Fairweather

Holy Shit. OK, maybe you're not a total tool. (Like j_b) Are there any "R's" you would vote for now? How about John Mcain? ...somethin' to think about while you're waxing Matt's boots.

I know that one's vote is a very personal matter, but could you name the last Republican you voted for?

Actually, Erock, if you read through the past threads that start, or drift onto the topic of political "literature", you'll see that Mattp's point is quite clear, and not as you stated above. ...And not just "in this instance".

Fox News is supported by free market advertising. NPR is supported (in part) by my tax dollars. I have every right to expect objectivity from them. I suspect you would not have voted for Dan Evans, and for the sole reason that he was a Republican. So why can't you be more like Dan Evans...or Booth Gardner for that matter? Because you are as much a liberal tool as you perceive I am conservative. If moderate Democrats existed, I would consider giving them my vote. ...Actually I do.... My US Rep. is Norm Dicks (D), and I vote for him every two years.

Did I claim it was a debate program? Very weak ,OW. So when will Fresh Air be "interviewing" Bill ORiley? Never, I suspect. As for Mattp's premise that,["since the righties never claim libel, the claims of Mr Franken/others must be true!"], couldn't the same be said for the liberals? I mean, if what Limbaugh, Hannity, Medved, Coulter, others say isn't true, then why haven't they been sued? Truth proved by absence of legal retort? ...Come on Matt. I hope you wouldn't come into a court room with a weak case like that! And you've used this premise on other occasions as well.

No doubt NPR gave equal time to an opposing point of view.

Al Franken has to be one of the biggest idiots on the political scene today. He tried to verbally attack Bill O'Riley at a book fair recently (shown on C-Span) and it was soon apparent that he had no real grasp of even the most basic issues facing our country today. The debate later steered to O'Riley and liberal Molly Ivans (sp?) and it was a joy to watch two people who really knew their shit go back and forth while Al Franken sat like a pissed off kid on the sidelines. (And by the way; I can't stand Bill O'Riley!) I suspect Franken's book has a ghost writer. "Lies and the Lying Liars..." "Big Lies" "Blinded by the Right" "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot" ... This seems to be all the left/liberals can come up with. Books/Titles that remind me of a kindergarten playground debate.

You guys have created a great site here. Timmy, your climbing bio sounds much like my own. No extreme, near-death experiences, or hardman desperate moves. Just good times in the hills. I always thought you and Jon were extreme-type climbers and knowing that you're both just "average-joe" climbers like most here gives the site even greater appeal. Sorry to hear you're getting threatened by idiots. Hope you can find a way to put a stop to it. If these threats do originate from a military source, a simple series of phone calls to a c/o would probably put a stop to it. ?? If the threats originate from a certain psycho wanna-be speed climber then maybe something "outside the box" is in order, like some good ol' fashioned public humiliation. ?? Anyway, I hope you guys keep up the good work here.

...some good lyrics from The Wall THE THIN ICE if you should go skating on the thin ice above life dragging behind you the silent reproach of a million tear-stained eyes don't be surprised when a crack in the ice appears under your feet you slip out of your depth and out of your mind with your fear flowing out behind you as you claw the thin ice...

THE YES ALBUM

You and I might agree on this: Selling/exporting north slope crude to Asian markets in an effort to make sure the American west coast supply is "tight", and prices kept artificially high is bullshit. The original north slope deal, I believe, promised no exports. (Am I wrong on that one?)

Yes, but final administration approval of the deal was required/made by whom? Bill Clinton/Ron Brown. Democrats. Your original claim laid the blame for "all the big oil company mergers" exclusively at the feet of the republicans. I wonder who slept in The Lincoln Bedroom after that deal was consumated? Nice job on the Google search, by the way. Half an hour aint too bad.

Butt out, Alpine Krust. I wasn't talking to your sorry arse. You're starting to sound a little bit like Mattp's lap-dog. Besides, didn't you recently make it onto Trask's "good 'ole boy list"? I thought you were one of us now.

Not to downplay this beautiful route, but unless it snows before your climb, your chances of falling into a hidden crevasse on the Mazama Glacier in September are almost zero. The climb is very straightforward in good weather, and you may be overestimating it just a bit. I'll bet it's getting a bit icy in spots though. Just my two cint.

Catbird, You still haven't shown any interest in explaining your claim (in a previous thread) that it was those evil republicans who approved the BP-Arco merger. Just a friendly reminder, and an opportunity to explain a hollow claim.

Johnny, That was one of the greatest posts in Spray history.

The first question is easy. Kosovo was pre 9/11/01. Many American's opinions about the aggressive use of our military changed on that day. The second question has no answer. We are all left to gather information from the widest possible variety of sources, filter it through our own biases, beliefs, and skepticism, and then take our best guess.

By the time Saddam finally allowed the inspectors in, with conditions, it was too little, too late. He miscalculated. I think using the word "lie" to describe Bush's candor/lack thereof is certainly a stretch. A big one.

And let's not forget about Clinton's sales job (lies) vis a vis Kosovo. ...And then there was the aspirin factory in Sudan. Were you as outraged then? I believe the media gave WJC a big "pass" on both of those actions.

I maintain that Bush is an honorable man. (I'm losing faith in Cheney) However, I believe his administration did, in fact, exaggerate the threat posed by Iraq in order to promote an invasion. (Now I see they're trying to blame the "bad intelligence" on Iraqi dissidents who crossed over prior to the war.) But Saddam had to go. Period. My only regret about the administration's credibility, is that they will now be scoffed at when they try to sell us on the even larger threat posed by N Korea.

I don't think the mainstream media is ignoring the story at all. They have attempted to drive the story home by repeatedly leading their nightly newscasts with it a few weeks back. Apparently the story didn't have any "traction" with the American public as a whole. If it had teeth, the media would have stayed with it. While this story means everything to you, and many here, the American public was/is apparently willing to accept that they were "misled" to one degree or another. Frankly, I am too.

The mainstream media sees FOX News ratings going up, and up. They don't want to lose market share. FOX is telling the majority of the American people what they want to hear in the post-9/11 world....that we are kicking/going to kick some ass. The rest of the media wants to emulate FOX. This effect is now fading, as the American public loses its stomach for payback, and I think you'll see the mainstream media slowly turn back into the sniveling, disrespectful, whiners that they once were. (IMHO ) ....just a theory.

Actually, I find myself listening to NPR more and more frequently. Something about the sounds they incorporate into their stories give them life, and I can only imagine that family gatherings around the radio in the 1940's were something like this. I find most of the stories fascinating, but some , while balanced on the whole, were obviously selected to appeal to a liberal audiance.(again... IMO.) Just to clarify, I don't mind liberal stories that are obviously editorials...like some of the absolute CRAP written/read on NPR by Daniel Shore. (Some balance would be nice too, but I guess that's why there is Limbaugh and Medved.) What irks me is editorial undercurrent woven into actual news. I don't find this much anymore in NPR's top-of-the-hour news. Maybe that is why I am finding it so much more digestible. Maybe they got the word that the big (17%) taxpayer cow was a-'gonna-dry up real soon if they didn't change their ways. ?? As for the "mainstream media", no I don't believe there are ANY conspiracies afoot, just a common ideal amongst reporters that leans hard to the left.

Matt, Are you sure you read the same book I did? (Or for that matter, did you just skip the book and go straight to the liberal published reviews/retort?) I just skimmed the chapter in question once again and can see dozens of examples/quotes relating to this topic. "Light on facts, heavy on whining"? What more do you require? " The conservative Media Research Center found that in 1990, when George Bush was president, there were 71 homeless stories on ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN evening newscasts. But in 1995, when Bill Clinton was in the White House, the number had gone down to just nine!" ...."a Village Voice study that showed that in 1988 the New York Times ran fifty stories on the homeless, including five on page one. But a decade later, in 1998 the Times ran only ten homeless stories, and none on page one." "An ABC World News Tonight story just three weeks after Goerge W Bush was sworn in.....reporter Bob Jameson said, 'In New York City the number of homeless in the shelter system has risen above twenty five thousand a night for the first time since the late 1980's'". Note that the number of homeless did not necessarily decline during the Clinton years, just the number of network stories about their plight. The chapter is literally stuffed with example after example of this bias. How about the voting records/patterns of Washington DC journalists: 89% said they voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 7% said George HW Bush. 2% Ross Perot Do you honestly believe these reporters put aside their idealology ...not just when writing a story, but when choosing a topic? Matt, I can tell you don't like to be challenged, but are you sure we read the same book? NPR ... too conservative? Good lord, it may be too late to help you.

U2 Joshua Tree Supertramp Crime of the Century The Who Quadraphenia Alan Parsons Project Pyramid Wow. Am I old, or what?