rule of the day for the
dems...

Read you own post, Scottie.

I always get a kick out of statements like, "Those rotten, no-good, so
and so's and such and such's are despicable because they are so
hateful and intolerant!"

Thanks for starting my day with a smile.

Both of your parties are guilty of pandering. Yours hopes to achieve
and maintain power by toadying up to the equally rich or richer,
piling so much wealth on their ultraprivileged tables that some will
ultimately spill over the edges into your own pockets.

Bull****. Do you consider it 'bad' to be wealthy? Are the rich inherently
immoral? How do you define 'rich'?

Your opposition
?[liberals]
hopes to achieve and maintain power by promising the poor, the
discouraged and the disenfranchised an ever elusive "brighter day",
thereby garnering millions of hours of volunteer time and tens of
millions of votes.

Absolutely true.

So you are both a batch of thieves. The difference is not in what you
do, but who your masters are.

Luke 6: 41-42

One with your attitude towards religion should not quote the Bible.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I didn't say it was bad to be wealthy, I said your party steals for
the wealthy----- vs the other party that steals for the poor. There's
no difference in what either of you do, only who your masters are.

"...steals for the poor." �What horse****!

DC has a pot full of poor. It's been run by Democrats from time immemorial..
Wealthy Democrats. Democrats who've convinced the 'poor' that they will
look out for the 'poor'. Have the 'poor' done one iota better in all that
time? The Mayors go to jail, the city council folks go to jail, the school
board folks go to jail, the friggin' teachers' union folks go to jail.

You need to wake up Chuck. The Democrats have done a good job of convincing
the uneducated that the Democrats are looking out for them. It's true. The
Democrats want to keep them poor and uneducated - that way the poor will
continue to believe the **** like you just spouted above.

Hell no, the Democrats don't want the No Child Left Behind Act to succeed.
The poor may *learn* something!
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Stop and think, John. (vs react)

Never did I say the Democrats *gave* anything to the poor, just that
Democrats steal from the general public in the name of the poor.
Your party steals from the general public in the name of the rich.
Once again, there is no difference in what either of your parties do-
only in the reasons you give for doing them.

HK wrote:
Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:



You forgot to capitalize yourself.
Want some more love letters from your fan club, Harry? Google
yourself on google groups. You have amassed quite a following.

Ahhh...another boating-related missive from the current chair of the
"obsessed with harry" club, and most likely another boatless loser,
just like most of the rest of them.

I've never been low enough to try to be you, JimmyBobBoy.

He He You're doing great Harry.


Ahhh...another boating-related missive from the current chair of the
"obsessed with harry" club, and likely another boatless loser,
just like most of the rest of them.

He learned to cut and paste, too. Amazing progress.

JimH wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:


You forgot to capitalize yourself.
Want some more love letters from your fan club, Harry? Google yourself
on google groups. You have amassed quite a following.
Ahhh...another boating-related missive from the current chair of the
"obsessed with harry" club, and most likely another boatless loser,
just like most of the rest of them.

I've never been low enough to try to be you, JimmyBobBoy.
He He You're doing great Harry.

Are you Jim from Florida?



Probably, though I don't keep track of the a**holes here. I believe
daily sniffing of the a**hole's is a job shared by Herring and Reggie.

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 9, 5:54�pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 15:53:02 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:34?am, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 06:24:38 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:08?am, wrote:
On Feb 9, 9:03?am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
HK wrote:
I am truly sorry if I offended any of you fellas.
Love you,
Harry Krause
Next thing you will be doing to calling some a Black Loser, or a
Wet-Back Loser.... you really should be ashamed of yourself.
Only if they think it will help in the elections.. The democrats have
been pulling this "tolerant party" farce for decades, the drift
between Obama and Billary has really opened up the curtains to the
blatant bigotry and pandering that is the rule of the day for the
dems...
Read you own post, Scottie.
I always get a kick out of statements like, "Those rotten, no-good, so
and so's and such and such's are despicable because they are so
hateful and intolerant!"
Thanks for starting my day with a smile.
Both of your parties are guilty of pandering. Yours hopes to achieve
and maintain power by toadying up to the equally rich or richer,
piling so much wealth on their ultraprivileged tables that some will
ultimately spill over the edges into your own pockets.
Bull****. Do you consider it 'bad' to be wealthy? Are the rich inherently
immoral? How do you define 'rich'?
Your opposition
?[liberals]
hopes to achieve and maintain power by promising the poor, the
discouraged and the disenfranchised an ever elusive "brighter day",
thereby garnering millions of hours of volunteer time and tens of
millions of votes.
Absolutely true.
So you are both a batch of thieves. The difference is not in what you
do, but who your masters are.
Luke 6: 41-42
One with your attitude towards religion should not quote the Bible.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I didn't say it was bad to be wealthy, I said your party steals for
the wealthy----- vs the other party that steals for the poor. There's
no difference in what either of you do, only who your masters are.
"...steals for the poor." �What horse****!

DC has a pot full of poor. It's been run by Democrats from time immemorial.
Wealthy Democrats. Democrats who've convinced the 'poor' that they will
look out for the 'poor'. Have the 'poor' done one iota better in all that
time? The Mayors go to jail, the city council folks go to jail, the school
board folks go to jail, the friggin' teachers' union folks go to jail.

You need to wake up Chuck. The Democrats have done a good job of convincing
the uneducated that the Democrats are looking out for them. It's true. The
Democrats want to keep them poor and uneducated - that way the poor will
continue to believe the **** like you just spouted above.

Hell no, the Democrats don't want the No Child Left Behind Act to succeed.
The poor may *learn* something!
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Stop and think, John. (vs react)

Never did I say the Democrats *gave* anything to the poor, just that
Democrats steal from the general public in the name of the poor.
Your party steals from the general public in the name of the rich.
Once again, there is no difference in what either of your parties do-
only in the reasons you give for doing them.


Herring is getting more and more irrational as he ages.

On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 18:34:36 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 9, 5:54?pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 15:53:02 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:34?am, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 06:24:38 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:08?am, wrote:
On Feb 9, 9:03?am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here

wrote:
HK wrote:
I am truly sorry if I offended any of you fellas.
Love you,
Harry Krause

Next thing you will be doing to calling some a Black Loser, or a
Wet-Back Loser.... you really should be ashamed of yourself.

Only if they think it will help in the elections.. The democrats have
been pulling this "tolerant party" farce for decades, the drift
between Obama and Billary has really opened up the curtains to the
blatant bigotry and pandering that is the rule of the day for the
dems...

Read you own post, Scottie.

I always get a kick out of statements like, "Those rotten, no-good, so
and so's and such and such's are despicable because they are so
hateful and intolerant!"

Thanks for starting my day with a smile.

Both of your parties are guilty of pandering. Yours hopes to achieve
and maintain power by toadying up to the equally rich or richer,
piling so much wealth on their ultraprivileged tables that some will
ultimately spill over the edges into your own pockets.

Bull****. Do you consider it 'bad' to be wealthy? Are the rich inherently
immoral? How do you define 'rich'?

Your opposition
?[liberals]
hopes to achieve and maintain power by promising the poor, the
discouraged and the disenfranchised an ever elusive "brighter day",
thereby garnering millions of hours of volunteer time and tens of
millions of votes.

Absolutely true.

So you are both a batch of thieves. The difference is not in what you
do, but who your masters are.

Luke 6: 41-42

One with your attitude towards religion should not quote the Bible.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I didn't say it was bad to be wealthy, I said your party steals for
the wealthy----- vs the other party that steals for the poor. There's
no difference in what either of you do, only who your masters are.

"...steals for the poor." ?What horse****!

DC has a pot full of poor. It's been run by Democrats from time immemorial.
Wealthy Democrats. Democrats who've convinced the 'poor' that they will
look out for the 'poor'. Have the 'poor' done one iota better in all that
time? The Mayors go to jail, the city council folks go to jail, the school
board folks go to jail, the friggin' teachers' union folks go to jail.

You need to wake up Chuck. The Democrats have done a good job of convincing
the uneducated that the Democrats are looking out for them. It's true. The
Democrats want to keep them poor and uneducated - that way the poor will
continue to believe the **** like you just spouted above.

Hell no, the Democrats don't want the No Child Left Behind Act to succeed.
The poor may *learn* something!
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Stop and think, John. (vs react)

Never did I say the Democrats *gave* anything to the poor, just that
Democrats steal from the general public in the name of the poor.
Your party steals from the general public in the name of the rich.
Once again, there is no difference in what either of your parties do-
only in the reasons you give for doing them.

I read. You said, "...the other party that steals *for* (emphasis added)
the poor." Perhaps that slip was Freudian?

I still find your opinion to be horse****. But, that's just my opinion of
your opinion!
--
John H

On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 21:41:55 -0500, HK wrote:

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 9, 5:54?pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 15:53:02 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:34?am, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 06:24:38 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:08?am, wrote:
On Feb 9, 9:03?am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote:
HK wrote:
I am truly sorry if I offended any of you fellas.
Love you,
Harry Krause
Next thing you will be doing to calling some a Black Loser, or a
Wet-Back Loser.... you really should be ashamed of yourself.
Only if they think it will help in the elections.. The democrats have
been pulling this "tolerant party" farce for decades, the drift
between Obama and Billary has really opened up the curtains to the
blatant bigotry and pandering that is the rule of the day for the
dems...
Read you own post, Scottie.
I always get a kick out of statements like, "Those rotten, no-good, so
and so's and such and such's are despicable because they are so
hateful and intolerant!"
Thanks for starting my day with a smile.
Both of your parties are guilty of pandering. Yours hopes to achieve
and maintain power by toadying up to the equally rich or richer,
piling so much wealth on their ultraprivileged tables that some will
ultimately spill over the edges into your own pockets.
Bull****. Do you consider it 'bad' to be wealthy? Are the rich inherently
immoral? How do you define 'rich'?
Your opposition
?[liberals]
hopes to achieve and maintain power by promising the poor, the
discouraged and the disenfranchised an ever elusive "brighter day",
thereby garnering millions of hours of volunteer time and tens of
millions of votes.
Absolutely true.
So you are both a batch of thieves. The difference is not in what you
do, but who your masters are.
Luke 6: 41-42
One with your attitude towards religion should not quote the Bible.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I didn't say it was bad to be wealthy, I said your party steals for
the wealthy----- vs the other party that steals for the poor. There's
no difference in what either of you do, only who your masters are.
"...steals for the poor." ?What horse****!

DC has a pot full of poor. It's been run by Democrats from time immemorial.
Wealthy Democrats. Democrats who've convinced the 'poor' that they will
look out for the 'poor'. Have the 'poor' done one iota better in all that
time? The Mayors go to jail, the city council folks go to jail, the school
board folks go to jail, the friggin' teachers' union folks go to jail.

You need to wake up Chuck. The Democrats have done a good job of convincing
the uneducated that the Democrats are looking out for them. It's true. The
Democrats want to keep them poor and uneducated - that way the poor will
continue to believe the **** like you just spouted above.

Hell no, the Democrats don't want the No Child Left Behind Act to succeed.
The poor may *learn* something!
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Stop and think, John. (vs react)

Never did I say the Democrats *gave* anything to the poor, just that
Democrats steal from the general public in the name of the poor.
Your party steals from the general public in the name of the rich.
Once again, there is no difference in what either of your parties do-
only in the reasons you give for doing them.


Herring is getting more and more irrational as he ages.

Well Harry, I see you've still not grown the balls to come out from behind
the pretend Bozo's Bin.
--
John H

On Feb 9, 6:51�pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 18:34:36 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Feb 9, 5:54?pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 15:53:02 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:34?am, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 06:24:38 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 9, 6:08?am, wrote:
On Feb 9, 9:03?am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here

wrote:
HK wrote:
I am truly sorry if I offended any of you fellas.
Love you,
Harry Krause

Next thing you will be doing to calling some a Black Loser, or a
Wet-Back Loser.... you really should be ashamed of yourself.

Only if they think it will help in the elections.. The democrats have
been pulling this "tolerant party" farce for decades, the drift
between Obama and Billary has really opened up the curtains to the
blatant bigotry and pandering that is the rule of the day for the
dems...

Read you own post, Scottie.

I always get a kick out of statements like, "Those rotten, no-good, so
and so's and such and such's are despicable because they are so
hateful and intolerant!"

Thanks for starting my day with a smile.

Both of your parties are guilty of pandering. Yours hopes to achieve
and maintain power by toadying up to the equally rich or richer,
piling so much wealth on their ultraprivileged tables that some will
ultimately spill over the edges into your own pockets.

Bull****. Do you consider it 'bad' to be wealthy? Are the rich inherently
immoral? How do you define 'rich'?

Your opposition
?[liberals]
hopes to achieve and maintain power by promising the poor, the
discouraged and the disenfranchised an ever elusive "brighter day",
thereby garnering millions of hours of volunteer time and tens of
millions of votes.

Absolutely true.

So you are both a batch of thieves. The difference is not in what you
do, but who your masters are.

Luke 6: 41-42

One with your attitude towards religion should not quote the Bible.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I didn't say it was bad to be wealthy, I said your party steals for
the wealthy----- vs the other party that steals for the poor. There's
no difference in what either of you do, only who your masters are.

"...steals for the poor." ?What horse****!

DC has a pot full of poor. It's been run by Democrats from time immemorial.
Wealthy Democrats. Democrats who've convinced the 'poor' that they will
look out for the 'poor'. Have the 'poor' done one iota better in all that
time? The Mayors go to jail, the city council folks go to jail, the school
board folks go to jail, the friggin' teachers' union folks go to jail.

You need to wake up Chuck. The Democrats have done a good job of convincing
the uneducated that the Democrats are looking out for them. It's true. The
Democrats want to keep them poor and uneducated - that way the poor will
continue to believe the **** like you just spouted above.

Hell no, the Democrats don't want the No Child Left Behind Act to succeed.
The poor may *learn* something!
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Stop and think, John. (vs react)

Never did I say the Democrats *gave* anything to the poor, just that
Democrats steal from the general public in the name of the poor.
Your party steals from the general public in the name of the rich.
Once again, there is no difference in what either of your parties do-
only in the reasons you give for doing them.

I read. You said, "...the other party that steals *for* (emphasis added)
the poor." Perhaps that slip was Freudian?

I still find your opinion to be horse****. But, that's just my opinion of
your opinion!
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Interesting note: I don't see any denial that your party steals for
(or in the name of) the rich, only a protest that the Democrats don't
really steal for (or in the name of) the poor.

We ran into one of my wife's oldest (longest standing) friends at a
play tonight. This lady organizes the D caucus in her precinct. Four
years ago she had about 20 people attending. This year she had to cram
over 80 people into her house, yard, and garage. Her precint gets 5
delegates to the state D convention, and the crowd elected 4 Obama and
1 Clinton delegate.

Somethin's happenin' here
What it is ain't exactly clear
But it's time to stop, "Hey! What's the sound?"
Everybody look what's goin down.......

I hope that the next POTUS (from either the tweedle-dee or the tweedle-
dum party) does a better job of reaching across the aisle. It's time
for people to stop reacting on an emotional level to the mere mention
of the name of the opposing political party. That's not how adults
solve problems.

On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 22:08:11 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

Some snippage


- Show quoted text -

I didn't say it was bad to be wealthy, I said your party steals for
the wealthy----- vs the other party that steals for the poor. There's
no difference in what either of you do, only who your masters are.

"...steals for the poor." ?What horse****!

DC has a pot full of poor. It's been run by Democrats from time immemorial.
Wealthy Democrats. Democrats who've convinced the 'poor' that they will
look out for the 'poor'. Have the 'poor' done one iota better in all that
time? The Mayors go to jail, the city council folks go to jail, the school
board folks go to jail, the friggin' teachers' union folks go to jail.

You need to wake up Chuck. The Democrats have done a good job of convincing
the uneducated that the Democrats are looking out for them. It's true. The
Democrats want to keep them poor and uneducated - that way the poor will
continue to believe the **** like you just spouted above.

Hell no, the Democrats don't want the No Child Left Behind Act to succeed.
The poor may *learn* something!
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Stop and think, John. (vs react)

Never did I say the Democrats *gave* anything to the poor, just that
Democrats steal from the general public in the name of the poor.
Your party steals from the general public in the name of the rich.
Once again, there is no difference in what either of your parties do-
only in the reasons you give for doing them.

I read. You said, "...the other party that steals *for* (emphasis added)
the poor." Perhaps that slip was Freudian?

I still find your opinion to be horse****. But, that's just my opinion of
your opinion!
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Interesting note: I don't see any denial that your party steals for
(or in the name of) the rich, only a protest that the Democrats don't
really steal for (or in the name of) the poor.

We ran into one of my wife's oldest (longest standing) friends at a
play tonight. This lady organizes the D caucus in her precinct. Four
years ago she had about 20 people attending. This year she had to cram
over 80 people into her house, yard, and garage. Her precint gets 5
delegates to the state D convention, and the crowd elected 4 Obama and
1 Clinton delegate.

Somethin's happenin' here
What it is ain't exactly clear
But it's time to stop, "Hey! What's the sound?"
Everybody look what's goin down.......

I hope that the next POTUS (from either the tweedle-dee or the tweedle-
dum party) does a better job of reaching across the aisle. It's time
for people to stop reacting on an emotional level to the mere mention
of the name of the opposing political party. That's not how adults
solve problems.

No, I didn't address your assertion that my party 'steals for the wealthy'.
It made little sense, and was therefore not addressed.

Now that we've decided the Democrats 'steal *from* the poor' (but pretend
otherwise), perhaps you'd explain your second assertion.

In my view, the Democrats *and* the Republicans steal for the wealthy.
You'd surely put Ted Kennedy, George Soros, Harry Ried, etc. amongst the
wealthy, yes?
--
John H

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 17:28:10 -0500, HK penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 17:05:05 -0500, HK penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

Gene Kearns wrote:

Instead of being such idiots, you could have helped me and the wife
compound and polish one side of the boat. We could have gotten done in
time to float it and hit the best watering hole on the ICW.... a view
of the water, hottie little waitresses, shrimp burgers, and the
coldest Red Stripes on earth. With any luck we could have hooked up
with D-unit and company. But n-o-o-o-o-o-o-o you guys want to snipe at
each other.
Well, you could have stopped off at Tri-State today, where, while going
into the fishing flea market, you would have noticed two just delivered
30+' Gradys, each with a pair of 350s on the transom. Jeez.
If I had that sort of expendable income...... I'd be all over it!


I didn't even look closely. When I see that sort of array on the stern,
I simply think..."Another way to support Big Oil..." And think of the
truck and trailer you'd need to haul 'em! Gotta be 12,000-14,000 pounds
in those rigs.

I'm pretty sure they were 33's.

Nice boats, though.

No way to trailer that sort of boat, short of a tractor trailer and
(even worse) the oversize permits. I think the narrowest model, 33' or
over, is almost a 12' beam.



What? My 4Runner won't do? Ack! I better call and cancel the order!

Seriously, though, I asked my salesman there how boat sales were going,
and he said they were moving just a little less than the usual number of
new larger boats, that middle range boats were "down some," and smaller
boat sales had "fallen flat." Larger boats at that dealership are the
big Gradys, of course, and I'd guess the "middle range" includes the
23-30 foot Parkers and Gradys, with the smaller boats the Parkers and
Gradys the size of mine or smaller. He said the downturn was due mostly
to declining economic conditions, rather than the price of fuel.