Fairweather

Seems to me, given the current real estate market, that there is a high likelihood this is just an insurance scam--but who knows at this point. I will say that the comments posted by Tvashtarketena and Rob are utterly disgusting. I wonder what Tvashie's fantasy ACLU buddies would think of his support for this act.

Road creation?? Huh? In any event, were supporters of ADA so inclined, I would oppose their efforts. Maybe the tactical use of ADA requirements would be effective in stopping some of the environmental extremism and twisting of TWA that runs rampant these days.

With regard to the road: Is this yet another "narrow road corridor" tactic (ala Dosewallips or Stehekin River) that will effectively prohibit future repair by preventing even the most minor roadbed relocation project when the inevitable washouts occur? I believe ongoing tactics employed by enviro-lawsuit inc in this regard are the reason why you are meeting with skepticism from those who would normally support this proposal. I am unable to locate a detailed map of the proposed additions online. Any links?

You don't know me. Even with your broad brush...you missed. Only the top portion of the south side (along with most of the north) is encompassed within the current wilderness area. The Palmer snowfield/lift is not. Are you saying that the 25 climber-per-day Mount Hood limit proposal was a good idea? Or are you just angry because there are actually people who disagree with you?

...Or repairs to it in the event of a washout. This particular bill is not a big deal, but I think the "big picture" is. By drawing a line in the sand here, those of us who subscribe to the Ira Spring doctrine (of inclusion and building a love of the outdoors in/for future generations) can deny certain extreme environmental interests from gaining yet more leverage with which to lock us out. BTW: The link to Senator Coburn was very helpful... I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for standing up to so-called environmental interests regarding the proposed Mount Hood Wilderness extension. As an avid hiker, skier, and mountain climber, I am saddened to see access to our wilderness areas and national parks being methodically stripped away by environmental interests (and their lawyers) who want to turn these places into nothing more than museums--and then lock all the doors. They regularly stand in the way of simple road repairs, or stand by a doctrine of "social standard" when determining who and how many are allowed into "their" preserve. I know Bush supports this bill--and I support Bush--but he is wrong on this. Thank you for being the lone voice of reason regarding this bill. Brian XXXXXX Fircrest, Wa

Thread drift. But man, are there too many people in the world, or what. Every now and then I meet American adults who have chosen to remain childless though. Um, Rob, the "9 trillion" he is referring to is the Federal Debt in dollars--not world population which currently hovers at around 6.5 billion... with a B.

lincoln refused to recognize the confederacy as an independent country Do you really think that GWB's actions are any worse than, say, those of Andrew Jackson (Trail of Tears), William McKinley (Spanish American War), Woodrow Wilson (war monger beneath a guise of liberal/pacifist), LBJ (botched Vietnam), FDR (attempted dictator), or the administration of Ulysses Grant? I'm just offering some perspective. I don't think GWB is outside the norm.

This statement is completely untrue. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation applied only to slaves in Confederate States.

Refresh my memory: were the draft riots before the so-called "Emancipation Proclamation" or after? And the proclamation was pure political expediency that specifically did not free slaves in border states. Wilson's Sedition act was certainly enforced - I can't remember the famous trial right now...I'll look it up.

I didn't say wrong--I said, rhetorically, "right or wrong." Trying to defend ideas you agree with is noble, but can't you at least admit that Joe's view is somewhat narrow and could use some insight?

Come on Joe, you don't really believe that spew do you? The white, monied, capitalist, corporate, protestant interests of which you speak have been moving thigs forward--yes, forward--since Jamestown. It's almost as if your view of American history doesn't begin until 1968. If you want to read about real Republican corruption, try looking at a period in American history called "The Guilded Age" - approximately U.S. Grant in 1869 to Teddy Roosevelt in 1901 who brought the corruption to a screeching halt. You might also consider some of Lincoln's transgressions regarding individual liberty--specifically The closing of newspapers, the imprisonment without trial of perhaps 1500 American (Yes, Union) citizens for political expedience, and, of course his use of federal troops to quell draft riots in New York resulting in over 1000 deaths. They make your phantom menace look like flowers and butterflies. See also John Adams' Alien and Sedition Acts around 1798 and Woodrow Wilson's Sedition Act of 1918. Did you know that Americans who spoke out against the war in europe then were jailed? How about FDR's attempt to stack the supreme court and create a virtual dictatorship for himself. You have every right to spew your nonsense about the current state of affairs or your conspiratorial rants, but spare yourself the embarrassment that MattP enjoys by looking at the real and complete political history of the United States. Right or wrong, the road we are on today is the same road we've always been on.

Good for Coburn. I support Wilderness and the concept of Wilderness Areas, but until road repair/access issues are resolved the 'Wilderness' designation gives environmental extremists too much leverage to limit reasonable access for hikers, climbers, and mountain bikes. I will use the link to express my sentiments and support of Coburn's intransigence. I still haven't forgotten how "Wilderness Watch" tried to force the USFS to severely limit climber access on the south side of Hood using an extreme interpretation of language in The Wilderness Act just a few years ago.

Geeez, Joe. You sound just plain crazy talkin that kind of nonsense. Just plain crazy. With your background and ability to tell a story, I would love to hear your thoughts about LBJ v GWB--I really would (Sincerely). But any point worthy to the degree that it could change my view would likely just be lost to your conspiratorial and hate-filled rantings.

no

Barring the repair of the Dosewallips Road; sometime in late July, I will be riding my mountain bike up the Dosewallips trail--inside ONP--to just below the Deception Creek junction, where I will proceed on foot to Hayden Pass and Eel Glacier on Mount Anderson. I may or may not have a .38 revolver concealed in a pouch attached to my pack belt. If I am somehow apprehended, I will call you to defend me in court. What do you charge per hour?

or who proudly proclaims the positive benefits of using LSD on a recreational basis. What about one who proudly proclaims that he is going to ignore regulations pertaining to the use of mountain bikes in back country, or trail park passes? I think your pal Fairweather has done both. Can we talk about the 2nd amendment now or is it just bait and bash. I thought you believed in civil disobedience, Matt. As for the TP passes, I buy them. Not sure where you came up with that one.

The guy on the other end of the phone isn't protected by The US Constitution.

You have things a bit twisted, don't you think?

It's better defined as someone who likes to equate the relatively benign actions of an evangelical Christian population with the daily Muslim carnage strewn across front pages of the world's newspapers.

Not on internal communications between American citizens. I never said that. Has this been an issue with the Bush Administration?

I think it is you that has a reading comprehension problem, Matt. Here is what I said: "The constitutional case for privacy is not nearly as clear as the second amendment case for citizen gun ownership." Exactly how does that statement render me inconsistent? You are one who has stated your disdain for the second amendment in past posts. Like you stated above; it says what it says--and, frankly, private gun ownership is pretty much settled law at this point. You have a peculiar way of turning the world on its head when you argue--and not just with me. I'm not sure if this is a muddy the water strategy you like to employ, or if it is simply something that has served you well over the course of your many, many days. No matter, it's weak, transparent, and, yes, annoying. Good day.

Say WHAT? With tidbits like these thrown in:

Anyone who disagrees with a liberal is usually tagged as 'divisive'. "Can't we all just get along...on my terms?"

?? I think you need to lay off the Celebrex for a while.

Yes, Matt, I'm talking about you.