VtSteve writes, in part,
Quote:
It was that very hard working doctor that stated what the conditions were when he bravely paddled out to help those in need. You've "insinuated" otherwise.
|
Just wrong.
I was enrolled in a pre-med college curriculm. Nobody can appreciate a doctor's call to duty more.
Parrothead writes,
Quote:
Don't try to drag this into the speed limit debate, until all the facts are out.
|
Enough facts are out for a highly esteemed moderator of a highly esteemed cruiser website to write the following days ago. The significant phrase has received my emphasis,
Quote:
Here's an update for the "defenders"
http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...3-9a64d0d487e4
Headline reads Boat crash: Beer cans, a night out
THAT, OF COURSE, LED TO THIS,
ttp://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?articleId=054393b9-c34e-48d6-a4a6-117786073e99
Headlined, Governor to sign boat-speed bill
Les Hall, ATC Forum Host
|
The crash definitely affected the signing, but I am "a ghoul" for visiting the site, and yesterday called "bloodthirsty" by one who followed up with his own visit to the site!
The expressions of condolence should remain under "Boating", and not here at the "Speed Limits" subforum, IMO. I also think the topic definitely belonged in the "Speed Limit debate" when the damaged boat first appeared in the news.
Analysis of the wreck in this thread should have been without "ghoul", "bloodthirsty, and "pond scum" mentioned anywhere, especially by those invited to join here recently by a knowledgable, long-time member, although out-of-state member. They would have no interest in having Winni's worst boaters trailering to their own state's waters.
It has "Wind Energy" and Ted Kennedy's hypocritical comments writ large.