mattp

Sorry about that. 524, not 542. Anyway, I'm on furlough for half a day. Cragging IS my rehab with all this family stuff going on. We had five - I'm not kidding: five - houseguests for a week and I'm still on nursing duty and waanh waanh waanh... See you at the park 'n ride.

Cragging? I didn't think that was your thing. 542-xxxx.

I've been stuck at home with family business for weeks and have an away pass for tomorrow morning through mid afernoon. Any interest?

You come up with some weird stuff, Akha. The professor clearly did not ask for any of this . All those who are making such a big issue of this are acting on their own agenda: the news media who like a sensational story picked up on one line of a five minute answer to a question that one of their members asked to kick this thing off and people like our friends BillCoe, Bug and Ponderosa argue that the bottom line here is that the President should simply not comment on these issues. If anybody is to blame here, it is (gasp) THE POLICE OFFICER. There is no way any of you libertarians, cynical liberals, or gun nuts around here would ever justify your having been arrested for mouthing off to a police officer inside your own home. NO way ever. But when it is President Obama who has the nerve to comment on this: an outrage. He has acknowledged that it was a mistake to use the word "stupid" but so far I have yet to see anyone here who is critical of his remarks indicate they listed to the entire answer he provided and that they actually disagree with the message he was clearly trying to convey: he was not and did not suggest judging the police officer for that action, it is wrong (yest stupid) to arrest somebody for being unruly in their own home, and (oh my f'ing god) there is racism in America.

I initially thought this was a BS idea. After all, this is/was an important story of the day and he was asked about it in a press conference and if you ACTUALLY LISTENED TO HIS RESPONSE you would know that the furor is over a message that is taken from one sentence that has in fact been taken out of context. But you are right to a point: a black president's comments on racial politics are guaranteed to be taken out of context. I'm not sure whether, at the end of the day, I will conclude he "should" or "should not" have commented. Certainly it was risky at best to speak to that issue. But his message was in fact 100% correct in my view: he said that he wasn't judging or commenting as to whether the police acted in a racist fashion but it was stupid to arrest Gates. As I heard on the radio today: a gaff is when a politician actually speaks the truth.

Nope. I read your response. Did you actually listen to Obama's statement before you pronounced it a "knee jerk reaction?" Lets parse the words. The whole thing.

Question for Bill and anybody else who complains about Obama's remark: Did you actually listen to or watch the press conference? I listened to his answer to that Cambridge question and he specifically said (1) he didn't know the facts, and (2) that he was NOT calling the Cambridge police racists. Yes, he said "what we do know is that they acted stupidly" or some such thing, but if you actually listened to his answer you would know that his message has been more than a little distorted for the sake of a press mess. Seriously. Turn off Rush Limbaugh and George Will and listed to the actual press conference. Then ask yourself whether you might grow "agitated" if police officers were in your home and you proved it to them and they didn't then apologize for bothering you and then exit out your door. Especially you, Mr. 2nd amendment. One might argue he should not have offered any comment at all, but that is not what most "commentators" are saying. Certainly not somebody who said Obama offered a knee jerk response. In my view, it is THAT commentator who is offering the knee jerk response.

You may debate the need for a law, but what I have read suggests that, in general, conversations with passengers in the vehicle are less of a hazard. Passengers are physically invested in the safety of the trip and able to see when the driver needs to concentrate on driving or may have overlooked an oncoming hazard and will stop talking or even point out the danger. A cell phone caller continues the conversation and demands a response or attention completely oblivious to the circumstances of the car and driver.

Yup. On any big or even remotely serious climb that I ever did solo I experienced moments of serious misgiving that can only be described as "demoralizing." I climbed the NE Buttress, solo, in about 1983 and experienced more than one of these moments. Good on you for doing this one, BillA: I know lots of climbers who have said they thought it looked like a good solo objective but just a few who have actually done it that way. All of them report that demoralization experience, though not necessarily at the titanium pin. It is just a big piece of terrain.

I read something like this earlier in this thread and I'm a little unclear where this idea comes from. I for one don't expect anybody to "kiss my ass" just because I'm guiding or instructing. In general I DO expect climbing partners to contribute to the outing in some fashion and buying gas or carrying stuff or whatever are examples of ways someone can do that but, more than anything else, I want my partners to be safe and fun to spend time with whether they are less experienced or more. If I've offered to guide someone all I really expect is that they are ready to go when they said they would be, genuinely intend to do whatever it is that we agreed to do, and that they have a good attitude about the whole thing. Paying their share of gas or carrying loads is part of that but "kissing ass" is really not the point.

Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife has given the go ahead to open the South Face of Beacon Rock on Wednesday, July 22, 2009. The climbing area (south face) will open no later than 8am on the 22nd. If anyone has questions, contact the park. (509)427-8265

Years ago I had several friends who also liked the NW Ridge. All of them with backpacking backgrounds. Recently I have not heard anybody else to think much of the route. I guess the times have changed -- because the ridge hasn't.

I think the Superfly crux is significantly harder than the bonus pitch on Silent Running. The bolt is nearby but not as close as it could be. You will likely fall more than two feet if you peel but it is a pendulum type fall so you can backstep and avoid any sliding or scrape.

All I know is that this Josh guy better show up, on time and ready to haul all the gear, and he's gotta do what we say ... and HE BETTER NOT WEAR COTTON!!! (By the way: I disagree with Porter in that I don't think this thread is - or that it should be treated as - spray just because there have been some jokes and some jive. It is in the "climbers board" and it has some of the elements of a spray thread for sure, but we are in fact discussing how a beginning climber might find support and guidance on cc.com and there have been lots of good points made.)

Total Soul has more variety to it and is overall a better though slightly harder route and has a messy start. It DOES top out, and onto flat ground where you can take your shoes off and relax, so you'll like that about it. Silent Running does not "top out" because we looked up there and saw a mossy slab disappearing into steep woods and saw no reason to go up there. You're right: it wouldn't be hard, though.

Folks that want to "school" someone like Josh on the Internet crack me up. Josh: if you want to tag along for some rock climbing at Darrington some time, let me know. I might make you scrub some moss, though. How are you with a wire brush?

Trip: South Early Winter Spire - South Arete Date: 7/11/2009 Trip Report: On Saturday I climbed South Early Winter Spire with Fred Beckey and friends. I had come prepared to serve as guide and there was plenty of that as one member of our party was relatively inexperienced but Fred, ever the master, did his share. I bet it has been some years since he’s been on this peak but he knew it well: as I started up the first pitch he offered “you won’t need that #3” and just as I started eying a crack heading up and right he asked: “Can you step back left?” (I found the #3 very useful but he was absolutely right about the move back left: one friction move and pitch 1 was dealt with via a variant that allowed me to set a perfect belay for my two ropemates). Fred took over the lead higher up on the route and, even if the climbing on this - the easiest route at the pass- wasn’t at all difficult, he showed his experience and care for his companions. Soon enough we were up at the summit and Fred was telling stories of his 1942 climb of the route with his brother Helmy to two other climbers who had come up another route. We soaked in some of the best views a climber can have around here and headed down. The descent went really well and, again, I was very impressed with Mr. Beckey. Fred was competent down-climbing awkward blocks and sandy slabs, and on the lookout for trouble as he pulled rappel ropes that could easily bring a loose rock with them or get snagged on a flake or tree. I’ve done several trips with Fred in recent years and this was one of the best. The South Arete rocks! Fred belays Megan across the "whaleback" high on South Early Winter Spire. Gear Notes: Whatever you bring will be adequate. The route has a couple of tricky spots, very short in duration, where gear in the 1"=3" range comes in handy and you could use a small piece somewhere along the line. Approach Notes: Walking shoes will get you to this one after the snow is gone. We encountered a few short bits of snow and the mosquitos were amazingly reasonable for a mid-season climb at Washington Pass!

I thought down-climbing the route itself was "definitely the way to go." It was almost as much fun as climbing up it, easy, fast, and meant we didn't have to carry over. We left camping gear at the ***** spot below the glacier, hiking boots and axe for the glacier, and climbed the route in rock shoes. Whatever you do, its a great route, eh?

I like the (relatively neglected) NW Ridge on Mt. Adams, though it does have over a thousand feet on talus that is vaguely loose and you could crush a finger when the boulders shift. It offers great views the entire way and a couple hundred feet of exciting steep snow climbing at the top that has enough exposure to be very exciting but is very manageable for a party of mixed abilities if the leader has much guiding savvy. From an attractive timberline camp well served by trail it is straight up and down.

There is a trick to that hard move on the first pitch of "Tracks." Try turning around and facing the other direction. To reach "Romanitica," the correct trail is a right fork not far past the double cairns, but the "trail" on up to the route is probably nonexistent at this point as, even when it was seeing regular traffic, there wasn't much of a trail and the Anenome grows in really strong every year. Romantica and two other routes start on low angled slabs below and left of the large white overhangs that make up the central part of the next higher tier of cliffs. The last two parties have reported following a topo that does not show the last pitch of "Erocktika" but there is a new topo that shows Erock and Tracks on one drawing and shows the complete version of both. The last pitch of E-Rock heads right, and then up an arete and there are a couple of cool features along the way. There is a rap route that parallels the route from the top of the last pitch, and a station part way up that last pitch, then two stations in space followed by one near that "third" pitch belay station but about 20 feet up and right, and there is an intermittent station before the ground (if anybody heads up there with quick links and chain - and I have some I bought for that purpose - I would be happy to have my 'biners back). I think it is possible to rappel the entire rap route with a single 60 meter rope, but it might turn out to require 62 meters -- until someone goes and verifies this its a good idea to take two ropes. I DO know that to rap from the top of the climb it takes three slightly less than 60 meter rappels if you skip the intermittent stations and all raps are nearly straight vertical in orientation so you shouldn't get lost. If you do decide to head up there with a single rope, consider what you think you are going to do if you get a single rope stuck. If somebody wants to go up there and help me tinker a bit, I'm still working on E-Rock. Send me a P.M. The single pitch route "Driving Miss Daisy" or "Trophy Wife" is very worthwhile, but once again the approach involves some thrash.

Does the Constitution say we have to build the biggest stockpile of weapons in the world, invade countries and topple governments from Latin America to South Asia, and maintain 200 military bases around the world? What does the Constitution have to do with this? BTW - in my opinion blaming Bush for the deficit is only slightly less absurd than blaming Obama for Bush' deficit. Yes, the President has some power over spending and I think it is more than fair to point out that the Bush who promised smaller government and avoidance of nation-building did just the opposite, but I don't think even the most hardcore balance-the-budget fanatic could turn the ship of state around. There is a huge American anti-tax and entitlement sentiment and we are a militaristic nation where a large percentage of our population simply accepts the fact that we SHOULD dominate the world and that to question our military machine is to be unpatriotic. Anybody who truly wants to shake up Washington won't last ten minutes in American politics and borrowing money is the American way.

OK then, you have a full day or maybe two to think about how to answer my question: why is military spending not something to complain about with the same vigor as social or environmental programs or, for that matter, economic stimulus?

I was a little miffed to read where you wrote "You do understand that ..." Then again, I wrote that you were "wringing your hands." Sorry about that, my good man.

Fairweather, I think you may be using a chart that is misleading. Whether purposely or not I don't know, but misleading. There is a similar one for the 2009 budget: Below the chart it specifically indicates that it does not include any accounting for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In addition, it does not show payment on debt for past wars as part of military spending. What else is concealed in this presentation if these items are "off budget" -- do you think it might include secret funding for early childhood education? I doubt it. In addition, Social Security is paid for (presently though this is not sustainable) NOT by taxes that are part of the broader Federal budget. Look at your paycheck next week: it is a separate line item. The money is managed separately and I don’t know how the budget works but I don’t think either Obama or Congress have the same options to tinker with Social Security. Obama has no power to change or to draw upon the Social Security funding for other purposes - that is purely a Congressional matter and it will not be an easy task to take funds from that program. Another way to look at it is to consider only "discretionary spending" as in that which there is actually room to adjust the spending in an annual budget. Here's another chart, from a couple of years ago: 2006 budget, info from National Priorities Project. Lastly, with your smug and smarm, take any pie chart you wish and tell us how you think it is better to spend our tax dollars on military endeavors that are killing hundreds of thousands of people and accomplishing little or nothing the benefits us or the inhabitants of those lands where all this killing is taking place than it would be to spend the same money on health care or education or housing or, for that matter, paying down the National debt. I understand the concern for deficit spending, but how is it that you never express any concern for the misdirected spending on the US military? Do we need 200 military bases all around the world? Weapons programs we will never use and we know are already outdated? Ill conceived invasions and take-downs of petty screw-ups that do not threaten the U.S.? Seriously?

I find it interesting how people who complain about deficit spending never seem to complain about defense spending. You wring your hands about how "irresponsible" it is for Obama to borrow money for economic stimulus, but we spend more on "defense" than the next ten nations combined (maybe the entire rest of the world). Not only that, but our military escapades have by all accounts been generally ill-conceived since WWII. Where's the call for responsibility?