Fairweather

exactly!

How do you make this leap, moron? Show me where I've ever subscribed to anything of the sort being taught in our public schools. So you don't support the lower arsenic levels adopted by the Bush administration for drinking water? The levels that are even lower than those proposed by Clinton? 3ppb, I believe. And you don't support the lower sulphur content in diesel recently passed by the Bush administration? No, asshole, I think this is where you would have us ALL live.

Failure to sign shows nothing either way. If there was a corresponding letter opposed that was signed by as many or more scientists, then you've got something. re: Kyoto: http://www.sepp.org/pressrel/petition.html http://www.oism.org/pproject/

48 Nobel laureates whom, I'm sure, don't have a political bone in their collective bodies. Are you trying to say, Will, that those we hold high in academic esteem are devoid of political bias? I believe the opposite is often true. The original story begs completion: Who are these 48? Is there a counter position, or group of "concerned" scientists who don't hold these views? We went through this when the Kyoto debate raged...the hundreds of American Academy of Sciences members who signed a letter in support, versus the thousands of members who declined to do so. In order to know the whole story, you have to have....the whole story, no? And Jim's post certainly does not represent the whole story. Do you really believe that it is only Republicans who are willing to stack-the-deck when it comes to science? I recall The Clinton Administration doing the same on several occasions. Generally speaking, administrations will buy the science they like, and decline that which they don't. If you think you can keep politics out of science, or vice versa, ....well you know this just ain't gunna happen in our lifetimes. If you torture the data long enough it will tell you what you want to hear. Better yet, subvert the process at the source!

Anyone have any info re: climbing (mountaineering) or x-c routes in this area?

I didn't really see anything in the story to get too worked up about. If I understand correctly, hikers are the ones pushing to remove ORV users from areas they currently enjoy, such as Dark Divide. Nowhere did I read the Bush Administration is pushing to open up more areas to ORV use. So I must conclude..... Just more environmental community hysteria.

This is what you bring to the table to support your positions? Are you sure you're not confusing non-profit with [/i] non-partisan[/i]? Gimme a break.

Actually, the Massachusetts legislature (Democrat-controlled) is feveishly working to strip the governor of the right to name a senatorial successor. I know it's hard to believe...but they now believe that the state senate should appoint vacant seats.

Look at your picture #6.... That's a good sized rock slide onto the upper lobe of The Hubert Glacier. (In the background.) Looks pretty fresh too. Did that come down from the back side of Athena?

Clearification: .410 interchanges (in most weapons) with .45 long Colt...not to be confused with the common .45ACP round. But then...guns are for protection against aggressive people more-so than critters.

What is your estimate of how long this route will be "in". (The 'normal' portion up from Puyallup Cleaver, that is.) I've got the last two weeks of July off...think it will hold? Any key bridges about to go? How did the sickle look? Thanks! Nice climb.

The obvious solution: shoot them on the battlefield. I agree, however, with the court's decision re: Jose Padilla . The guy is an american citizen (like it, or not!) and is due his day in an american court. Fuck the rest of 'em. Let them rot in Guantanamo until this war is over.

Yes. It was the rectangular blue/gray metal box with "Mt Washington 6255'" on it. The last entry was a big group about 7 days prior, but I can't recall names. It wasn't anchored down, so I don't know how long it will last.

Nice trip & pics! That Baker/Shuksan picture is especially nice. What do you use for a camera?

This would be a sweet way to access the trailheads along West Side Road or the Dose!! Honda Ruckus: 50cc 4 stroke. (NOT a two stroke blue- belcher!) I think it should be legal...

See ya!

Ok, OW, I work about 55 to 60 hrs per week in the private sector as an account manager. I am paid salary plus bonus ( , these days) and have a company car I keep for both business and private use. I won't mention the company name, but it is one of the larger corporations in the world. BTW, you don't see me posting here between 5am and 4pm. I don't bear any animosity toward those who work government jobs be they Fed, State, County, but I do believe that about 25 to 40% of local government jobs are make-work. (Maybe I'm wrong on this...change my mind!) True, govt jobs pay slightly less, but this is adjusted up by generous insurance, retirement, PTO benefits...not to mention better job security than that found in the private sector. Again...if I'm wrong, help me change my mind!

Did you actually read the story you linked?? It seems to make my case that Moore is nothing but a wind-bag propagandist. Ill paste it below so you can more readily read what you post: Blind, Or A Coward? June 30, 2004 One of the first things I did when I got back from vacation was to go see Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11. It’s a brilliant piece of propaganda, entertaining and funny, and it skewers the president deliciously. But am I the only one to notice that in one critically important way, it entirely misses the boat and gets nearly everything wrong? Maybe this has been said before—I’ve hardly read all of the criticism of Moore—but if so, I haven’t seen it. Moore totally avoids the question of Israel. Not only that, but the opening polemic of the movie ties President Bush and company mightily to Saudi Arabia. In one sequence, what seems like several dozen images flash by showing Bush and his advisers shaking hands and chumming it up with leading members of the Saudi royal family. Moore says outright that while Bush is paid $400,000 by U.S. taxpayers in salary, Saudi Arabia has supported Bush and his family with more than $1 billion in business-related subsidies. (That amount, it seems to me, is ridiculously inflated and must be nonsense.) The stated implication is that Bush is more loyal to the Saudis than he is to America. Huh? Here are some questions for Moore: If Bush is so “in the pocket” of Saudi Arabia, why is he Ariel Sharon’s strongest backer? Why, when he had Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah down at the Texas ranch a few years ago, did he flip off the Saudi’s peace plan? And most important, why did he invade Iraq—since Saudi Arabia was strongly opposed to the U.S. invasion of Iraq? Why did he launch his Iraqi adventure over Saudi objections, with many of his advisers chortling that Saudi Arabia would be “next”? Why did he stock his administration with militant neocon crusaders who see Saudi Arabia as the main enemy? Why, Michael? I have to conclude the Michael Moore is either blind, or a coward. Blind, if he can’t see Bush’s craven ties to Israel, driven by the neocons and the Christian Zionists and Bible-thumping fundamentalists like Jerry Falwell, who consider Israel Jesus’ next stop and see Saudi Arabia as Satanic. Or cowardly, because he knows it and decided not to mention it. Is that because attacking Israel is too hard? Moore’s photo-montage of Saudi princes borders on the racist, showing Bush & Co. clinging to grinning, Semitic-looking Arabs in flowing white robes one after another. Would we stand for a similar, racist-leaning montage of Bush palling around with grinning, Semitic-looking Jews in skullcaps? 'Course not. More important, Moore completely misses the political boat. Perhaps that’s because he relies so heavily on Craig Unger and his book, House of Bush, House of Saud , which makes the same “error.” And more for Moore. Yes, Bush 41 and his advisers—the Carlyle Group-linked James Baker, et al.—were (and are) connected to Saudi Arabia. Did Moore notice that Baker, along with Brent Scowcroft, and other former advisers to Bush 41 (including Colin Powell) were against the Iraq adventure? And that there were reports that Bush 41 himself thought it was a stupid idea? I can’t believe that Moore can be so stupid. So I can only conclude that he produced this movie the way he did on purpose. Then I read that he didn’t bother inviting Ralph Nader to the Washington, D.C., premiere of the film, and (according to The Washington Post ), Nader called Moore “fat.” Well. Moore is fatheaded.

Who the hell is Anthony Wade?? Why won't Moore do interviews???

Christopher Hitchens is a well-known and respected writer. (And a liberal, no less!) Who is Chris Parray??? Is that the best you can come up with Stonehead?? Pretty obscure.

You seem like an angry worker/peasant tonight, Cj. "Asshat". The word seems a little over used here these days. Please work on originality.

Who decided that selfishness is so evil? It provides an economic system that works better than the alternatives. Here's to selfishness, since a system based on selflessness becomes communism. Well said, Cracked.

Liberal writer, Christopher Hitchens, has a few choice things to say about Farenheit 9/11 and Michael Moore. If the film was intended to "stir debate", then why won't Moore actually debate anyone on the material? Not even a fellow Bush-bashing liberal! http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

1936 CONSTITUTION OF THE USSR Adopted December 1936 CHAPTER X Hammer & Sickle FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF CITIZENS ARTICLE 118. Citizens of the U.S.S.R. have the right to work, that is, are guaranteed the right to employment and payment for their work in accordance With its quantity and quality. The right to work is ensured by the socialist organization of the national economy, the steady growth of the productive forces of Soviet society, the elimination of the possibility of economic crises, and the abolition of unemployment. ARTICLE 119. Citizens of the U.S.S.R. have the right to rest and leisure. The right to rest and leisure is ensured by the reduction of the working day to seven hours for the overwhelming majority of the workers, the institution of annual vacations with full pay for workers and employees and the provision of a wide network of sanatoria, rest homes and clubs for the accommodation of the working people. ARTICLE 120. Citizens of the U.S.S.R. have the right to maintenance in old age and also in case of sickness or loss of capacity to work. This right is ensured by the extensive development of social insurance of workers and employees at state expense, free medical service for the working people and the provision of a wide network of health resorts for the use of the working people. ARTICLE 121. Citizens of the U.S.S.R. have the right to education. This right is ensured by universal, compulsory elementary education; by education, including higher education, being free of charge; by the system of state stipends for the overwhelming majority of students in the universities and colleges; by instruction in schools being conducted in the native Ianguage, and by the organization in the factories, state farms, machine and tractor stations and collective farms of free vocational, technical and agronomic training for the working people.

Sounds like a great deal! I think I'll just quit my job and live on the government's dime. Additionally, I think every citizen should be guaranteed the right to high speed internet, a DVD player, and home entertainment center...with 5 channel surround sound, of course. Where does it end?