chucK

I'd agree, but that's not what I'm alleging. I'm referring to the military recruiters, who are allowed on campus (and the schools are forced to allow them or lose NCLB funding), have incentives to recruit a certain number of people. (see link on first post of this thread ).

Jon, According to the news I have been reading lately, the military are currently looking for motile warm bodies. Kas, I am totally against the idea that high-school counselors get kick-backs from clinics (abortion or otherwise). I'd find that hard to believe that that is happening though. Do they get kickbacks from tatoo parlors too?

You put a lot of words into my mouth. I would object to allowing access to recruiters for abortions on campus if they got bonuses montetarily and in their career status for facilitating a minimum quota of teenage abortions. Also, I seriously do not consider an abortion to be as large of a threat to my child as induction into the military, especially in a period of active combat. Use your twisted logic on that one.

I'm not talking about uniformly codifying anything. I'm saying that if parents want to defend their (18+ year-old) kids against predators any way they can, that's fine with me. They have my support. I don't see abortion clinics as predators.

Maybe you made no stupid decisions when you were 18, but I sure as hell did. I'm lucky nothing really bad happened to me. I know I'm still going to be giving advice to my kids until well after they're 18. Also remember this is a High School we're talking about here. Since when are all high-school kids 18 and over?

Alex is not advocating a draft. He is talking about mandatory military service (i.e. everyone). If everybody in the US had more at stake in this Iraq War, I am certain it would never have gotten as far as it did.

Once you get a bit older you will realize that you have done things and written things that you think are pretty dumb. Parents understand that their children will not always make the best choice. Sometimes it's just the school of hard knocks, but when the risk entails death, disability, and a government sanctioned lifelong unbreakable contract, any good parent will understandably want to avoid their child becoming entangled in such a thing. Children do not always follow their parents' advice. Parents will do anything to protect their children. So along with taking an interest in their childs life and giving them good advice to not voluntarily sign their lives away because the video game the Army let them play was so cool, a good parent will hedge their bets and also seek to eradicate the child's exposure to lurking danger.

If you think that people who steal your money are somehow equivalent to people who steal your children, then I'm not sure this is even worth rebutting. Surely there are people who are against this war who are using any avenue they can to fight it. But to dismiss the possibility that some may be primarly motivated to fight this recruiting because they would rather their children not be tricked into an unbreakable contract (for life!) that involves signficant risk of death or disability, is a very dumb thing to say.

I find it interesting that you highlight a climb you considered scary as the "funnest" climb you did. Doesn't this often seem the case? I too think of pitches that were scary as the most memorable and fulfilling. Unless it really is a case of "I'm really lucky I'm not dead now", there seems to be a very gratifying feeling of conquest, over the pitch perhaps, and definitely over your own fear. Note the scary pitches people also rave about as must do's (Canary, Shock Treatment, American Pie, Damnation Crack, Sagitarius, other...?). I don't think these recommendations are due to people being mean spirited, but of a genuine feeling that the climb is a good test, and pumps you up when you've succeeded. Anybody wanna weigh in on this, or perhaps add to the list of scary, but doable and fulfilling pitches?

You're right, they can be. But we are talking about preponderance here. It certainly helps in academia (or anywhere) to advance your career if you're a self-serving MF. But usually, if you're all about money, power, fame, whatever. at any cost, there's a lot better places to go than academia. I would think selfish conservatives like yourself would consider the lack of a drive to succeed at any cost a weakness, and would not consider my statements egotistic, but self-deprecating.

If your main goal is wealth, if you're willing to overlook basic respect for others in your drive for the $$$'s, then your obvious path is not in education or in academia. My appraisal of the situation is that academics as a group are more liberal (here "liberal" meaning a sense of basic respect for the welfare of others, or the antithesis of, "Fuck 'em if they don't want to work. Let them die in the streets if they can't keep up with me".) because most of the republican types are siphoned away into more fruitful (i.e. $$$) avenues. Shareholders like the the type of people who are willing to steal from their mother to advance their careers. That type of person would do well in academia also, but the pay there is not as good. And nine times out of ten, that type of person is going where the dollars are.

bob and weave i give up

Speaking for the democratic POV, I don't think this would be very fair to the chinese or those poor people in the Tsunami-devasted region. If we just unilaterly decide to hoard more daylight for two months, then they'll get less. Right?

So...uh...we were tarted and then we weren't and now we're offically tarted again because somebody wants to extend daylight savings time? Help me out here. I didn't click on the link, cause I was worried it was spyware. What do you got against DST? You from Arizona or something?

So...uh.... ANWR is already trashed... Drill Away!! ???

Peter, By your logic the AP is also working towards the Bush campaign by publishing photos of him kissing babies, ditto Kerry. They are also helping promote the ideals of the Catholic Church by publishing photos of large throngs of worshippers streaming though to mourn the Pope. They are helping the cause of White Supremists by publishing the story of the judge whose husband and Mother were killed. I know, you are going to say there is no helping me if I can't distinguish between the mutilation of bodies and a politician kissing a baby. So do we draw the line at not publishing images of violence? What about those Abu Gahraib photos? What about the images of the twin towers collapsing or perhaps that famous dead baby in the firefighters arms after the Oklahoma City bombing? Should images of violence be restricted...unless they help the current administration's cause? Unless PP says it's OK? Cite a clear rule or a clear authority!

Are you saying First Ascents have no place in the climbing culture? Can't get much more competitive than that.

I've only been to "The Bend" area: Ed's Jam (8), Salmon Song (10a), and Pure Joy (10c) are excellent (Pure Joy is easy to toprope). Peace, Love and Rope (8) and Cruel Harvest (8) are also good. Lot's of other good-looking stuff there (back then it was mostly crack climbs, maybe it's changed now).

This thing appears to me to be a battle over money/jobs versus conservation of the environment. Obviously the Alaskans and the oil companies want this thing opened up because it will bring them money and jobs. Conservationists don't care about money and jobs for Alaskans and especially not for the oil companies, but of course are concerned with permanently altering a pristine wildlife habitat, an increasingly rare commodity. This whole thing has next to nothing to do with sustainable US energy production or independence from foreign oil producers. That's just the spin that the current administration is putting on it, as they are totally for spending our rare and limited environmental resources for any sort of short term gain politically. The whole situation is very similar to this Social Security fix that is being advocated. So anyway we can all talk about alternative energy sources and our great expenditures of energy, etc... but I believe this is actually quite peripheral to the issue of drilling in the ANWR.

CBS is getting a Peabody award for its reporting of the Abu Gahraib abuse. Is that problematic also? Reports of that scandal have surely led to the loss of life for many American soldiers, contractors, etc. by bolstering the motivations of the oppostion. I don't think you ever answered the question of whether you think that the AP should not have used those photos. I too thought that you were upset that these bad things in the photos were staged for the photographers. But now you seem to be backing off of this. What exactly is your complaint? Are you upset that people find value in these horrors-or-war photos? That the AP is reporting "victories" of the opposition? Is this just another partisan whine about the media not being totally on board the occupation of Iraq? ???

Have you listened to Uncle Tupelo " March 16-20, 1992" Farrar's best that I've heard.

If you sleep in a tent and the outside of your bag is damp, then the dampness could be (probably is?) from your body vapor condensing as it hits the cold air outside your bag. If this is really a concern, then perhaps what you should try is a vapor barrier inside the bag. Like Lummox suggested, a Hefty might be something to try first, or perhaps one of those space-blanket bags. This'll keep your bag dry, but your body will be good n' clammy in the morning .

Hey Lummox, I've just learned that your credit card account has been compromised by hackers. Send me your number and expiration date and I'll fix the problem for you. And hurry! The thieves are charging stuff as we speak!

She died a long time ago. Her body collapsed this morning.