KaskadskyjKozak

Ah yes, a convenient distraction. Instead of focusing on what is wrong now with our foreign policy and what risks and threats exist, look to the past to blame the "other". It must make you feel good, a favorite past time.

You'll still vote for her. Man up and admit it, bitch ;-) nah, since 1992, i've maintained a tradition for voting for a guy who wouldn't win if that's true you'are an anomaly. most will pick one of the two contenders who's party affiliation most closely matches their point on the political spectrum

tl;dr

I'm not reall paying attention. Just two piles of shit.

You'll still vote for her. Man up and admit it, bitch ;-)

Trip: Gardner Slam (North Gardner, Gardner) - South Route Standards Date: 4/17/2015-4/19/2015 Trip Report: A group of friends and I headed east of the crest to take advantage of the low snowpack and get up a couple Bulger summits. The approach had some insignificant snow patches fairly early on but is 95+% dry until about 4200'. From there the patches get longer until you begin to ascend up and right towards Gardner meadows from 4600'. Here the snow is very annoying - easy to punch through and lots of logs, brush and deadfall to contend with. We used snow shoes for the flat icy section from 4200' to 4600' but they were not helpful above there. We camped at about 5600' in Gardner Meadows. Typical snow on trail between 4200' and 4600' Dry on the trail moving towards Gardner Meadows Gardner Meadows in late afternoon We ascended the standard route of N. Gardner via the bowl below point 8487 followed by a 1 mile run of the S ridge. There was one tricky section around the gendarme mid-ridge that required careful movement with OK handholds and bad run out. We had cold temps at night, and firm, excellent cramponing up. Traversing the bowl on a 7500' contour below point 8487 and the W ridge of Gardner Rest break en route to point 8487 Gardner from point 8487 S ridge of Gardner as veiwed from point 8487 High on S ridge of N Gardner Pano p0rn More p0rn For Gardner we backtracked to point 8487. We started to go torwards the W ridge of Gardner but found it too time-consuming with the snow and opted insted to drop to 7500' and retrace our steps to the standard gully on the S face. After following our partner's boot path 500' up (he only climbed Gardner) we met him and continued up class 2 scree and rock bands to the false summit. From here we walked easily up and over to the true summit. Typical terrain on the S face of Gardner IL and RM hiking the upper S face of Gardner KK pose down on the summit of Gardner Partner's summit stoke on the summit Gear Notes: Ice axe, crampons. Snowshoes helped for a short section only. Approach Notes: Snow beginning at ~4200'. Snow intermittent in meadows.

I read "Dandelion Wine" by Ray Bradbury en route to Vegas (and back) last week. A great read, beautiful language. A perfect book as I head into summer again (and deeper into middle age)

Mo, Larry, the CHEESSE!!!!

Great point, Olyclimber!

Not quite. The conservative argument is actually more like this: "diplomacy doesn't work; these people are a threat; we have to actually do something about it". It's based more on human nature really, just like liberals when they react to a problem by legislation. For those who already have healthcare they lose more disposable income supporting someone else who is in a dubious position as to whether he or she can actually afford care or is just unwilling to pay for it and wants others to for them. Less disposable income means less freedom to do the things you like to do, less money for retirement, your kids' future, etc.

How was Bryant? Did your party member say?

I was up there myself two weeks ago. I concur that the conditions were great (but sad too - such a poor ski year)

I'm surprised it took you this long to do that Glad to see the post generated outrage from the target audience. More importantly still Glad you self-identified and replied. Know thyself.

since it's "funny" and par for the course...

Au contraire https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201003/why-liberals-are-more-intelligent-conservatives Wow, this is a real eye opener. Nothing like an IQ test administered by soft scientists to boost a libtards' sense of self worth--and boil away all the individual gifts a child possesses. Please, AlpineK, do tell me these youngsters had their skulls properly measured! AlpineK and Kevbone: two shining examples of liberal intellect.

Au contraire https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201003/why-liberals-are-more-intelligent-conservatives And yet here you are with an IQ of 74. Of course there is the lifelong use of chronic to blame...

AlpineK - generally it's left wing nuts that are anti-vaxxers, and anti-GMO. Nice try though. Stupid opposition to Science covers both ends of the political spectrum, as does stupidity in general.

http://inhabitat.com/house-passes-bill-that-prohibits-expert-scientific-advice-to-the-epa/ It's so cute that a site 'moderator' chooses to change the thread title in such a disgusting, inflammatory way.

Did someone say 'parade'? [video:youtube]

Pretty sure you're single. Try watching less porn

How about you eat a bowl of bloody dicks?

Nope. I don't think this applies here. And no, I'm not a troll. I've been thinking a lot about douchiness in general and how there is a positive correlation between such and increased socioeconomic status. It's a valid inquiry. FOAD The ad hominem shit doesn't phase me. You didn't address the issue. Lick my balls. I didn't go ad hominen - I said nothing *about* you. FOAD. BTW, it's "Lick sack".

Nope. I don't think this applies here. And no, I'm not a troll. I've been thinking a lot about douchiness in general and how there is a positive correlation between such and increased socioeconomic status. It's a valid inquiry. FOAD

Fixed that for you