Fairweather

i hope you are not serious there's great logic... lets kill em before they get a chance to strike! sound familiar?

Matt, You may be confusing Manning, who is decidedly anti-access, with the late Ira Spring. Spring, whom I greatly admire, was a true moderate and believed that access ensured continued public interest in wilderness and its preservation. Frankly, I don't know where Ira stood re: MF Road. As for Manning, look at pages 217-219 in "100 Hikes in the Alpine Lakes". If you don't have a copy, I can regurgitate it here, but to summarize: "Permanent closure of The Middle Fork Road is the goal.....eventually trips [up The Middle Fork] can begin at North Bend". Also, look at "MidFORC" and "ALPS" as key players in this farce. I realize criticizing Harvey Manning is blasphemous in present company, but a quick journey through his "Hikes" series, and numerous other publications, reveal him to be completely radicalized IMHO.

This Fucking pisses me off. Issues like this are the very reason I turned into a bona-fide enviro group hater. I went to two of these "public hearings", and rest assured, the majority of folks at these meetings did not support this decision. No doubt Washington Trails Association, self appointed title-holder to our public lands, got a write-in campaign going. This issue has been kept "under the radar" for the past couple years after initial public outrage. ....So now you see how it works. Fucking WTA! They call themselves a "trails advocacy" organization, but they were key in getting this decision passed. Harvey Manning hiked his trails, took his pics, wrote his guidebooks, and now wants to lock us out. (He too was instrumental in this "project".) Watch out folks.....your favorite area is probably the next target of these groups.

Colombia

...unless, of course, they support your politics, eh Scrambler?

How's her new boyfriend like it?

An excellent post, Dan! I find it sad that our nation allows this "yard-gap" to exist, where only the wealthy can afford to hire folks to do their yard work for them. You know,this yard gap does not exist in other industrialized nations like France, Belguim, and those Scandinavian countries! If only the Democrats were in power this yard-gap inequity would surely get addressed. We could tax the wealthy bastards one dollar for every square foot of lawn and/or landscape they posess annually, and use that revenue to provide lawn service to those less fortunate among us. We could also fund child-care services for the children of the these disenfranchised lawn owners so they could ensure their lawn is being properly tended without the distraction that kids bestow. After all, everyone knows the wealthy have nannies and governesses and shit. Of course to ensure this new revenue is equitably distributed, a new government bureau will have to be established. Salaries start at $58,000/yr. No experience necessary. Generous health and retirement benefits too! Universal lawn care! I like it Dan.

Sorry about the length of this, but I couldn't create a link. Looks like we're doing some good things in Iraq that The New York Times et al don't give a rat's ass about: Saturday, October 04, 2003 This is a partial transcript from The O'Reilly Factor, October 1, 2003. Watch The O'Reilly Factor weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the Radio Factor! BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In our second Personal Story segment tonight, actor Bruce Willis (search) has just returned from Iraq, where his band, the Accelerators (search), entertained the troops. While over there, Mr. Willis offered a million dollars of his own money to the people who capture Saddam. Bruce Willis joins us now from Washington. Wow. A million bucks. What did you learn over there? BRUCE WILLIS, ACTOR: Well, I saw a humanitarian effort that I don't see in any of the newspapers here back home, Mr. O'Reilly. O'REILLY: Can you describe what you saw? WILLIS: What I saw was the military helping to get schools back open, helping to get hospitals back open, helping to get the power turned back on, working in the field to help get the Iraqi people back on their feet. O'REILLY: Now, what was the -- were you in Baghdad (search), or were you out in the countryside? WILLIS: I was not in Baghdad. O'REILLY: OK. WILLIS: I was in Mosul (search). I was in Kuwait (search). I was in some places that may not even appear on the map. O'REILLY: So you were out in what they call the bush, even though... WILLIS: In the dirt, yes. In the dirt. O'REILLY: What did you observe about the rapport between U.S. forces and the local people, the local Iraqis? WILLIS: There's a great rapport. I mean, obviously, there's still, you know, conflicts going on there. One of the things that the military feels, I think, is that what's happening right now, the guys that are, you know, still firing RPGs at, you know, the APCs and humvees, are actually from other countries right now. You know, they're really -- less and less of it is coming from, you know, inside of Iraq. O'REILLY: But the regular folks you saw, the Iraqi people, they seem to... WILLIS: They were happy to have the military there. O'REILLY: They were friendly to them. WILLIS: Yes. O'REILLY: Do you think you were managed over there and just shown things that would leave that impression? Did you get the feeling the bad stuff was maybe... WILLIS: Not at all. Not at all. I actually asked to go into places where I probably shouldn't have been. But, no, I don't feel like it was managed at all. O'REILLY: So, from your vantage point, you saw some good that the U.S. is doing, yet... WILLIS: I saw a lot of good. O'REILLY: You don't read about that in the L.A.Times or The New York Times. WILLIS: You don't read about it anywhere in the United States. And I was actually watching, you know, the news here in Washington last night, and it's -- it's just baffling to me that after we've, you know, successfully taken down a known gangster, known terrorist, who was in power in this country for 30 years, that anyone would suggest that we just abandon, you know, the Iraqi people now. It's just crazy to me. O'REILLY: No. It is. Now, you offered a million dollars of your own money to the guys who get Saddam Hussein. You might have to pay that because... WILLIS: They'll get it. You heard about that. Well, fortunately, and maybe unfortunately, the military themselves are unable to collect on that. If that... O'REILLY: I'm going over with my guys from Long Island now and we're going... WILLIS: Good deal for you. You could actually pick up the check. But if it does happen through military sources, I would -- I intend to donate the money to either a school or a hospital. O'REILLY: You should. Hospital, U.F.O. -- U.S.O., I should say. U.F.O., I don't know what I'm talking about. WILLIS: That's OK. O'REILLY: Now, in the world that you live in, the show business world, you're in a minority here by going over there. I have a list of some other stars who have gone over there. Drew Carey (search) went over, Roger Clemens (search) went over, Wayne Newton (search), Paul Rodriguez (search), but most of it is sniping at the government, and even at the military. They say we support our military, but every two minutes you hear another negative coming out of there. How do you react to that? WILLIS: I would like to -- I would like to suggest that anybody who is, as you say, sniping at the government to, you know, go over there themselves and see what I saw. I didn't hear one complaint from anyone in the military over there, and these guys are out there living in the dirt. They had great spirits, great morale. Had the opportunity to walk through Walter Reed hospital yesterday and see some of the, you know, some of the young kids who had come back. O'REILLY: The wounded guys. WILLIS: Yes, sir. O'REILLY: Do you engage your peers in a debate on this? Say you're on a movie set and there was Sean Penn (search) or Kevin Bacon (search). I mention them because they're in a new movie upcoming. Say you were on a set with them, would you debate them about this? WILLIS: No. I don't really feel the need to debate it. I believe the United States, everybody is certainly entitled to their own opinion, and as I am entitled to mine. I just happen to be patriotic and I'm very happy to see that, you know, the United States was able to come in and, you know, take down Saddam Hussein. O'REILLY: Did the weapons of mass destruction controversy bother you at all? WILLIS: I don't think that's what it's about. I think this is about a war on terrorism. And it's about trying to stabilize Iraq. Stabilize the Middle East, which, God knows, could use some stabilization. And it is about a war on terror. I don't -- I don't know. Maybe people have a short memory, but the memory of those people forced to jump out of the World Trade Center will forever be etched in my memory. O'REILLY: They'll say, the opponents, they'll say Saddam had nothing to do with that. WILLIS: Well, they're certainly entitled to that opinion as well. I see Saddam Hussein as a gangster and a terrorist who raped his own country for 30 years, and to simply abandon Iraq now would be a crime. O'REILLY: Even Howard Dean and the others say, you know, we can't do that. No level-headed-thinking person is. By taking this stance, are you going to lose jobs in Hollywood? Are people not going to talk to you in [the L.A. restaurant] Spago (search)? Will you get stuff thrown at you? WILLIS: I don't think I'll have anything thrown at me. If so, I grew up in New Jersey so... O'REILLY: You could always go back there. WILLIS: Yes. O'REILLY: Your father was a military guy. Did that shape your thinking? WILLIS: No. I -- I just grew up, you know, being patriotic. I love this country. And it is -- look, it's an election year, and there are a lot of people out there that are jockeying to get their guy, you know, to get a new guy in the White House, and I think that the commander in chief is doing a really, you know, great job. O'REILLY: You know, the other side would say, look, I'm patriotic because I'm dissenting against the policy I feel is bad for America. They would say that. WILLIS: And what policy would that be? Would you be able to actually... O'REILLY: Sure. I hear it every day. The policy that we should have gone in with the United Nations, waited, not spent all the money, we're the big bully on the block. That's basically it in a nutshell. WILLIS: Well, I don't know anybody who's pro-terrorism except for terrorists, and I am certainly anti-terrorism. And I think that this war on terrorism is -- has long been overdue. You know, long before 9/11, if you look at countries like, you know, Sarajevo, Beirut. O'REILLY: No question stabilization has to occur. Mr. Willis, we appreciate it. WILLIS: Thank you very much. O'REILLY: Thanks for going over to see the guys and the ladies over there. It was nice of you to do that. WILLIS: Thanks for having me on the show. O'REILLY: I'm sure they appreciated you being there. WILLIS: Thank you, sir. Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2003 Fox News Network, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

This link was on the Netscape Home Page Today: Women's Top Sexual Fantasies By Patty Lamberti Women may not be as turned on by pornography as men are, but the visual images in their heads sure get them hot. Before you read further, remember that what a woman fantasizes about isn't necessarily something she wants to happen in reality. Fantasies are safe. Reality isn't always. Here are most women's top 6 sexual fantasies: * Getting it on with a coworker. Women, more than men, are aware that very bad things can happen if you have sex with a coworker. So unless alcohol is involved, they often leave office sex to their imagination. So if you catch a woman staring at her desk, she may not be thinking of a report she has to do, but rather having hot, raunchy sex there with a colleague. * Being watched by a voyeur. Women get off on the idea of being watched, and lusted after, by unknown persons through a window. It's why Alfred Hitchcock's Rear Window was so popular. * Having sex with multiple people. Sometimes in her fantasy they're strangers, sometimes people she knows. Sorry guys. Just because she fantasizes about this doesn't mean she wants to get it on with another woman in reality. * Having random sex with a stranger. In this fantasy, she's walking down the street, and randomly stops to willingly have sex with a tall, dark, unknown man. * Being tied up/tying someone else up. S/M (and fantasizing about s/m) is about playing with power in a relationship. * Being videotaped. Like the voyeur fantasy, she may visualize being caught naked on camera, either knowingly or unknowingly. Why do you need to know what's going on in a woman's head? Because maybe it's something she'd like to try in reality (ask first). Or maybe it's something she wants you to talk dirty about while you have sex. A woman's fantasies are certainly not limited to these six. Each woman has her peccadilloes. No matter what a woman dreams up, she's not a freak. Copyright 2003 Fun Online Corporation.

By your very comments above, you have revealed the way you both try and convict prior to seeing any evidence. The comment made by Limbaugh is hardly racist, although a bit odd. If anything, he's guilty of assuming his ESPN audience and radio audience are the same. BTW, Limbaugh hasn't been "fat" for almost ten years. Is it safe to assume based on your comment, Jim, that you harbor some overt hatred of the overweight? "Fat" is a cruel label too often used by the unenlightened. Are you filled with hatred, Jim?

...and to accurately report his time at 24:01 shows the true integrity of this guy. (No Dan -, he!) Holy shit, that one extra minute would have been hard to accept! What a great report he wrote too.

Canada=30 million people. USA=280 million people. Average wait for ACL Knee surgery in Canada? You paid $10 out of pocket? Who paid the rest? Why are so many Canadian Docs moving to the USA? Why are wealthy Canadians coming here for treatment? Under "Hillary Care" a doctor caught performing services for cash, outside the govt network could be thrown in jail for one year. In France, socialized medicine failed to help 14,000 elderly citizens who died during the August heatwave. Most Doctors and health care workers were on govt-sponsored "holiday". Socialized medicine? No Thanks.

Right or wrong, the government is already deeply into the health-care business via Medicare/Medicade/VA. I personally believe giving the government further, final, absolute control of our health care crosses a line into the world of socialism, or worse. And lets not forget the gigantic bureaucracy a plan like this would create. More govt jobs, and associated generous taxpayer supported pensions, etc. I don't want the government telling me I can, or cannot be treated for any illness or elective. I don't want to sacrifice my quality of health care because 15% of the population has no insurance. I already pay for the uninsured via higher insurance premiums and copays. I am willing to accept that versus giving the government control of such an important part of my life. I find it ironic that the same people bitching about "The Patriot Act" and "losing their freedoms" are pushing so hard to turn over their freedom to chose and pay the doctor of their choice for such a very private and personal service.

Beck, Maybe you could tell me when Kenneth Leigh's (Enron) misdeeds took place? Did Enron begin its pillaging only after Jan 23, 2001? No, I suspect "energy policy" and accounting practices were discussed with the Clintons on the very night Mr Leigh bedded down in The Lincoln Bedroom. What was it going for back then? $10,000 a night? Where was your outrage when the previous administration was gettin' cozy with corporate America and making policy based on $$$? Face it Beck, you're a partisan wonk and your recent wining/dining with the Olympia crowd has probably blinded you to the fact that your Dem buddies are just as "dirty" as you perceive Republicans to be.

...Don't forget Toyota, Mitsubishi, Toshiba, Leica, BMW, Zeiss.... Hey, Beck! Maybe WWII was just a big corporate conspiracy. You liberals still don't get it. We all are the corporation.

United we...Stood.

I'm sorry you feel so "worst". Your statement re the hijackers and describing their actions as "treason" is moronic. Sorry, but I don't know how else to describe the above.

Sisu, I was in Mcarthy a couple years ago and noticed quite a few folks around town carrying .45's. I asked a guy who my (10 yr old!) son and I were sitting next to in the tavern about his choice of weapon. He explained that he would rather get 7 or 8 lower-powered shots off than one or two from a 7 pound shotgun that was probably strapped to his pack anyhow, or even a heavy trigger-pull revolver. As I was carrying a .44 single action, I could see his logic. As it turns out, we did have a bear encounter while in the mountains, but luckily, nothing that involved a shot being fired. ...But that's another story....

other than complaining about the fact that 'some white people are sure fucking stupid', what are gun enthusiasts suggesting be done to prevent negligence accidents like this in the future? cuz damn, there sure are alota stupid white people out there. I didn't realize the gun debate was limited to one race. Indeed, I didn't realize anti-gun folks like you were such racists.

I just love those old Manning/Spring pictures of folks glissading down Heather slopes. In the late 19th century a common practice of adventurers in the subalpine areas of Rainier was to ignite a small grove of alpine fir at dusk. The flames could be seen for miles and the heat lasted all night. I suspect that, even then, these practices were viewed with disgust by more enlightened individuals.

IF a Whitehouse leak is found, it should be dealt with harshly. Let's not forget that the good Niger ambassador has an agenda, and that seperating politics from truth here will be difficult. Let's also remember that Senator Schumer had no problem with congressional leaks of intelligence briefings to the media prior to the Iraq war. Leaks that could have cost ordinary soldiers their lives. IF Rove or any other staffer is involved, he/she should be locked up for a very long time. ...........I'm still waiting for Bug to explain his statement. Or has he revealed the true face of the modern "progressive"?

Thanks for the pics and info! The main icefall crosses my personal "sanity" line. Too much hanging ice on the left, and too much loose rock conglomerate on the right. I would like to give the South Icefall a shot one of these days though!

I think you misunderstand my post Matt. By "part of the program", I simply mean acceptance of existing standards/practices. As Unsoeld was considered to be ahead of his time by me and others, I find his acceptance of this practice surprising. Chill out.

What the fuck does this mean, asshole?

I believe most of the area just above the parking lot at Sunrise used to be a camprgound.(!) You can still see the loop road and even make out some of the old campsites. Good story Mattp. I hadn't heard Willi was part of "the program" back then. I would have thought that a guy like Unsoeld would have been more of a "visionary"....even back then. I vaugely remember reading about "our rapidly disappearing meadows" back in the 70's. This should be a case study about why we need to take in all the data before we act lest we cause unanticipated results. Much like the fire suppression practiced until....well I guess we're still doin' it.