sirwoofalot

Yeah, well I almost did. I will follow KK’s lead and not bite on the election remarks; however, on a different subject, the economy, Cuba is a shining example of socialism.

Look! Up in the sky, its a bird, its plane, its a FROG!

I love your photograph. Both my children readily slept in my Kelty carrier. Just make sure they are strapped in, and um, maybe a helmet, even a bicycle helmet. It has been and continues to be the rule at our house that you wear a helmet. It started with Tricycle for no other reason that to get in the habit. It extends to scrabbles, (I have not taken any of them on rope yet) skiing/boarding, bicycles, skate boards, CLIMBING GYM, Etc.

It is too bad for the people of Cuba. I am sure the socialist love to lift up Cuba as the shinning example of Socialism at it’s finest. Oh, yaeh, you forgot me.

JB, Thanks for the research on cc.com.

Absolutely! I think it would go a long way to break my spray addiction. why in gods name would you want to do that? how would you fill your non climbing time? Working? DUDE thats why i only spray in the PM now Unfortunately, that is why I spray all day long. I am going home now, and I will spray you all later on Tuesday!

OUCH! too funny!

not a bad idea so you want this bunch of spraylords to find that the easiest threads to post in and keep track of are all climbing related? you're playing with fire. Spray is ~75% of the Past 24 Hours. I can go to the spray forum to find that. After the weekend if I want to see what's going on in all the climbing forums I click on the Past 24 Hours button and wade through 3 pages dominated by spray to find the climbing talk. Personally I'd like a climbing related easy search button. OTOH I never click on the TR button. It's like at TGR. They have a drop down quick menu that takes you to any of the forums except The Padded Room. They get way more traffic so I think it would be reasonable to have an all climbing topics hot button. REally? I always hit the TR first thing in the AM, and the roll up my sleeve to get ready to do as Dave Kneehouse might say, "Spray, spray away"!

Absolutely! I think it would go a long way to break my spray addiction. why in gods name would you want to do that? how would you fill your non climbing time? Working?

It is a 3 day weekend! and I am on IR

You are an extremely persuasive counterexample to the thesis of intelligent design. Dude….you are stocking me on CC.com……. I just got an MRI report that I herniated my disc between L4 adn L5. I am sorry to report I can no longer read the banter between Kev and KK because it make me laugh too much, and man-o-man does that ever hurt!

Absolutely! I think it would go a long way to break my spray addiction.

Exactly, no offense intended towards my R friends out there. Demonizing with sensational labels is such a tardweb/talk radio cliche. Socialist here, Fascist there, then next thing you know someone's going to trot out the N word. Fare enough. I agree and concede the point. sorry. I did not realize i was demonizing. Sincerely, sorry.

Careful what you ask for sirwoof! I think your definition drops an important point about fascism, coercion, and should be read as follows: Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers the individual subordinate to the interests of the state, party or society as a whole. Fascists seek to forcibly forge a type of national unity, usually based on (but not limited to) ethnic, cultural, racial, religious attributes, and to the detriment of any opposing views. My point is fascists force their point of view onto others. I really think your first definition can be used on either of the two major parties in the USA, but once you add coercion into the definition, and I think it is an element of fascism, then it does not fit to either or the American political parties.

1.) I don’t quite get your rhetoric about the Republicans being fascists. Perhaps you should investigate the meaning of fascism before using the label. 2.) I am not advocating that anyone should vote any way. I am merely pointing out the irony of how the so called ‘Democratic’ party uses Socialist means to choose their candidate. Cool your jets Benny!

I think we need to first establish some definitions. 1.) Democracy is a system where the majority of the people decide. For example we are in a room with a bunch of climbers and you walk in with a case of beer. In a democracy we can all vote to take away the beer from you. 2.) Socialism is a system where the minority of the people decides. For example we are in a room with a bunch of climbers and you walk in with a case of beer. KKK decides to take all of your beer and distribute it as he sees fit. Now, keeping these two definitions in mind lets look at the State of Washington ‘Democratic’ nominating process. First we are going to have an election where the majority can speak out, but it does not count. Instead we are going to have a caucus and choose delegate who will represent us, and finally, if we don’t get our choice then we are going to use a “Super Delegate” to decide the Democratic nomination. Which of the above definitions fits the ‘Democratic’ Parties nomination process? Thus, I call the wolf what it really is, Socialist. So tell me, what does fox news say?

Hey, look it is only my opinion and I am the first to admit I can be wrong. I don’t think I can make my analysis any more clear. The Socialist need to look more moderate and the GOP needs to keep its base. If asking if I watch Fox News was an attempt at a put down them I sorry to report it missed the mark.

Nope. I sure do not watch fox news. Why?

Nope, no one's marginalizing the Dems any more. We gave the Rs a shot at running the place and they compleeeetely blew it. So think again! I don’t think you understand my point. Allow me to try again. There are basically three power groups here. The far left, the Christian right, and the moderates. The far left is the most unreliable in getting out to vote, the Christian right is by far the larges and most influential. That makes the moderates most needed by the Socialist. The Socialist party must show itself to be moderate, and not a bunch of screaming Howard Deans. If the Socialist can do that then they have a good chance to win the Presidency. If they fail at this then they have no chance. If the GOP can stay together and placate the Christina right then they have a very good chance to keep the Presidency regardless of what the Socialist do. The choice both sides make for their VP’s will determine to a lager extent how they fill these goals.

If the Socialist put in a VP who is from the ‘Cut and Run’ mold trying to pull in the far left then they will only succeed in isolating themselves to the left; the socialist need to be looked as moderates in hopes to making the right look like they are extremist. I don’t think the GOP will choose either a women or a black as the VP running mate. It would look reactionary. I am not even sure CR would accept. The GOP is much too methodical for that. I don’t think having any link to the war on terror is going to be a minus. If the socialist try to use their rhetoric about her connection to the war on terror, then they, the Socialist, will be just making themselves look to be further left. The socialist can not afford to make themselves look any more liberal than they already are. So for the GOP maybe you are right and CR would be the best choice.

Um, SS, you do make some logical aruments and point out the error of others thought processes, but this time you are wrong. Absolutely, wrong. Try again.

I remember it used to be the nominee would offer the position to the person he (she) defeated they in turn would decline and then the party nominee would announce who his running mate would be. In the 1960 election was going to be our very own S. Jackson. When JFK offered the position to LB Johnson he, Johnson, accepted. IMO, I think for the Socialist party, AKA the demes, they need to try to make themselves look to be moderates. So Obama needs someone to like T. Kennedy, a fat ole white man. For the GOP they need to convince the silent majority, AKA the Christian right to get out and vote. If the GOP can get the Christian right out then they have a very good chance to defeat Obama. However, if the GOP does not pick someone who the Christian right will accept then the It is most likely the Christian right will put up their own candidate and split the GOP and the Socialist would win in a land slide. But then again, even if the Socialist lose they can always claim they are what the people really wanted so we should never have any elections anyway, just have a few ‘super delegates’, but that is a different topic.

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 Here, let me take that map and compss from you. I dont' know what a declination is, or how to read a map, but what the heck.

I had a flash yesterday, and wonder why I never thought about this before. I realized I do NOT have to point out others sins to them. I need to read the Bible and know what God saying to me and me alone. About how I need to change, how I need to correct my life. I have never walked in someone else shoe, and can not. It is a spiritual impossibility for me, and I should not try to. If God speaks to me through his word, that is to me. Before you rip Christianity perhaps you should check what God has to say about it; give up your preconceived notions based on other people’s mistakes and start by reading the Bible. Might I suggest starting in the New Testament with the book of John?

I think Pink and Minx are the same person.