mattp

It is kind of a mess but it really isn't hard. Take the glue off with paper and an iron, as described, or use a heat gun or a propane torch and a broad knife (I hang them on a post in the basement where they can lie against a flat surface and work from the top down; it takes minimal care not to get glue on the front surface and of course you don't want to burn your skins). You can get everything off your skins in fifteen minutes.

I believe it is very hard to argue that these guys are loyal to America, even if you agree with their basic positions on social issues or even the war. Seriously. Do even the right wing loyalists think they didn't out a CIA operative for political reasons? Isn't it clear that Rove and Cheney were involved at least at some level? Isn't this treasonous even if you can make some legal argument how they didn't break the law? It might be different if they were saying that Valerie Plame was a rogue operative or was somehow acting against our national interest but we have not seen a hint of that. In fact, we've seen no attempt to justify what they did, and they are not denying they outted her for political payback against her husband or to deflect criticism based on what he was saying. At first, the President's spokesman denied any high level involvment - saying he'd been assured by Rove and Libby they weren't involved. Then, Bush said "we'll never know, but it is up to Ascroft to investigate." Since then, silence except to say "Libby is a good man and I can't comment on an ongoing investigation." Isn't Bush at some level responsible, whether he knew or not?

He also tried the "I'm going to run a clean administration where we ask not only "is it legal, but is it right." I don't think you can blame either failing on the Democrats - do you? Seriously? Where have you seen an effort to be honest and to be "moderate" in his administration's efforts with regard the environment, taxes, the war, oil development, social security, you name it? He chose a nominee that he hopes will stimulate his base in the far wing of his party, and he's counting on party loyalty to keep the moderates in line. If it works, as it has worked for him in the past, it is a good strategy. However, we may see that his fortunes are running out. Either way, hold on for the ride.

If it won't rain - as in the forecast says high pressure and clear for the next five days - leave the bivvy at home. The amount of moisture you get from dew doesn't justify the weight of the bivvy, in my opinion. I often bring a mosquito-net dome, which weighs almost nothing but makes life MUCH nicer if bugs are out, but I either bring a tent or tarp or not. If you are camping (not actually bivvying on some ledge somewhere) the bivvy doesn't add much but weight. In marginal weather? A light tent or tarp weighs little or no more than (most) two bivvy bags.

Lowell, Thank you for posting here. I have studiously avoided these "memoriam" threads where I don't actually know the individuals involved, but here I find a tribute to someone I knew. Carl rocked! He held an enthusiasm for climbing and skiing that most of us can only imagine -- and he shared it willingly. I can honestly say: he will be missed.

Sounds like the "full on" Darrington experience. Those who've only been up there to bake in the sun don't know what they've missed.

Here's a shot of Whipsaw, from Kevin Pogue's collection. Pony Keg is the crack immediately to the climber's left.

Its definitely true that some partners are better than ohers when it comes to taking care of/returning your gear. But that is only one quality in a larger matrix.

My brother had a home-made version of something like that on top of his Saab many years ago and while I'm sure those you show here are easier to set up and easier to get in and out of, the thing was kind of a nuisance. Getting up and down from the top of the car was clumsy and of course you had stability issues if you moved around inside very actively. Also, it felt leass secure than sleeping on the ground, and was less private. It was also more visible where you were trying to keep a less obvious profile, an dit was more exposed to wind when that was an issue. On the plus side, of course, you didn't have to set the thing up in mud and snow and it wasn't as prone to flooding. On balance I'd just get a car top carrier and a simple tent unless you have a reason to want to avoid sleeping on the ground.

On the way home from climbing yesterday my partner told me that it is all B.S. anyway, and there is little point in trying to follow all of this because don't they all just lie anyway? He said that maybe I was right that these particular thugs in the Whitehouse are worse than average, but he still kept reverting to "all this politics is political."

Funny twist here, too is the Bill Robbins connection. I am told that the second time or third time the route was "chopped," the chopper couldn't pull the 1/2 inch bolts so instead he flattened the hangers. Then they were bent back out so they would be useable but Bill Robbins - another one of the trad warriors very vocal about how sport climbing was trashing the coulee - thought this was unsafe and went out there and replaced the hangers. As much as he didn't like the sport climbing explosion out there, he thought twice-bent hangers were dangerous and didn't want to see climbers using them that way.

I don't think I would favor moving an entire string of ten bolts or whatever to the other side of the collumn - certainly not now when there remain the old chopped ones. Maybe after the first time it was pulled he could have acquiesced, but I'm afraid it becamse an unfortunate pissing match and I think both parties would admit they didn't do everything right. I like Pony Keg, by the way, and I've climbed it several times without having any serious conflict with climbers on Whipsaw.

Kevin Pogue has publicly stated, I think on this board and elsewhere, that if he had it to do over again he would bolt the other side of the Whipsaw arete. At this point, however, it is what it is (or has become), and I have only partial sympathy for Catbird's complaint. There are lots of climbs out there and I do not see why - if that is what he is saying - he had any right to expect that somebody forego Whipsaw when he wants to climb Pony Keg. At least not to the extent that he would have been justified in being righteous about it. If he didn't want this problem, he could have chosen another climb. Of course, I wasn't there and maybe Catbird was in fact more gracious about it than what I gathered from his post.

Jay: you're speaking nonsense. First of all, it is very had to argue that, at the root of it, this war was not about oil. You've put up a good fight, though. Clearly and undeniably, oil is what makes the entire region of strategic import. Our specific motives in this case may have been one or two steps removed from taking over the oil fields but I use the word "may" and I haven't seen anybody pose a plausible alternate motivation except, perhaps, to establish more military presence in the region if we have to move out of Saudia Arabia soon. Whether somebody was trying to boost share prices in their stock portfolio or something? I'm not sure I'd take it that far, but clearly that horseh*t coming out of Washington in the run-up to the war, and since, was just that. Your second point is equally ridiculous. Who is arguing there wasn't corruption in the U.N. administered oil for food program? And what is the significance of this, in the context of any argument about why we went to war or whether it was a good idea? Your third point? I'm not really sure what it was. Who was arguing on Saddam's behalf, and what did it have to do with bribes? The French said they weren't convinced he had nuclear weapons or posed a signficant threat, that an invasion would not aid any war on terrorism, and that it might well lead to greater instability in the region. It looks like they were right. Do you think THEY were bribed to argue on Saddam's behalf?

If you're looking to smear the U.N., fine, but if you're looking to bolster any argument for war or show that the U.S. was frustrated by the failure of the sanctions, I don't think you want to look under that iceberg, Jay. Our own Congressional committee has found that the US was complicit in the evasions of the Iraq sanctions, and in fact blocked at least some U.N. efforts to intervene with the illegal trade with Jordan; also, most of the money that was funneled to Saddam came from us. In additin, we knew about the kickbacks but here, too, declined to intervene.

That'd be awesome. PP launches into a tirade and gets tackled by a bunch of irate radical soccer moms, melee breaks out, and it is WTO all over again.

To answer Jopa's question completely, I believe "Midway Direct" clombs that corner system directly above Jello Towaer about twenty feet or so past where "Midway Original" exits right, and then moves slightly left, up, and back right. It is not hard, but the pro is slightly funky and I don't think this variation gets a lot of traffic.

Sorry to bore you, JZ. I find it fascinating that what has been described as the first crag climb in Washington and is consistently touted as one of the classics has been incorrectly documented for all these years. Yes, it is an easy climb, and popular, and most parties do just fine without the details. I think it is the best 5.6 climb around, even if some guidebooks rate it 5.5.

I heard JayB and Peter Puget are going.

Searching for "Rove Conspiracy" on Google, I found this: Karl Rove's Web of Evil

What? Nobody has any other theory?

bwrts, I thought his drawings were excellent and, yes, in some cases more helpful than a photo. In many cases they provided quite a bit more relevant detail.

Jopa, your hard man here is on what has become the standard Midway route. Yes, I believe that higher traverse, climbing up past a fix pin and then stepping right under a small diagonal roof/crack is the original and it does not appear in the Washington Rock guides or Kramer.

Here's yet another spin on the Plame Affair: Rove directed forgery of Niger documents; all of this Plame Affair business is the result of a conspiracy to cover it up. Go Spot go!