Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

Fat Jack · 01-03-2006, 10:01 AM

WL,
I notice that you never address the issues-at-hand in your responses, instead taking the response off an a tangent when it is not going the way you'd like. You must have studied debating in school and learned about the use of red herrings to distract when your argument is going astray. Nice.
Of course, anyone else who read that old post knew I was jesting. But I guess if that was all you had... And I guess I forgot who I was dealing with. Did it fool any of you? If so, sorry (said in jest).

Now to the points about NHRBA;
I don't think anyone in NH truly believes that NHRBA is a "boating safety" group, despite your no-wake petition. Recall that John Kerry voted for the war...is he a hawk? We all know why Kerry voted for the war, and we all know why you petitioned for that NWZ.
Did you not report to the Winnilakers membership back in 2003, in a thread directed at your fight against that year's HB406, "its official,...NHRBA has been created. This association will be dedicated to fighting for the rights of boaters on NH's waters...looking for individuals to come to show support against a Bill, trying to impose a night-time speed limit...if the bill passes, day time speed is not far away"? Generally, "safety" groups efforts have something to do with safety....at least their initial efforts. No mention of no-wake zones here or education or improving enforcement of the 150-ft rule...just "fighting for the rights of boaters" (to go as fast as they want).
In that same thread about that night-time speed limit law, you posted a message entitled "This is why we have this site". Are we to believe that the Winnilaker's GFBL group suddenly becomes a "safety" group when they log off Winnilakers and log on to NHRBA?
In another thread, you wrote "NH Lakes Association is supporting this bill, so that means we have to fight even harder". NHLA has been a great thing for the state of NH. Few citizens of this state would disagree. Before NHRBA/Winnilakers, I knew of nobody who did not appreciate all that NHLA has done for all of us. Why were they your first declared enemy if you were a "safety" group?
In another post on that forum entitled "Loon lovers at it again! SB:106 Trying to ban watercraft" one of your members wrote of how Senator Johnson was trying to "backdoor" a policy to define 3-seat PWC's as PWC's (what they are). "We can't allow this to happen" he said. "let the loon loving, canoe paddling, conservatives know that its everyones right to our lakes". He asks for NHRBA's help. Why would he expect help from a "safety" group to fight loon lovers?
As recently as last April, on OSO, you wrote "I have set up a new organization NHRBA...I have legal representation in concord working for us on issues like the speed limit". Why no mention of your real purpose...boating safety?
Also in April, you posted on Winnilakers "The NHRBA has all summer to put in place an organization to counter the false claims of this anti-boating group" (referring to Winnfabs). If your organization was put in place for this purpose then, why not just admit that now? Or else, when did it convert to a "boating safety" organization?

Again, I can't speak for Winnfabs. I do not know how you disserned that their real objective is to ban all boats from our lakes. I have never seen anything except NHRBA talk of that (scare tactics?). But I am told that Winnfabs was formed for the sole purpose of fighting for HB162. In fact, they say so right on their website; "The motivation behind the forming of our alliance was the introduction into the New Hampshire state legislature of House Bill 162 which provides for a daytime speed limit of 45 MPH and a nighttime speed limit of 25 MPH." They do not pretend to be anything else. I just wish NHRBA would have the integrety to admit what they really are, what you yourself alluded to in the Citizen last week; a GFBL group fighting against any limits on their "excitement". There is nothing wrong with standing up for your beliefs. In fact, that is admirable. If you feel that high-speed boating is exciting, and don't want it to end, just say so. I'd respect that, I'd respect you, and I'd respect NHRBA. Notice that none of us are challenging the integrity of OSO or Winnilakers? They are GFBL groups, they admit they are GFBL groups, and we all respect their right to disagree with us. I respect the rights of smokers groups to fight smoking restrictions, so long as they do not pose as "health" groups and say they are doing so because they feel smoking is healthy.
FJ

PS: Are you swearing here that neither NHRBA or any of its partners, associates, or anyone else fighting like you against HB162 (Winnilakers.com, Speedwake, OSO, Baja Marine, your attorneys, the Marine Trades Association, etc) had a survey of their own done? If that is absolutely true, you should have no trouble with a simple unqualified "yes".

01-03-2006, 10:01 AM	#61
Fat Jack Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 183 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	WL, I notice that you never address the issues-at-hand in your responses, instead taking the response off an a tangent when it is not going the way you'd like. You must have studied debating in school and learned about the use of red herrings to distract when your argument is going astray. Nice. Of course, anyone else who read that old post knew I was jesting. But I guess if that was all you had... And I guess I forgot who I was dealing with. Did it fool any of you? If so, sorry (said in jest). Now to the points about NHRBA; I don't think anyone in NH truly believes that NHRBA is a "boating safety" group, despite your no-wake petition. Recall that John Kerry voted for the war...is he a hawk? We all know why Kerry voted for the war, and we all know why you petitioned for that NWZ. Did you not report to the Winnilakers membership back in 2003, in a thread directed at your fight against that year's HB406, "its official,...NHRBA has been created. This association will be dedicated to fighting for the rights of boaters on NH's waters...looking for individuals to come to show support against a Bill, trying to impose a night-time speed limit...if the bill passes, day time speed is not far away"? Generally, "safety" groups efforts have something to do with safety....at least their initial efforts. No mention of no-wake zones here or education or improving enforcement of the 150-ft rule...just "fighting for the rights of boaters" (to go as fast as they want). In that same thread about that night-time speed limit law, you posted a message entitled "This is why we have this site". Are we to believe that the Winnilaker's GFBL group suddenly becomes a "safety" group when they log off Winnilakers and log on to NHRBA? In another thread, you wrote "NH Lakes Association is supporting this bill, so that means we have to fight even harder". NHLA has been a great thing for the state of NH. Few citizens of this state would disagree. Before NHRBA/Winnilakers, I knew of nobody who did not appreciate all that NHLA has done for all of us. Why were they your first declared enemy if you were a "safety" group? In another post on that forum entitled "Loon lovers at it again! SB:106 Trying to ban watercraft" one of your members wrote of how Senator Johnson was trying to "backdoor" a policy to define 3-seat PWC's as PWC's (what they are). "We can't allow this to happen" he said. "let the loon loving, canoe paddling, conservatives know that its everyones right to our lakes". He asks for NHRBA's help. Why would he expect help from a "safety" group to fight loon lovers? As recently as last April, on OSO, you wrote "I have set up a new organization NHRBA...I have legal representation in concord working for us on issues like the speed limit". Why no mention of your real purpose...boating safety? Also in April, you posted on Winnilakers "The NHRBA has all summer to put in place an organization to counter the false claims of this anti-boating group" (referring to Winnfabs). If your organization was put in place for this purpose then, why not just admit that now? Or else, when did it convert to a "boating safety" organization? Again, I can't speak for Winnfabs. I do not know how you disserned that their real objective is to ban all boats from our lakes. I have never seen anything except NHRBA talk of that (scare tactics?). But I am told that Winnfabs was formed for the sole purpose of fighting for HB162. In fact, they say so right on their website; "The motivation behind the forming of our alliance was the introduction into the New Hampshire state legislature of House Bill 162 which provides for a daytime speed limit of 45 MPH and a nighttime speed limit of 25 MPH." They do not pretend to be anything else. I just wish NHRBA would have the integrety to admit what they really are, what you yourself alluded to in the Citizen last week; a GFBL group fighting against any limits on their "excitement". There is nothing wrong with standing up for your beliefs. In fact, that is admirable. If you feel that high-speed boating is exciting, and don't want it to end, just say so. I'd respect that, I'd respect you, and I'd respect NHRBA. Notice that none of us are challenging the integrity of OSO or Winnilakers? They are GFBL groups, they admit they are GFBL groups, and we all respect their right to disagree with us. I respect the rights of smokers groups to fight smoking restrictions, so long as they do not pose as "health" groups and say they are doing so because they feel smoking is healthy. FJ PS: Are you swearing here that neither NHRBA or any of its partners, associates, or anyone else fighting like you against HB162 (Winnilakers.com, Speedwake, OSO, Baja Marine, your attorneys, the Marine Trades Association, etc) had a survey of their own done? If that is absolutely true, you should have no trouble with a simple unqualified "yes".