Don't know if it pushes them over the 1000 mark or not, but I know that today they put another 20 spot in the membership pot and another C note towards the legal fund.[:-]

Mocha I never said that was an actual transcript, please try to follow along. I said they were some quotes from his interview, that I had found posted on another site.

Your copy of your alledged letter is not signed. However, I'll take your word for it till I find out otherwise. BUT, anyone can type up something and post it on the internet and claim it as authentic. Would you like me to show you?
See how easy that is to do?
Now can you fake a recording of an interview done 8 years ago? I don't think so. It's recorded history. I'm sorry, but I couldn't post the recording even if I did have it. (Are you new to the internet?) So I gave you two sources, actually 1 and crazyone gave you the other, to get this recording from and hear it for yourself. Or for a third source you could contact "shooter" himself for it.

Now let me help you out with the numbers. The interview was about 8 years ago. Jimmy changed his views 180 degrees at least 5 years ago, 8-5=3. Three years makes it 2001 not 2006. The reduction didn't really start till 2001 and they raised the antler restriction in 2002. Hence my questions that you or anyone have failed to answer. Now who's doing the dodging????

Here's a hint crazyhorse. Newspaper opinions or column do not constitute facts, especially from such a source with very low credability in the outdoor community.

Now if you can't be civil, stay on topic and answer, or even opin on the questions posed on why the sudden flip flop, please do not post a reply. These are legitimate questions that hunters want to know. I understand it is your goal to have this somewhat incrimidating evidence removed from public view, so I will not further foster your attempts. You've degraded the other site from your style of "debate" and I don't think this site wants that to happen here.
Have a nice day!

I do believe it's you who is being degrading. Please note your very own words below.

"So I gave you two sources, actually 1 and crazyone gave you the other,"

And here's another of your quotes.
"Now if you can't be civil, stay on topic and answer,"

Perhaps you should follow your own advice. Usually one resorts to name calling for one of two reasons.

1. They don't have an adaquate vocabulary to advance their argument.

2. They are losing the argument and choose to use vulgarities to throw things off track.

You are the exception, as you fall under both catagories.

Well meathunter2 you got your wish, you started this thread to get a fight going and you did. I guess I did a 180 to since the slaughter started at one time I said we had too many deer in some places and for that matter we still do but those places will always have too many, but no one can tell me we have too many on public land at this time.
By the way the USP is the fastes growing club in the state lots of X PFSC members are joining them. I guess I could get a good fight going if I started a thread on Roxane Palone, I guess you know who she is.

lost horn,
I don't buy that you're Jim Slinsky for one minute.

I thought you "could care less about this thread." Of courseI also thought that Meathunter2 said that"NRA acknowledge(d) this suit is bad thing for hunters nationwide"and that Slinsky changing his mind after three years is a "sudden flip flop."

I couldn't pass up the Lost Horn labeling himself as Jim.

If he is Jim he is the biggest hypocrite around.

Been thinking about this since yesterday. The only answer I can come up with is Jane Fonda in a Smokey The Bear outfit?

I only remember 2 no votes in the whole deer allocation process. RP's single yes vote didn't sink the 2 no votes.

You are right "T" I could never fill his boots, by the way I never did buy that you are Gary AltIII either.