willstrickland

Go on a weekday. Last week of August or first week of Sept. Do the Direct. Skip the mank 4th class approach pitch by continuing right about 35 yards and then back left on grassy ramps. Chockstone chimney has two chockstones, go over one and behind one. Make sure you get the Black Face pitch, 5th pitch if you count the chockstone chimney as the 1st. If there are slow moving crowds in front of you, you can escape left after pitch 2? or 3? and pick up the Wall St ramp to the upper Exum. Be at the base of the route at dawn, move fast and get down before 1pm if at all possible, thunderstorms can be nasty up there. The lower exum is the best climbing on the route, I've done the direct twice and I wouldn't do the upper section by itself. There are other really good climbs up that way too. If you're going to hike all the way up there, do Irene's Arete on the way up, and the NW couloir on Middle the day after you do the exum. One of the best trips I've ever had was doing those in a 4 day, 3 night deal with a rest day where we just moved from Irene's to the saddle before doing the exum. We carried over the middle on the last day and descended the SW couloir. You can also leave your stuff at the saddle and rap/downclimb the N. Ridge then reverse your approach to the NW couloir.

Felt a pang late one afternoon I was fishin’ off muir beach With larry lalonde Grabbed a tuna salad sandwich And I started to chew Pretty soon ler’s yellin Fish on, fish on! I was just a little pup And it was derby day Was dad and me and darrell Out in san pablo bay Taco flavored doritos And my orange life vest Dad caught a hundred pound sturgeon On twenty-pound test Now he fought that fish for an hour and a half Darrell’d say jump ya sons a bitch! And he grabbed for the gaff When we got him in the boat He measured six feet long I was so danged impressed I had To write this song called Fish on T’was a bright and sunny day It was me and todd huth Fishin’ shark & stingray Out of bohuas lagoon Well hey, hey, hey I’ll be screwed, blued and tatooed Looks like I got me one of them fish on Fish on! PRIMUS

Ever consider that it just might be continued use of the prevailing theme of SATIRE? Are you really going to take any of the sentences in there at face value?

I took away a completely different meaning from the babysmasher website than the two sides in this pissing match. Did any of you investigate the rest of the Babysmasher site? Go and read the "Lies" page. The message to me was twofold: 1. Baby changing stations are unsanitary and pose a public health risk. (You might as well be smashing them because using those stations is going to expose them to disease and/or make them sick) 2. We as a society have a major problem with children out of wedlock/single parent families. Call for birth control, responsible parenting, or restoration of the sanctity and reverence of a marriage. Yes, they are using some indefensible "humor" to convey the message. But read this quote from their "lies" page and tell me if you get the same meaning that I outlined above: Corporate America is lying to you - the fact is, the use of Baby Smashers as "baby changing stations" is endangering our health. The unsanitary nature of using a publicly accessible device to change the dirty diapers of babies should be an obvious red flag to the average consumer. However, it seems as if big business has managed to pull the wool over our fine country's eyes yet again. Disease and filth are inadvertently being spread throughout the adult population via urine and fecal matter residue left on Baby Smashers by those using them as "baby changing stations". While one of the obvious advantages of the nation-wide installation of Baby Smashers is population control - this spread of disease to adults is an unwanted side effect. Furthermore, as the number of children born out of wedlock continues to remain high, and the number of children born to unfit, uncapable parents does the same -- we at BabySmasher.com feel it is time to alert more of the general public to the existence and use of Baby Smashers. Please, contribute to society's education on this matter and order now!

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/24/cheney.leahy/index.html "Cheney, who as president of the Senate was present for the picture day, turned to Leahy and scolded the senator over his recent criticism of the vice president for Halliburton's alleged war profiteering... In response to Cheney, Leahy reminded Cheney that the vice president had once accused him of being a bad Catholic, to which Cheney replied either "f--- off" or "go f--- yourself." Nice one DICK.

You might also remember the anthrax letters, and another sniper in Ohio. If you're going to use hyperbolic rhetorical questions to back up your point, make sure they are above question.

This one is very easy for me. Some people deserve to be killed...the whiny kid on the airplane, the bitch on the cell phone in her SUV who almost mowed me down on my bike, the dickneck playing earth shaking bass in my parking lot at 2am on a Tuesday night....but seriously: 1. Some innocent people are executed. 2. It's cheaper for taxpayers to jail them for life. Two excellent reasons to retain the ABILITY to seek the death penalty, but to not actively seek it in most circumstances where it is available. Personally, I would rather check out of this earthly existence early courtesy of a lethal injection, rather than be ass raped by Bruno and Tiny for 30 years. I think life in prison is worse punishment than death. I don't oppose the death penalty, but the reality of our ligitious society and the obscene costs associated with it make my choice easy. Retain the right, but only use it in rare cases like McVeigh/Nichols, John Allen Mohammed/Lee Malvo, etc. FWIW, I also am very much in support of prison work farms. The prison system should be self-sufficient on food at a minimum.

Whatever Bob, you old chuffer. You had to re-adopt the suspenders to get the power back when old age came knocking? I bouldered with you in Loa when I lived there once upon a time. That might be the all-time worst boulderfield I've ever climbed in....used condoms from the jack-Mormon breeders, Jenny Blackburn's name prominently displayed in spray-paint, dead sheep remains, and yahoos shooting jackrabbits. You bail from Cap Reef or what?

How's that treble hook in the jaw feel?

Hey, you're not going to rile me. I agree with you, this administration is abhorent. They are calculating and bumbling at the same time, and certainly the worst administration of my lifetime. Still, that doesn't make Michael Moore any less of an asshole. So right back atcha.

JJ Cale - Best of Modest Mouse - Good News for People Who Love Bad News Radiohead - OK Computer Rage - Live at the...

You should have run that poll here Distel. I bet you would have received some sage advice.

You're going all the way to Arizona to pull limestone pockets at Priest's Draw with Bob Van Belle? Get wise Distel, head for the big stone.

You folks might find this site interesting http://www.bowlingfortruth.com it dissects the liberties Moore took with editing and bending the truth. I think Moore has a talent for what he does - stirring up shit with half-truths. This site is pretty telling (it breaks it down scene by scene). The self-serving selective editing (the bank/gun scene is one) is disingenuous and cowardly. I encourage you to check out that site. I actually enjoy Moore's work, but I definitely don't side with him on the issues. I think he is crafty, and pretty intelligent. It's a shame he's such a manipulative bastard with a moonbat agenda.

Get it correct if you're going to nitpick details. "Ham" indicates the part of the body the meat comes from. It is NOT necessarily smoked, although it can be. Ham is meat from the....you guessed it...ham of the pig. That's ass to you and me.

You want a quote....I give you a quote: "Propaganda must always be essentially simple and repetitious. In the long run, only he will achieve basic results in influencing public opinion who is able to reduce problems to the simplest terms and who has the courage to keep forever repeating them in this simplified form despite the objections of the intellectuals." - Joseph Goebbels’ diary, 1/29/42

Whatever Josh. Do you meet those requirements? It is hard to find people with skills money and free time. Good luck Tex, maybe give Mike a shout. He fits the bill and he's been down there before, generally has the winters off, etc.

Josh, I believe your stance amounts to age discrimination. That's not PC!

Who and when? The Huberbuam clocked in at just under 3hr last year...2:54 or something, smashing the El Cap record (previously held by various parties on the Nose) I've seen some video of that climb and it seems hard to beat that...Alex was short fixing and free climbing 5.12 with a huge loop of slack while Thomas speed jugged on more or less free hanging rope.

Never fallen on them, but I have rapped off both.

Did you sandbag him and burn him off? Or give him the hoser-down spray smack-down?

Abraham does ok until he gets to the "Why Iraq" section. His assertion is that: 1. Iraq could have been actively cooperating with terrorist groups and passing WMD to them (he mentions the PLO). 2. We needed a strategic base of operations to protect against the rise of radical islamic regimes. Abraham continues by attempting to equate the war in Iraq with the war on terror. And this is the critical error in his analysis. 1)Regarding his first assertion, we have determined that the Hussein regime was not actively working with Al Qaeda, and they did not pass WMD to the PLO for use against Israel. The PLO scenario is pure fantasy. Condi Rice's assessment that WMD possessed by Iraq would be uselss to them because it would result in obliteration of their country in retaliation, can also be applied to the PLO scenario - If the PLO deployed WMD in Israel, and there was any indication that it came from Baghdad, nukes would be flying from Tel Aviv with coordinates to center-punch Sadaam's palace. 2)We had existing strategic footholds in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan. We did not "need" Iraq. Abraham's second error is equating the opposition to the Iraq war with a failure to understand the danger posed by the rise of radical islam by those in opposition. This is preposterous to me. I fully recognize the danger and support the intelligent use of crushing, decisive force to quell that rise. The outright lying to the public and the misapplication of both forces and resources are the reasons for my opposition. In other words, we could be using our military and financial resources in much more productive ways in the fight against terror than nation-building in Iraq. Abraham attempts to play the "liberal wussy" card, which in many cases can be valid. There are certainly peaceniks who live in a fanatasyland of "smile on your brother, everybody get together try to love one another right now". But broad stroke generalizations of the opposition ignores that there are many conservative leaning, pro military types who opposed the conflict based on practical analysis rather than idealistic pipedreams. I think the MOST relevant thing in the whole article is one line that doesn't get much emphasis: "Such was the case in Lebanon leading to the Syrian occupation and what was attempted in Egypt with the murder of Anwar Sadat, along with the multiple attempts on the lives of Hussein in Jordan, Mubarak of Egypt and Musharraf in Pakistan. Pakistan is a particular prize because of its nuclear weapons." Pakistan is also a hotbed of radical islamic schools and a haven for the radicals themselves. I'd wager good money that bin Laden and his gang of shitheads are in the Pakistan border region. And from what I've read, our troops in Afghanistan patrolling the border region cannot cross the border in pursuit of insurgents. This baffles me. BushCo needs to make it very clear to Musharaf that he WILL cooperate. No "request". More like "we will pursue them if they cross the border, and any attempt to intervene on the part of Pakistani troops will bring down a world of hurt". Everyone agrees that Hussein was an evil dictator. But it also defies logic to say that he needed to go BECAUSE of the dangers of a rise of radical islam. Hussein's regime was secular, and he ruled with an iron fist. The stability of Iraq's regime, and/or it's susceptibility to an radical islamic uprising was never in question. Regardless of your feelings about Sadaam and his ways, he was a stabalizing secular force and in many ways that was an asset to the region with regards to ascention of radicals to governmental control.

Dana Designs too, or did Gleason buy it back? And if he bought Dana back from K2...who owns Mystery Ranch now?

Ran into some stacked shale-like plates in NC once. Every hold was portable. Need pro? Remove a plate and stick a cam in the resulting horizontal. Investigated a cliff near Price Canyon, UT once that looked like Maple Canyon style cobbles. Only this stuff wasn't cemented together...anyone need a bowling ball? Cutler sandstone can be pretty interesting.