mattp

There's good cragging around Lake Taupo and the volcanos in Tongariro National Park are a lot like the Three Cinders, but slightly more exciting.

Gawd, I hope so. Despite my post above, I can't imagine how ANYBODY could prefer McCain. As I've said on a number of issues, I believe that there is a large amount of inertia in the system and neither one is going to "change" as much as any of us might hope, but they are different. McCain talks about and promotes war over diplomacy says giving more money to the rich is the answer to our economic woes says we can drill our way to oil independence has taken to some of the most dishonest election tactics we've seen in recent years repeats the right wing mantra that government is bad and will continue to make it so Obama talks about restoring cooperation with our allies and promoting diplomacy over war says that those who are hurting need tax breaks more than those who are not, and balancing the budget is part of restoring our economy wants to pursue renewable energy sources and turn away from oil has thus far avoided stooping to McCain's level of dishonest campaigning says that government functions can be improved Even if you believe these points are all just electioneering, it is the Republican foreign and domestic priorities that have caused or at least failed to address our biggest problems today -- the middle east is not going well and our economic system has been badly damaged by greed unrestricted through deregulation. Even if you hold the cynical views expressed by the right around here, I'd say an Obama who is held back by "the system" would be better than a McCain who is driven by it.

Yup. Purely partisan politics might suggest that we let the Republicans win this one so THEIR guy has to face the mess that THEY have created. After all, it doesn't look like the next President will be able to punt on either Iraq or the economy. Then a Democrat might offer to save the day in 2012.

On more textured rock, I've found Andy's garden trowel to be a pretty good implement. It can dig when digging is the game and it is stiff, for prying at stuff. If it has a sharp point, it can get into many corners and pockets as well.

Fairweather, do you think:

Still wondering if Puget or EricB will tell me how it is that they disagree with this.

Will our "conservative" friends, Fairweather, KK, JayB or Peter Puget argue that these arms sales are a good idea? You lefties? It seems to me there is a high likelihood that at least some of these sales are going to come back to bite us.

With White House Push, U.S. Arms Sales Rise Sharply New York Times, September 13, 2008

The best crack cleaning tool I've found is an alpine hammer. I've trashed mine sot if anybody has one to sell I might be interested. On relatively smooth rock (granite) a broad knife is good for scraping lichen.

Puget and EricB don't want to talk about it, but I'll do some of their homework for them. Here's the recent lies I can think of: McCain Lies Obama wants to teach sex ed in kindergarten Palin said thanks but no thanks to bridge from nowhere Obama wants to raise your taxes We can defeat the terrorists through military action We can drill our way to oil independence Obama Lies McCain wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years I can get us out of Iraq in 16 months without leaving a mess behind This is just a start, based on a few short minutes' reflection. Can cc.com's fact checkers add to these lists?

"Answering that question is "Above my pay-grade" Matt " Good quip. Have a comment on the question or are you suggesting that one line is equivalent to the several items I set forth above?

No. Listen to that interview of McCain that is linked on one of these threads. Read the papers this week. Is there a basis for your "no?" You think we CAN "win" in Iraq? You think tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans will trickle down to you and me? You think we can drill our way to oil independence? You think Obama supported legislation directing that sex education be taught in Kindergarten?

I think the south side of Adams is a great climb. I've done it several times to ski the SW chutes and I've always enjoyed it. It is not a wilderness experience nor is it an alpine climb, but its great. I like the NW Ridge, too, but there is about 300 feet near the top where non-climbers may be scared by a steep snow slope over a large void. Most late season volcano climbs are going to involve a lot of rock hopping and dust -- will your out-of-town friends enjoy thousands of feet of that?

That is more or less my question in the foreign policy thread. Can someone win if they say things are not simple and we cannot beat the terrorists into submission or give tax breaks while balancing the budge or drill our way to energy independence? Clearly, Obama is not completely adverse to giving pat "feel good" answers to political questions but, just as clearly, he IS much closer to "straight talk," no?

There is a clear difference in how they talk about it. Obama has been pretty consistent to say that invading Iraq was a mistake from the beginning and that he doesn't think we can or should sustain the present occupation. McCain has been fairly consistent in saying it is a good thing that we invaded Iraq, a resounding victory is attainable, and we should not be looking toward withdrawal as a goal but only draw down our occupying forces if conditions suggest it. As to how they will actually manage the war, political factors and on-the-ground reality may well grant them less room to put their respective "visions" into play than we or they may wish. The Iraqi's want us out and the generals have said over and over that we cannot sustain the military presence we presently have there. The money spent on paying the Iraqi's not to fight each other may dry up or become politically infeasible. Other priorities may intervene. My guess is that Obama will not be able to get us out in 16 months and McCain will not be able to attain "victory."

Alkatete, your posts sound a lot to me like you've swallowed the ridiculous idea that we can win the war on terror through military means. Do you think that?

I think the question here is this: can Obama talk about "the foreign policy difference" that was noted in the editorial cited above? As soon as someone says "we've been following a mistaken path" the alarm bells go off and many folks think the speaker "hates America" or will be "weak on defense." Even our esteemed BillCoe and Mr. RBW balked at my suggested criticism of the US' overall posture, though I clearly wrote that I believe we need to maintain a strong military and there's a good chance our assessment of the recent US involvements won't differ by near as much as how we'd want to talk about them. McCain can say "America First" ... "We must Stand up to Russia..." "Losing in Iraq is not an option..." It plays well. How does Obama talk about the reality that it is not that simple -- assuming that he actually wants to?

Agreed on both counts, RBW. The Cold War and the Cuban Missile Crisis - two instances where we did not actually engage in combat -- turned out well. Our recent engagements -- like Iraq, Somalia, Lebanon -- turned out worse than "imperfect," wouldn't you say? And our President's "with us or against us" rhetoric after 911 -- do you call that simply "imperfect" or was it in fact a bad idea? Clearly, there are known knowns and known unknowns... errh... I mean we don't know what would have happened if at any point we'd done something different. But I think it is a mistake to tell the world "we don't care what you think" and a disaster for our politicians to tell our people that "we can and should rule the world." Wolfowitz Doctrine

There's where you and I disagree. I believe we need a strong military to protect our interest, but it has been an obvious disaster to use it as we have in places like Vietnam and Iraq, and less obvious perhaps, but I think similarly ineffective in trying to intimidate Iran, or any number of troublesome adversaries all around the world. Is Russia going to back down in Georgia for fear of a U.S. intervention? Will we be able to keep China from buying our oil in the middle east through threat of force or might we do better with diplomacy and dollars? Is Hugo Chavez shaking in his boots? Are the terrorists more or less likely to want to show how badass they are by striking against the U.S. now? Are we more or less likely to gain the cooperation of our former allies the next time we want something? I hope that in the next 50 years we will attempt more diplomacy and less military deployment.

There have been more than one party that has taken four days on Stuart when they planned on two. I'm not sure which route they were on, but the upper North Ridge is often described as a technically easy route and not all that long (both are true, in a way), but some parties find the approach MUCH longer than they thought, the climb much more serious than expected, and the descent to be something other than trivial.

As far as I can tell, nothing much has been done. Do the voting machines now issue receipts? Are there plans to provide enough of them in the districts where there were long lines in the prior elections? Are we going to allow international poll observers? Will obvious attempts to disenfranchise certain blocks of voters through selective or targeted types of enforcement for "voter fraud" be curbed? Republicans and strident cc.com posters have scoffed at the notion that there were any serious problems with the way elections were run in Ohio in 2004 or Florida in 2000 and it seems the Democrats have more or less backed off after having been intimidated by cries that they were just poor losers. I haven't really heard much follow up on how we might actually address any of the issues reported. Have there been improvements made that just have not been widely publicized?

I take it that is a no. Are you one of those do nothing me first guys that McCain talks about?

Get over yourself, KK. You have been no less of an ass. Or not much less. Really. "You guys" ebb and flow with respect who is being the bigger jerk one day or the next, but the fact is you clearly have shown you like rolling in dog pooh. Tvash has gone out and actually put some work into trying to make our voting process better. What about you? Post belligerent stuff on a climber's website and suggest that people who don't like America should leave?

I agree that Tvash is being abrasive for no reason other than that he thinks it is clever, KK, but you frequently indulge in the same. Try responding to his point rather than taking the bait and riding yet another thread into the toilet. Regardless of "who started it," you still end up in the sewer.