slothrop

The vote that everyone says was "for the war" was actually just to authorize the use of force by the President, effectively handing over the Congress' war-declaring authority to the Prez. (Remember the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution?) Kerry gave a speech during that vote, saying he hoped war would not be necessary, and that diplomacy must be given a chance. So the vote "for the war" was really a vote of confidence in Bush's judgment on whether to go to war in Iraq or not. A stupid thing to agree to in hindsight, but different than actually voting to declare war on Iraq. If you read the recent very long article in the NYT about the centrifuge/rocket body debate, you'll realize that many Senators who voted for the use of force authorization did not, in fact, know the same intelligence about Iraq's nuclear capabilities that the executive branch did. Whether that would have changed many votes is doubtful, given the mass hysteria at the time...

The question mark on the right, up the dihedral, is described in Beckey, I think. Rumor is that it's kinda chossy.

Jeez, klenke. Some of us are trying to discuss things, you know, reach into that gray area and mix it all around a little. Although the current fad is to see only two sides to each issue, there's a lot more to a debate than us vs. them. Why are you so bitter and apathetic about politics, anyway?

If he was wired and still managed to screw it up that badly...

It is interesting that neo-con strategy revolves around ousting Saddam and establishing US bases in the Middle East, both of which would enable Islamic fundamentalism to flourish. With Saddam out, a major secular government in the area is gone (the only one except Turkey?). For all his evil deeds, Saddam did not side with the Islamist ideal. The US bases in Saudi Arabia were already sticking in the craw of various Islamist types, but actually invading a country to establish a foothold for the infidel military... now that's really going to piss people off. But I guess the neo-con response to that would be: kill 'em all, we've got the better army. Doesn't sound like a recipe for stabilizing the region. This strategy is a bit different than the realpolitik of supporting dictators (like Saddam) as long as they keep things stable.

Word. Thanks for posting that.

Way to go, Nick! What's with the stair-step triangular chunks of rock on the boulder in that first photo? Any photos of Dorado Needle?

Putting political signs in public spaces has been done for decades. They usually get removed after the election. What's the big deal?

Didn't the US Chamber of Commerce spend a large amount of money to fund attack ads against her in the recent primary? They must be pretty worried.

Holy beta overload, klenke! I did the dihedral that robertm mentions, too. It's a nice wide-hands-ish crack on decent rock.

Somehow I'm not sick of politics yet, so I'll ask: what's the dirt on Deborah Senn? Some right-wing wacko friends of my girlfriend's family say they know some dark little secret about her, but didn't elaborate. And now I read a letter from my local Democratic Party precinct that says, "For Attorney General, I support Mark Sidran by default--I know his opponent Deborah Senn too well to support." Well, I don't know her too well. What's the story? Rumors and speculation welcome.

Pfft... "rangefinder" cams. If you don't carry these two essentials, you're practically free-soloing: The Impulse Laser Rangefinder (with optional tilt sensor) The Dyer 651 series electronic ID calipers Designed to "Measure all types of internal grooves that are hard to reach": Don't be sketchy! Mountaineers Approved !

I don't get it. The rebolters complain about a lack of communication, but they didn't show up for the meeting Dane arranged, ostensibly to work out a compromise.

The debate was a good sprayfest. Lots of curled lips and finger-pointing, accusations of distortion and lying. I liked how Cheney pointedly failed to thank Edwards before his closing remarks. Cheney, if he got his fat lumbering ass in shape, would be the alpine climber, while Edwards clearly is a sporto.

Doh! I just missed it. To be rebroadcast on KCTS (public TV) at 9pm.

Thanks, Paul. My landlord, in a display of solidarity with the ash-stricken, is having my building's brick walls tuckpointed over the next few weeks. There's cement dust flying everywhere, covering the walls, yard, and basement in a fine layer of gray. It's the next best thing to living downwind!

Can ya post the text? Registration is required.

Thanks for posting, DJB. I'm glad we all got a chance to hear your part of the story. I'm sorry that you're disappointed at the controversy, but that goes hand in hand with staging an event of SPQ's magnitude.

Sweet. I bet there's plenty more potential in that area, too.

After climbing at the Pearly Gates this past Saturday, I see what Retrosaurus is referring to. I thought I'd add my two cents of constructive criticism in case the FAs are reading. The first route ("bolt near the bottom") I'm guessing is Easy Pickins. The main feature of this route, two thin cracks separated by a sloping stance, is short but worthy. The bolt placements leave something to be desired, however. That first bolt is quite close to a protectable crack and is near your knee when you get to a good stance to clip it, anyway. I traversed in from the right on this route, since a "direct" start is quite a bit harder. IMHO, this first bolt is unnecessary and could be removed. The second bolt, near where you can traverse off left to Cloud Nine or right to No Room for Squares, is also close to a protectable crack and awkward to clip from the good stance after the crux. I'd say this bolt would be a lot better if it were two feet higher (my partner that day agrees) and might protect an ankle-breaking fall better that way. Pearly Gates is the next route Retrosaurus mentions, with the bolt at the roof. It's true that there is easy pro above the roof that you can place from a no-hands rest. Since the route was near my lead limit, I was happy to clip the bolt at the roof before thrutching into the chimney/rest. Without the bolt, I probably would have looked more carefully for pro just after the crux to protect me from hitting the slab below the roof if I slipped moving into the chimney. I think there were a couple potential placements, though none would protect against an ankle-breaker. Applying the principle of "protect for the leader at his/her limit", the roof bolt is reasonable. The climb itself is one of the most fun pitches I've done in a while. Thanks to the folks who have established routes at Pearly Gates, it's certainly one of the best crags in the Icicle.

Well, it sounds like the riggers did a good job and I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt... but we should go up and look to make sure they didn't miss anything. I do agree that the larger issue is the overall impact of a herd of desperate, bonking adventure racers and their handlers: shitpiles, trampled veggies, PowerGel wrappers, etc. Looks like Fairweather's been posting on the SPQ forum: http://www3.subaruprimalquest.com/forums2.0/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=2&threadid=184

They're all really spendy compared to a nylon windbreaker.

WTF? Sounds like the bolt war is on.

You all realize that this article is why Merv or dwayner or whoever posts all those clown pictures.

Here's a fact check on the debate from the Annenberg Center: http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=271 Plenty of misquoting, inflated figures, and flubbed words all around. My favorite is this, though: Ah, the irony!