JayB

Wasn't at least one stated purpose of gerrymandering to more or less guarantee racial minorities seats in congress?

I personally can't believe that someone hasn't posted a male-poster's face onto a stock photo of some chick doing yoga poses in a rocky landscape ~ 1/2 hour ago...

Seems like there's a couple of different questions at play here. I don't think it's reasonable to assume that you'll never have your photo taken without your consent in public, much less that you have a legal right to prevent people from doing so.* However, if you find out that the person who took your photo without your consent has posted your photo on a private website and a bunch of clownpunchers are making lewd comments that are creeping you out, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask the person who posted the photo and/or the folks that run the site to take the photo down, even if they aren't legally obliged to do so. *Exception being non-consensual photos of body parts that you are trying to conceal with clothing...

From Greg Child's essay entitled "The Denz Option" "The Bill Denz I recall was a man who was self-sufficient, stoic, complex, reticent, intense, ambitious, competitive, steel-willed, fiery, fearless, undemonstrative, and selfish. These are the attributes of the classic alpinist." Infuse your personality with enough of these attributes and you will have all of the uncommitted time that you can handle, methinks.

Brutal. Message and delivery were about as subtle as being strapped to a chair, the having the director roll a stage-amp from a Slayer show a couple of inches away before he starts shouting a four word summary of the message into the microphone over and over again until the bleeding out the ears requires medical attention..... "Triumph of the Will" has a light-touch by comparison.

And unwitting self-parody is yours.

From Klenke's cc.com Gallery...

A few months ago our cat fell off of our roof, which is probably ~40 feet high, and dislocated his elbow. We took him to the vet, where they reset the elbow for ~$800. I asked the vet if it was okay to let him out of the carrier, and he said "Sure - just maybe put him in a small area, like a bathroom, where he won't be tempted to run around a lot." I leave him in the bathroom with a towel to lay on and head back to work for a bit, and figure he'll be fine since my wife will be back in half an hour. I get back about an hour later, and my wife is holding the cat in her lap in the kitchen. His fur is matted, his eyes are narrowed, and he just doesn't look right. I first think he may have had a seizure or something, but what actually happened is he wigged out in a massive way trying to get his cast off. He ripped all of his back claws off, tracked the resulting blood all over the bathroom (like as in streaks up to 3 feet high on the walls, and the smell of blood was palpable before you even got into the room), and managed to re-dislocate his elbow in the process. We were pondering what to do, since this is an incredibly cantankerous cat that goes berserk if there's anything on his body that he doesn't want there. He once managed to shuck the cone-thingy and rip out a stitched-in catheter with his teeth. We concluded that even if we spent the two-grand on the surgery, the likelihood that he'd tolerate the cast on his leg for long enough for things to heal was nil, and we decided we'd see how he did without the operation. If it looked as though he was in pain or poor spirits, we'd reconsider. He's slighyly gimpy, but gets around fine, doesn't seem to be in any pain can still use the leg to walk, run, and bat things around with. We just don't let him out on the roof anymore. If it was a choice between spending the $2K or putting him down, we'd have spent the money.

The Danes need Prole there to inform them that freedom of speech is nothing more than a value-laden western construct formulated by the capitalist elite for the purposes of justifying their class-rule and deceiving workers into accepting a finite subset of "freedoms" defined for them by the said elite instead of demanding and forcibly seizing their rightful share of the social product.....

This is my guess as well. I think Edwards has a lot riding on any endorsement he may make. "In 1985, a 31-year-old North Carolina lawyer named John Edwards stood before a jury and channeled the words of an unborn baby girl. Referring to an hour-by-hour record of a fetal heartbeat monitor, Mr. Edwards told the jury: "She said at 3, `I'm fine.' She said at 4, `I'm having a little trouble, but I'm doing O.K.' Five, she said, `I'm having problems.' At 5:30, she said, `I need out.' " But the obstetrician, he argued in an artful blend of science and passion, failed to heed the call. By waiting 90 more minutes to perform a breech delivery, rather than immediately performing a Caesarean section, Mr. Edwards said, the doctor permanently damaged the girl's brain. "She speaks to you through me," the lawyer went on in his closing argument. "And I have to tell you right now — I didn't plan to talk about this — right now I feel her. I feel her presence. She's inside me, and she's talking to you." The jury came back with a $6.5 million verdict in the cerebral palsy case, and Mr. Edwards established his reputation as the state's most feared plaintiff's lawyer. In the decade that followed, Mr. Edwards filed at least 20 similar lawsuits against doctors and hospitals in deliveries gone wrong, winning verdicts and settlements of more than $60 million, typically keeping about a third. As a politician he has spoken of these lawsuits with pride. "I was more than just their lawyer," Mr. Edwards said of his clients in a recent essay in Newsweek. "I cared about them. Their cause was my cause." The effect of his work has reached beyond those cases, and beyond his own income. Other lawyers have filed countless similar cases; just this week, a jury on Long Island returned a $112 million award. And doctors have responded by changing the way they deliver babies, often seeing a relatively minor anomaly on a fetal heart monitor as justification for an immediate Caesarean. On the other side, insurance companies, business groups that support what they call tort reform and conservative commentators have accused Mr. Edwards of relying on questionable science in his trial work. Indeed, there is a growing medical debate over whether the changes have done more harm than good. Studies have found that the electronic fetal monitors now widely used during delivery often incorrectly signal distress, prompting many needless Caesarean deliveries, which carry the risks of major surgery. The rise in such deliveries, to about 26 percent today from 6 percent in 1970, has failed to decrease the rate of cerebral palsy, scientists say. Studies indicate that in most cases, the disorder is caused by fetal brain injury long before labor begins. An examination of Mr. Edwards's legal career also opens a window onto the world of personal injury litigation. In building his career, Mr. Edwards underbid other lawyers to win promising clients, sifted through several dozen expert witnesses to find one who would attest to his claims, and opposed state legislation that would have helped all families with brain-damaged children and not just those few who win big malpractice awards." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/31/politics/campaign/31EDWA.html?ex=1203224400&en=ec51e69ecd2f506f&ei=5070

I think that you are definitely right, and your perspective as a first hand observer is authoritative IMO. I'm just saying that in the same way that someone who sees a male cross dresser from a couple blocks away will tell you they are looking at a woman, even if they'd come to a different conclusion from a few feet away...most parties are probably going to look across from the parking lot, perceive an unacceptable objective hazard, and climb something else. It also sounds like the pitches down low are stiff enough to act as a fairly stout filter that might weed out a lot of folks who would otherwise find the route appealing.

Thanks for the first-hand perspective. Given that there are plenty of wild, untrammeled, beautiful places that require good fitness and solid all-around mountain skills that don't give the appearance of being threatened by serac-fall at all, or at least less extensively, my sense is that your achievement will not be duplicated by another party any time soon. It's certainly one of the more dramatic and imposing lines anyone's established in the Cascades in the past few years, IMO. Link to original TR to save interested parties some searching. http://cascadeclimbers.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/494632/fpart/1

I'm just happy that the youth of today are *finally* standing up for something and engaging in displays of spirited public activism such as this...

If we reach a state of affairs where that's the primary inspiration for shouting out"Allahu Akbar" then well be well on our way to licking the terror problem...

Just think if some of that zeal were transferred into ice-hockey. If you heard "Allahu Akbar..." from behind you you'd know there was a wicked body check on the way...

Can't believe that this thread title has been up for this long without someone posting a photo of a plastic, made-in-China Jesus chotcke or Elvis-style velvet painting of HeyZeus...

Why choose when we can have the best of both worlds... http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/06/terror/main1685808.shtml Fill up your car to pay for the oil...that funds the perma-welfare that fosters the segregation from and contempt for the society around them...instead of being forced to go out and mingle with the infidel whores to make a living and temper the seclusion and fanaticism a bit... Worked like a charm in Europe (sans the money to pay for the perma-welfare). Too bad that Canadians lack the ethnolinguistic chauvinism to get the full-tilt mass-alienation going Banlieu style...

Howjda guess? sobo never gets any. It's a fucking way of life. How do like that irony? A "fucking" way of life not getting laid. Yeah, what a great fucking life. ahh, marriage I ain't gonna change it now, cuz I've got mouths to feed. But I tell ya this: If I knew then what I know now, I never would've taken the plunge. Milk tastes better when you don't own the cow. Just don't let us find out that you are planning to chronicle your tale in a tell all marketed to housewives in England, complete with a photo to accompany the teaser-profile in the tabloid(!)....

I'm thinking of hedging in pesos to protect my savings...

There will be no shortage of money losing enterprises in the news in the next year. I encourage Prole to find one of them and give them all of his money, or better yet, he can author an agreement to have the government transfer all of his earnings to them to keep them in business indefinitely. Follow this one simple step, and your prosperity will be assured.

I thought it was buying leveraged portfolios of securitized neg-am, I/O, pay-option, 2/28 No-Doc ARMs issued on hundreds fraudulently appraised investor-owned properties in the Sacremento suburbs... http://flippersintrouble.blogspot.com/ Or maybe that was Merrill, Citibank, etc...

Reverse optimization of the asset allocation problem. Perfection. Whoa! Stop the presses again. Are you telling me that the business and ruling classes will attempt to preserve their wealth during periods of economic crisis and use state power to do so? Like, OMFG. And workers will support it to keep their jobs? Huh, I guess no one's willing to commit social suicide for the free-market utopian jihad except the economists. Oh wait... The assumption that all businesses, wealthy people, etc have a common interest in a unitary policy approach is quite amusing. As is the notion that unprofitable enterprises going out of business is an unequivocally bad thing. The fact that your personal economic ideal lacks an efficient mechanism for doing so, along with an effective mechanism for allocating resources, coordinating supply and demand constitute some of the principal reasons why societies with economies based on your model did so well in the twentieth century.

This honestly isn't an attack, but I am curious about how you process Deuteronomy, Revelations, etc.

It would appear that in this case, two equivalents of Grignard reagent will add across the carbonyl bond. Thus, either A or E might be the answer. The only question being, whether the oxygen resulting from the opening up of the lactone ester bond is methylated or not. I have to think about this some more. Cool. My first guess was A. Figured the CH3 would wage a nucleophillic attack the carbonyl group and make something that looked like A, but it's been ~14 years since Ochem, so it's all going fuzzy and something tells me I'd get about 25% of the answers right on a multiple choice test with four potential answers for each question...

expecting different results from the same process? The task for this group is to find ways to incorporate the genius that this policy embodies into mountaineering. 1. If you suspect that you are on the verge of getting lost, forcibly transfer the map and compass to the guy who has shown the least capacity to use them.... Ther