Fairweather

I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!! WINDOWS VISTA KILLED MY SOUNDCARD!

I haven't climbed Mowich Face - but I have been up several routes on Rainier over the past 28 years or so, probably spent a lot more time on the mountain than you, and I can see Mowich Face from the road just behind my house. It is bone dry, frozen mud, ash, and thermally altered paste. The hanging ice tongue above Edmunds Glacier is virtually gone - something I haven't seen before. Frankly, I don't believe any ranger at MRNP told you it was a good time to climb this route, and my comments were meant to dissuade you from going. Even if you climb it, post a brilliant trip report, and hang some fine pictures, my comments stand. It is an irresponsible endeavor at this time, IMO. You would put at risk the lives of your potential rescuers and the hearts of those who love you. I can think of at least a couple out-of-state parties that solicited beta from this site prior to their off-season departure dates - and never came back to post here again. Just please take care.

climbing culture? you mean like taking risks, thinking for yourself, and being an individual? or did you mean shopping at PCC, drinking fair trade coffee, reading Mother Jones, listening to that awful Dave Matthews, and 'sticking it to The Man' like all the other so-called 'cultures' in Seattle??? Really, what is the 'climbing culture'? What about our conservative friends? Are they not part of said 'culture' or are they 'persona non-grata'? As for 'manipulative advertising', i think all the adults here can make decisions for themselves without being 'protected', thanks kindly. And if I had kids, I wouldn't let them make such a profound life decision without being involved but I certainly wouldn't keep them from it if that's what they really wanted. Raise your kids to think for themselves and they won't need you looking over their shoulder all the time. If other people's kids want to join up, that's not your 'problem', and you certainly have no say in the matter. While you're at it, maybe you could explain what the 'mission' of the site is? I seemed to think it was about trip reports, partner hookups, gear/technique, and a healthy bit o' spray. I didn't realize we'd become Habitat for Humanity or Greenpeace.... Did I miss the memo? Shit! Damn good comments.

Carbon River Road to Ipsut is closed to ALL traffic for the next couple weeks. No bikey. No walkie either. Mowich Face now? Holding a gun to your head and pulling the trigger would probably be about as safe. And the cleanup less expensive.

And soon enough, it will be China again. Naw, China has already won that war. They own us! China holds about $350Bn of an $8.5 trillion debt. While that's not desirable IMO, it hardly qualifies as "owning" us. (BTW; Japan holds about $450Bn)

The issue here is not MoveOn or Guliani. The issue is this statement by MattP doled out in his usual dismissive (and uninformed) manner: "For his part, KK apparently cannot even be bothered to read a newspaper and cries that it shows bias for the NYT to publish a paid political add from MoveONn. The NYT did not give MoveOn any discount." The very thing Matt accuses KK of he demonstrates himself. When confronted with the facts, he resorts to obfuscation and digs up the usual settled business. And again - he absolutely refuses to ever admit he may have "mispoken". This, OW, is the issue.

I learned a different addage: "If you carry bivvy gear, you will bivvy". Or, more simply put, speed is safety. You can survive a lot with a 1 oz emergency bivvy sack and a lighter, but carrying pounds of extra gear 'just in case' usually increases the chance of crawling your way into an unwanted and dangerous situation. That "extra 40" you're packin around your middle probably gives you an edge in that snowcave day 5 too, eh?

I guess they can't produce the tape right now because it's being "edited"?? And exactly what are the new rules? Our guys have to take a bullet in the head before they're allowed to open fire? Get a life, stool.

Crux recently posted a little tantrum piece about me and my daughter - whom he has never met - that was quickly deleted by moderators. Fortunately, I managed to copy it before it went away and I now look forward to sending it to his DNC employers. It's only right that they should know the kind of little prick they're working with. Just try to ignore the little shit stain.

Unfortunately, Mr MattP is incapable of admitting his own misstatements of fact - despite any and all evidence to the contrary. Par for the course.

Care to retract that "falsehood", Matt? Did you really have any facts? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297745,00.html The New York Times acknowledged Sunday that a controversial advertisement attacking Gen. David Petraeus, the American commander in Iraq, was sold to a liberal activist group at a discount rate the organization was not entitled to receive, and that the paper violated its own advertising policies when it published the ad. In a column published Sunday entitled, "Betraying Its Own Best Interests," Times Public Editor Clark Hoyt wrote that after reviewing the Times' policies regarding the sale and content of advertisements and conducting his own investigation of the matter, "I think the ad violated the Times' own written standards, and the paper now says that the advertiser got a price break it was not entitled to." According to the column, MoveOn.org purchased the ad at a "standby" rate of $64,575 when it should have been charged $142,083. To receive standby rates, advertisers cannot be guaranteed a date when their ads will run, but the sales representative who sold the ad to MoveOn.org told the organization that the ad would run on Monday, Sept. 10—the day that Petraeus was to appear before Congress. Click here to read the full column at The New York Times.com. Hoyt wrote in the column that Catherine Mathis, vice president of corporate communications for the Times, told him that the price was "a mistake," and that "the advertising representative failed to make it clear that for that rate the Times could not guarantee the Monday placement but left MoveOn.org with the understanding that the ad would run then ... That was contrary to our policies." Hoyt said the content of the ad—a full-page advertisement that questioned Petraeus' truthfulness with the headline "Gen. Petraeus or Gen. Betray Us?" violated Times advertising policy. "The ad appears to fly in the face of an internal advertising acceptability manual that says, 'We do not accept opinion advertisements that are attacks of a personal nature,'" Hoyt wrote. He wrote that the Times director of advertising acceptability, Steph Jespersen, told him that while he did think the language of the Petraeus ad was "rough," he "regarded it as a comment on a public official's management of his office and therefore acceptable speech for the Times to print." Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., was not aware of the MoveOn.org ad until it appeared in the paper, Hoyt wrote. "If we're going to err, its better to err on the side of more political dialogue. ... Perhaps we did err in this case. If we did, we erred with the intent of giving greater voice to people," Sulzberger told Hoyt. Hoyt wrote in the column that he disagrees with the decisions made by the Times employees responsible for the ad being published. "For me, two values collided here: the right of free speech — even if its abusive speech — and a strong personal revulsion toward the name-calling and personal attacks that now pass for political dialogue, obscuring rather than illuminating important policy issues," Hoyt wrote. "For the Times, there is another value: the protection of its brand as a newspaper that sets a high standard for civility. Were I in Jespersen's shoes, I'd have demanded changes to eliminate Betray Us, a particularly low blow when aimed at a soldier."

You look different all cleaned up 'n shit. Cute girl - she looks way smarter than you. Congratulations. Celebrating our 22nd year next week. Can't beat it. Good luck.

...and in the very next breath: You been to Idaho lately, Buckaroo? I think you might be surprised to see most of the stereotypes to which you subscribe debunked. No matter. You are a fucking LOON who needs to pull the conspiracy hook out of his gums and put down the pipe. I'm not even sure why I'm responding to your rants. You're not really worthy.

Did you just get your report card again? Good job! You did much better this time. Now run along and go show your mom.

Looks like most of the senate agrees with.....me. Dems included. MooovOn.org crossed the line. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297498,00.html Should they be banished/banned? Hell no! Unlike brotha Matt, I think an informed public can decide for themselves.

Tvashtarketena, of course. Just ask him.

...and you are an expert on exactly what? Battery/transformer sales? Pot. Kettle. Black.

I hope she is the Dem nominee. She'll be easy to beat. Obama, slightly less so. IMO, the two front runners are the two softest candidates on the D-side. Man, do I love the primary system!

Is he having one of his basement readings again?

Did anyone watch that ABC special last night on how utterly horrible Canada's health care system is? And how illegal for-profit clinics are sprouting up all over the country? One of them owned and operated by Canada's own version of Surgeon General! Long waits and shitty care. Thank God Hillary Rhodam hyphen Clinton is unelectable.

Good answers all around. Unfortunately, neither the Washington State nor the United States Constitution allow it. Strange that none of the usual suspects here were upset enough to revisit the topic vis a vis Gregoire as endlessly as they do GWB 2000. Can you imagine what a campaign post-deadlock would look like? I think new lows would be established in short order.

Better stick to Sig Figs, Avogadro's, Dimensional Analysis, and Stoichiometry, Justin. Because, clearly, statistics are not your strong suit. Addendum: Does your hypothesis above apply the the Washington State Gubernatorial Election of 2004 as well?

Is "The Mountain Loop Conservancy" one of the groups that is trying to block the repair/reopening of Mountain Loop Road? If so, screw 'em. Also, many statements of fact in the letter that are just plain wrong. Is the area USFS? DNR? More "details" that seem none-too-important to this not-too-brilliant author.