ORIGINAL: Screamin Steel
ORIGINAL: BTBowhunter
Since the audit has not yet been conducted, this thread is a total waste of time and is completely pointless.
Whateverthe audit may or may not conclude, it desreves to at least get an objective look before this type of poll can have any meaning.
It's more than a little bit premature to start with this whiney ass crap now.
The one thing this pollmight have been able totell us is exactly how many whiners we have that are so screwed up that they think they can know the audit is bad before it even starts. But since we have members here who have been caught with as many as 7 or more screen names, the numbers will never meanmuch anyway.
Of course, the mouth of the south will be screaming foul in bold type the whole time but he cant come up with a better qualified candidate to conduct the audit now can he?
40 state wildlife agencies and 4 provinces have used WMI without a problem for similar workand yet a very few crybaby's (with many names) are already screaming foul. Kinda makes you wonder......
C'mon, BTB. I actually have more respect for you than this. When I see a glowing red coal in a fire pit, I can see it glowing red hot and even feel it's heat fromsome distance....I don't really have to pick it up and get the third degree burns on my hands just to prove what I already knew. Likewise when my dog leaves a present on the lawn, I know that even though it may somewhatresemble a bigtootsie roll, that it is really just so much dog #&%@, and it smells just like you would expect from something that came from a dog's rear end, and I'm not much for putting it in my mouth out of morbid curiousity or for giving it the benefit of the doubt at that point. Too much damning evidence too ignore at this point, my friend. I too was hoping for an unbiased audit, but it isn't gonna happen.
Steel, I'm noy saying it should be taken as gospel or that it shouldn't be subject to intense scrutiny once done. Just to be fair, I can understand why you could be skeptical of ANY entity hired by ANY government agency to check out their practices. On the other side, WMI took the job knowing that their work would be under a microscope. All I'm really saying is that it's not fair or even helpful for anyone on any side to claim either a biased or anaccurate result till it's been produced for proper scrutiny.
To use your example in reverse, The pool scene from caddyshack comes to mind. Who knows maybe it will be a dog turd, but lets not drain the pool till we make sure it's not justa Baby Ruth
