wrote in message



there are a lot of ways to
have a splendid time on the water that don't have to involve running
around lickety-split all the time or burning 60 gph.


Absolutely,

I rarely run off shore anymore. I've become re-acquainted with in-shore
fishing
and find that I enjoy it just as much as I did years ago before I got into
"big game" fishing. Its actually a bit more relaxing, truth be told.


db

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:

Heheh. There's just no limit to the lengths some will go to
rationalize
away the raping of the American public.

"Nothing is wrong; everything is wonderful. Those WMDs are just around
the corner."
Cool it, Harry. There is no correlation between observing that even a
doubling of fuel prices
won't price most people out of boating (unless they're looking for an
excuse not to boat) and
"rationalizing the raping of the American public". Everything isn't
political all the time.

A. Baloney or, if you prefer, bologna.

B. The recent surge in oil prices is political. It wouldn't have
happened with a different administration in Washington.

We get a chance to shift the dominant party in congress in a few
months- assuming that's what the majority of people want. Then we'll
have to "stay the course" until the next president, of whatever party,
takes over in 2009. No real choice.

I have to disagree that the surge in oil prices wouldn't be happening
with a different administration in office. While it's true that the
Bush family fortunes, and those of most of the Bush family friends, do
extremely well when the price of oil becomes insane it's hard to
imagine that the guy the R's should have run in 2000 (McCain), the guy
who most likely actually won in 2000 but didn't get to take office
(Gore), or the unfortunate choice the D's ran in 2004 (Kerry) would
have had the political horsepower to jawbone the oil companies into
making less than the astonishing profits they are currently piling up.
Bush doesn't currently have any political HP to jawbone Big Oil- but
neither does he have the will to do so.


In the sixth year of a Gore term, gasoline prices would have stabilized
because of reduced demand and increased tazes, and we'd be much farther
along on the path towards alternative energy.

We also wouldn't be at war in Iraq, and we've have some real serious
negotiators at work in North Korea and Iran.


Pure speculation spinned in a most flattering way for Gore. You can prove
none of that.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:

Heheh. There's just no limit to the lengths some will go to
rationalize
away the raping of the American public.

"Nothing is wrong; everything is wonderful. Those WMDs are just around
the corner."
Cool it, Harry. There is no correlation between observing that even a
doubling of fuel prices
won't price most people out of boating (unless they're looking for an
excuse not to boat) and
"rationalizing the raping of the American public". Everything isn't
political all the time.

A. Baloney or, if you prefer, bologna.

B. The recent surge in oil prices is political. It wouldn't have
happened with a different administration in Washington.

We get a chance to shift the dominant party in congress in a few
months- assuming that's what the majority of people want. Then we'll
have to "stay the course" until the next president, of whatever party,
takes over in 2009. No real choice.

I have to disagree that the surge in oil prices wouldn't be happening
with a different administration in office. While it's true that the
Bush family fortunes, and those of most of the Bush family friends, do
extremely well when the price of oil becomes insane it's hard to
imagine that the guy the R's should have run in 2000 (McCain), the guy
who most likely actually won in 2000 but didn't get to take office
(Gore), or the unfortunate choice the D's ran in 2004 (Kerry) would
have had the political horsepower to jawbone the oil companies into
making less than the astonishing profits they are currently piling up.
Bush doesn't currently have any political HP to jawbone Big Oil- but
neither does he have the will to do so.


In the sixth year of a Gore term, gasoline prices would have stabilized
because of reduced demand and increased tazes, and we'd be much farther
along on the path towards alternative energy.

We also wouldn't be at war in Iraq, and we've have some real serious
negotiators at work in North Korea and Iran.

If Gore were elected and then re-elected we would have been attacked on US
soil several times with millions killed and national landmarks lost;
inflation would be out of control, the stock market would have tanked,
gasoline would be at $6/gallon and we would be on the brink of WWIII with
Iran, North Korea, Syria and Iraq.

Those scenarios are just as likely as what you presented.

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message





Oh, yeah..... how is Lockwood Folly Inlet? I understand that the state
and Brunswick County paid for some significant dredging...


The last time I traversed that inlet I found myself in 6' of water in
between
the cans... I believe it was close to low tide though. Our new 'new' place
is actually closer to Shallotte Inlet. ---not sure about it at all. We'll
see.

db

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Dan J.S. wrote:
" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...
.........we already know what will happen with the 25 ft+/twin engine
boat market.

So what do you predict will happen with the single engine 19-23 foot
boat market?


Nothing will happen to the 19-23 foot boat market. If you spend $2000 a
year on gas, would spending $2800 make a difference?


Heheh. There's just no limit to the lengths some will go to rationalize
away the raping of the American public.

"Nothing is wrong; everything is wonderful. Those WMDs are just around the
corner."

WMDs are in Syria, just FYI