HappyCamper

The Reverend Horton Heat

Bauhaus (instead of the obvious song - "Stigmata Martyr" - Peter Murphy chanting in latin) Aphex Twin - "Come to Daddy" (will scare kids) Type O Negative (pretty much any of their songs - "Black Number One" is a good example) Screaming Jay Hawkins "I put a spell on you" The Doors - "Strange Days" The Misfits - "Mommy, can I go out & kill tonight?" (Glen Danzig - creepy - oxymoron) I am sure there are some really good ones that will come to me later that will show up on a nice Halloween mix. Wouldn't mind finding some good Robert Johnson tunes or other Delta bluesmen - heavy stuff from just a voice and a guitar.

I have the Option WP. A couple downsides: no viewfinder, which sucks on sunny days, and no lens cover, so be prepared to occasionally de-smudge the lens. On the plus, it is nice to not have to worry about it getting wet. It takes pretty nice quality videos too. I have a 1 gig card (<$60 on Newegg.com) and can get close to 30 minutes of video on it. No complaints about picture quality - but I am no auteur.

Showing my naivete here: why use a single speed? I had a co-worker that used to race on them and said that a number of bike messengers were at the track, so maybe its a good workout for the race? They seem gawd-awfully tough to ride...cool looking though....some guy posted once on a bike BBS that it was a pure form of bike riding. True dat? I just squeak (literally) along on my 15 year old steel frame MB and really can't relate to carbon-fiber guy or single gear guy. You all end up passing me anyway. I do take some small guilty pleasure in occassionally passing carbon fiber guy though.

Not to mention that they are the same ones that fill Craigslist with their one year old "used" gear that the rest of us pick up at a nice discount.

I can't believe someone hasn't chimed in yet on Polish climbers.... Oops...reading comprehension slow after lunch....

- Visqueen - pretty poppy, guitar driven, female lead, a happier Hammerbox.... - Kings of Leon (despite being featured in the Jetta commercial) I got the new Bright Eyes....maybe I need to listen to it a few more times, but it seems overly hyped. Then again, I never got into Dylan either.

I'll wade into the treacherous waters here....I wouldn't condemn the guy because he said his client was innocent - if in fact he said that (I think his argument was that the prosecution could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that OJ did it). At any rate, any lawyer, even post-trial is going to say the same thing as Johnnie. He'd be an idiot and would be violating all sorts of ethics rules by saying later on something like "well, that sure was a load of shit I dropped in front of the court". It might even give the DA enough to re-open the matter and push for a new trial. A pot shot might be more appropriately aimed at the prosecution or the jury. Mainly the jury.

Read this off the Summit at Snoqualmie website today: 3" of new snow in the last 24 hours and a 7" base. We still need some more before we can get back on the slopes. Snow showers are forecasted over the next couple of days. We haven't given up on winter yet.

Good: Sublime - Smoke 2 joints....sorry, it was my 4:20 tribute

Tesla...."Signs" Sucks - actually the cover wasn't half bad...but out of principle, 80's hair metal bands other than the Crue suck.

Good cover: The Dead Boy's "Sonic Reducer" by Pearl Jam....although Vetter can't snarl with nearly the ferocity as Stiv Bator did (RIP)

The caffeine is wearing off as the day grows long...can't stop surfing and yet political debate tough to wade in to.... The worst cover of all time: The Wallflowers cover of David Bowie's "Heroes". The song is incapable of being covered. Actually even Bowie singing it now may be sacriledge. Close runners up: Police covering their own "Don't Stand So Close to Me" - one listen will make the reason why it sucks pretty clear. Also noted as the moment that Sting began to suck. Sixpence None the Richer covering "there she goes" by the greatest one hit wonder band: The La's. The band's name alone means they suck in general. Good covers: "Sweet Jane" by Cowboy Junkies - covering some band called the Velvet Underground. Ok, now that I have crawled out of the primordial ooze and discovered the Velvets, I could see why some might call it a sucky cover. Whatever, the girl's voice is too haunting to ignore. If Jakob Dylan fronted the Cowboy Junkies, it would suck. 300 Thread Count Egyptian cotton sheets. That's comfort.

I would never want to condone wasting valuable time at work, not to mention valuable bandwidth of you employer, but you can watch a lot of the Daily Show on its website: http://www.comedycentral.com/tv_shows/thedailyshowwithjonstewart/

Not really a big deal in my book - so there was a planted reporter - I am sure this wasn't the first time in the history of the White House. I am not sure about Helen Thomas being a complete lefty plant either - seem to recall her asking some pointed questions of Bubba. For the entertainment factor alone, I find it amusing that they let someone who was/is a male escort into the press pool. It shouldn't make the evening news - but maybe the Daily Show.

Newbie here - heard some advice that kind of ran counter to what I was thinking. I have been a long time snowboarder, but switched to AT last year to access the BC better (and to liven up the snow life a bit with some variety)....but still want to get a split at some point for the long slogs like St. Helens (well, at least peaks like that)...in other words, a long slog up for a few hours and then a blissful run to the bottom...sure if there was a long approach, i might still consider the AT.....but it seems like some of the Mt Baker routes might be nice with a split board....so, i guess the query is: are split boards sucky for doing a relatively straight forward uphill climb? I am stoked to improve my AT skills, but gotta pull some snowboard runs once in a while in the BC....this is all theoretical since the splits are gawd-awfully expensive and I already dropped cash on the AT last year.....

Not to get too technical here, but the US Constitution is probably violated every day. When someone files an appeal in federal or state court odds are that they are citing some example of a violation of such things as right to speedy trial, unreasonable search and seizure, free speech etc. Perhaps the better question is not whether the constitution is violated, but whether or not the alleged violation can be argued before a court. A number of Gitmo prisoners are trying to argue that they should just have a day in court. The fear is that the "enemy combatant" rule will be stretched to include US citizens (if it hasn't already - ex. Padilla). I think if prosecutors are allowed to make that application then you do have to worry that the ice axe has been removed and we face a risk of a fall. For example, what does the term "enemy combatant" mean? If a US citizen plans to commit a crime against a federal institution and perhaps belong to a foreign-based organization, should they be seized without due process? Keep in mind that my last sentence could be broadly applied to even minute violations. Is it unlikely? Yes. But that does not mean that you do stop maintaining vigilance.

I may be mistaken, but wasn't Colson the hatchet man for Nixon? I believe he served time for Watergate. Some irony there. I do not think we will get a flaming conservative judge - even Arlan Specter has issued some call for moderation. He retracted his statement in the face of outcries from the conservative base, but the sentiment is there. I think even more conservative Republicans will not push a "true believer" into the Supreme Court. They may pack the appellate courts, but not something as high profile. They might get someone who is a stealth judge in terms of ideology. The Republicans do not have enough votes to break a filibuster and I don't think the Republicans want to squander their capital on a fight that might pul people away from them. Its one thing that gay marriages are not favored by a majority, its another to say that Roe v. Wade should be repealed - I think a majority would not be in favor of that. Then again, they might feel that its now or never with the balance of power shifted. Just seems ruinous from a Republican point of view - with a majority, they can continue the erosion of Roe v. Wade. It might make for good television though - would make the Clarence Thomas fight seem like a PTA election.

When the abortion debate was reaching a real fervent pitch in the early 90's I had a professor who was known for conservative views. He had asked a question of a classmate and they had mentioned abortion as an aside to their answer. I think overall debate exhaustion made us collectively groan as most of us on either side of the issue did not want to make it a classroom topic. He response to the aside was as follows: "Abortion? I'll tell you my position on abortion. In ancient Rome the patriarch had the right to kill any of his children before the age of 12. That's my postion on abortion." He was a smart enough guy that I am pretty sure there was a point to what he said, but it wasn't going to be on the final so I skipped thinking about it.

True - maybe I am just amazed that when the Swift Boat ads and other attacks came out - he sort of stalled. Even true believers likely began to wonder if the ads were truth when there was nothing but silence in response. Well, silence broken only by the sounds of

Perhaps wrong thread for this but.... A thig that is perplexing about Kerry - the man was a former prosecutor. Albeit not a career prosecutor, but even the ones fresh in the hunt develop a killer fight instinct right away. Any decent prosecutor with some experience becomes pretty good at pitching their argument to the people (aka the jury) and will not yield a point without a fight. Tenacious bastards the lot of them. I'd have figured that if a former proscutor was in the debate you'd be wiping the blood spatters off of Bob Schieffer. Guess not. Dunno, maybe he wasn't a good prosecutor or maybe years in the senate softened his edge. I'd have voted for McCoy the DA from "Law and Order's". Sure, it's really the actor, then again look at Reagan, Fred Thompson and the Terminator. Sam Waterston in '08!

Pardon the minor digression - JayB mentions Dean in '08. It kind of makes me wonder how that one would have turned out in '04. Dean was most definitely not Kerry in has ideas and demeanor. Sure, some people found him "scary", but I bet his message would have resonated better with Americans in swing states than with Kerry's message. Not saying I support Dean - I just think the race would have been a real fireworks show. He would not have been afraid to speak his mind even if it got him in trouble or it created bad "spin". It might have even befuddled the Rove-ian way of thinking. They seemed to have hooked Kerry because for every simple attack they threw at him - he seemed to want to fully explain his answer, which is great if you are writing bills in the Senate - but it doesn't get you elected. Dean would have likely just thrown back an emphatic rebuttal that was pretty concise and - brutally honest. Almost like the former governor of Colorado in the 80's - forget his name. Mind you Rove would have switched tactics and called him "unstable" like they did with McCain - but the fight would have made for a good campaign season. Anyway - its probably an indictment of my character that I wanted more fireworks out of this election. Further digression/post-script: Love him or hate him, it was pretty funny to watch Bubba piss the ever-loving-hell out of Republicans. Damn, they hated him more than Demo's hate Bush. Someone said it above or in another line of postings - watch for Democrats trying to pin a Whitewater on Bush. The Valerie Pflame incident seems to have potential legs - will Rove do a perp walk?

I am pretty sure a good chunk of the "red" counties would prefer that Seattle pack up and move to Sweden. You'd probably be better off convincing Bill Gates to change his name to Bill de Medici and turning the Seattle-area into a city-state. Well, maybe keep Bellevue a part of the provinces.

Any input on rates? Last year I was quoted something like $500/year for a 1 mil policy. Then I filled out the supplemental form that asks about your climbing activities, which is pretty modest compared to the posters here, but the rates went up to $3,000 (Safeco). Some of you may have had policies for some time, but any one have any recent experience with quotes (i.e. maybe the insurance companies are tightening up on their risks)?

How about Regal Select? It came in the same bottles and with the same bottle tops as Lucky....I could only find it in hilltop in Tacoma...kinda wondered if it was expired Lucky with the labels replaced - for $8 a case, that might have been true.....the first beer kinda hurt, but after that it was just fine....