ericb

Porter - what about this man's eye witness testimony (in the Mccain video) do you question? Do you think he's lying?

sounds like a man of character to me

how ironic, I remember hearing this argument before, like 8 years ago. How is that ironic?

can we instead make tasteless black jokes? I'm in. Let's not sink to their level gentlemen. I am sure we can ride off of the coke useage, shady realestate deals, slum lord buddies, flip flopping on the war, his anarchic pastor (whom he said he would never abandon... we see how long that lasted), his wanton disregard for the common man and for just being a smug bitch! The big question is, what attribute is more valuable in a president....character, or charisma. My vote's for character.

Ummm....just what ARE his accomplishments?

Great pants! - I love mine. IMO less extra fabric in the legs is a good thing as it lowers the odds of catching them with your crampons.

Haven't used my ski rack in 3 years!

I grew up with Boxers and my hunny grew up with Mastiffs. we are very familiar with bully breeds. i am not a fan of any dog being off leash. some don't need to be leashed but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be. but then i don't like other peoples kids to walk up to me either. they don't bite (usually) but it is still awkward. The bully breed dogs that i have known were absolutely docile unless they thought that someone in their family was in any kind of danger. I had no doubt as a kid that Lady would not let anyone in the house who would hurt me. yet my ritual with her every morning was to lay down on the floor in the morning so we could wrestle and she would lick my face. my mom babysat kids and Lady would just sit there when the kids would paw all over her and pull her ears. Mom mom ran with Lady every morning. she was well behaved on a leash and would sit by my mom's foot if any other dog was around. she was not very socialized and I think I will do that differently. I would like my dog to be more social. however, I will not ever leave my dog tied in front of a store, or at the bottom of a climb. that is not fair to the dog or the other people around. (I am really excited to get a dog ) So if you want a dog to play nice with the kids, get a lab. The question is what do you get with "pit" that you wouldn't get with less aggressive breed.....why risk it? Given the litigious nature of our society, are you really going to trust your family's financial future to a dog's ability to rightly judge "when someone in their family was in any kind of danger". The breed is not agressive they are protective. I don't care for Labs. Bully breeds are no more a risk than any other dog. they require training and like any other breed if they are too inbred they are more likely to no function well in society. as far as the protective nature of some breeds Mastiffs Boxers Pitbulls Rots and others, they were specificly bred to go to war (mastifs and rots) Bull mastiffs were bred to attack people who were tresspassing. It is in their breeding to know when someone is not suposed to be on the property. I am fully aware of how you and other uneducated people view bully breed dogs and frankly i am totaly uninterested. The only dogs i have ever seen attack inappropriately were not bully breed. one was indeed a black lab that nearly tore the face of it's owners child. so there. Muff...I'm hardly uneducated, but we can compare pedigrees via PM if you'd like. Agression is due to both nature and nurture....so my point was why would you want a dog that you had to train to not be a lethal weapon given all the other options out there. I've not yet heard a person list a strength of the "bully breeds" that isn't present in spades in other less aggressive breeds. Can you list some positive traits of pit bulls and will see if they are somehow unique? Once will biking down the Burke Gilman (at the park near bothel), I came upon quite a spectacle. Two pitbulls, apparently from the same litter, on a forked leash, in a death match, tethered together by the same leash that the frantic screaming sobbing owner was walking them with not 2 minutes earlier. Apparently something triggered a disaggreement, and they both "snapped". She tried in vain for 3 minutes to separate them while their blood was running all over the paved trail. Finally, after 5 minutes, someone heeded my advice (I might have stepped in myself but I was in bike cleats and not particularly nimble) and dragged the duo by the leash into the lake until they could no longer touch bottom and they had to separate or drown. Actually one slipped it's collar and swam to shore, and once secured, the other was carried in. I think they both lived, but it was pretty traumatic to them and everyone within a 300 yard radius. Every since, I've been pretty down on pitbulls. Of course, not all breeds have the wow value of a pit bull, but if you need a dog to look cool, you've got problems.

I've got a 97 civic with 150K miles. Other than routine maintenance, and one $200 CV Joint fix, I've not spent a dime on the car. Another thing to consider (if this is for climbing pursuits) is a secure trunk. My civic has a locking mechanism on the interior trunk latch and fold down seats so someone who breaks a window doesn't gain auto entry into the trunk and its contents. A determined thief could certainly find a way no doubt, but it does give a little added security if you are leaving it at trailheads etc. This is one reason I prefer a sedan over a hatchback.

I grew up with Boxers and my hunny grew up with Mastiffs. we are very familiar with bully breeds. i am not a fan of any dog being off leash. some don't need to be leashed but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be. but then i don't like other peoples kids to walk up to me either. they don't bite (usually) but it is still awkward. The bully breed dogs that i have known were absolutely docile unless they thought that someone in their family was in any kind of danger. I had no doubt as a kid that Lady would not let anyone in the house who would hurt me. yet my ritual with her every morning was to lay down on the floor in the morning so we could wrestle and she would lick my face. my mom babysat kids and Lady would just sit there when the kids would paw all over her and pull her ears. Mom mom ran with Lady every morning. she was well behaved on a leash and would sit by my mom's foot if any other dog was around. she was not very socialized and I think I will do that differently. I would like my dog to be more social. however, I will not ever leave my dog tied in front of a store, or at the bottom of a climb. that is not fair to the dog or the other people around. (I am really excited to get a dog ) So if you want a dog to play nice with the kids, get a lab. The question is what do you get with "pit" that you wouldn't get with less aggressive breed.....why risk it? Given the litigious nature of our society, are you really going to trust your family's financial future to a dog's ability to rightly judge "when someone in their family was in any kind of danger".

The sweating thing is definitely possible....the "breathability" aspect of a goretex boot lining is quickly compromised as the pores get clogged by dirt and oils from your feet. Also, it's possible that the outer fabric being wet allowed the boots to conduct cold more readily to your feet, making them feel wet. I had a pair of trangos, and scotchgarded the outer fabric to make it more water repellent to avoid this, especially since they aren't particularly warm boots to begin with.

Are they goretex....if so, are you sure that water made it's way into the boot through the membrane, or did it go down through the top of the boot?

I had a similar experience and it was my IT band.....look up the various stretches for it on the interwebs if you get a chance. Also, I bought a foam roller and give it a couple sessions a week.....haven't had any issues for a couple years.

Blake - I've got a WM Hilite, and the synthetic version of the MB - #7 ~ 50 degrees. I think the WM is a bit lighter that the MB down offering, but it's also cut fairly narrow (I've got broad shoulders), so not much room to move, and the stretchiness of the MB is really nice considering you are in an already close-cut bag. Also while I've not snagged/torn either, the shell fabric on the MB seems a bit more resilient, at least based on the touch test. I think you could see both of them at Jim Nelson's shop, and he'd have a more educated opinion.

We warned you about the scene in SLC, and you wouldn't listen. Now look at what your idea of "entertainment" is

I've got the Garmont Towers and love them, but they are a bit heavy to end up in the pack. Vetta Plus is a similar design, but lighter. I've climbed ~ 5.5 in the Towers pretty easily. Now that I've got a heavy duty pair of leather mountaineering boots, I wish I had the Vettas vs. the Towers. The only thing about the Vetta is they are still over 3 pounds....for a non-waterproof low-top, this still is a bit on the heavy side. Garmont also has a ~ heavy duty approach shoe out this year called the Dragontail....looks pretty cool, but too new to have any reviews, and I don't know what retailers in the Seattle area have them to try on. They are supposed to be a step up from the "Sticky Cat" in support and durability, which is good because I blew through the lightweight mesh on my sticky cat on the first day out.

Thanks for the tip on the guidebook, got it last week and have been thumbing through it....getting Psyched! Other questions to throw out there..... The book calls for double sets of stoppers for many of the routes, and says hexes work well. Thoughts? - should I bring the hexes? Also, what are your thoughts about the ratings at the Leap compared to say, Leavenworth or Index or J-Tree. We are trying to pull together a tick list of climbs, but want to make sure we're not overshooting our leading abilities.

have you looked at the Garmont Vetta?

I think that when people who have a set of convictions about supernatural beings, and they cite those convictions as the central motivation for actions or beliefs that range from straight-up madness to mildly unsettling irrationality - it shouldn't be surprising that folks who don't share those convictions criticize them and/or those who hold them. If you find a case of an atheist or an agnostic who openly cites his atheism or agnosticism, or the desire to champion either cause, or his intent to strike down the enemies of atheism or agnosticism - as the motivation for committing an act of barbarity or madness, or as the justification for persisting in a delusion that's completely at odds with the facts - then you'd have grounds for critiquing those beliefs and those who hold them, IMO. Does communism count? Granted, it's not really a person per se, but a country of like 1 billion people

And the tape gloves

Headed there in June....any recommendations for a good guidebook?

Not as much as you......that does not change the fact that I will NEVER lay a hand my children. KB....why doesn't it surprise me that you can't grasp the concept of discipline without corporal punishment?

You mean it's not just me?

Can you point me to these studies? I'm interested in seeing how in depth this has been studied. There is a *vast* literature available on this. "1: Drug Saf. 2004;27(12):831-40.Links MMR vaccination and autism : what is the evidence for a causal association? Madsen KM, Vestergaard M. Department of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, The Danish Epidemiology Science Centre, Aarhus, Denmark. KMM@dadlnet.dk It has been suggested that vaccination with the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine causes autism. The wide-scale use of the MMR vaccine has been reported to coincide with the apparent increase in the incidence of autism. Case reports have described children who developed signs of both developmental regression and gastrointestinal symptoms shortly after MMR vaccination.A review of the literature revealed no convincing scientific evidence to support a causal relationship between the use of MMR vaccines and autism. No primate models exist to support the hypothesis. The biological plausibility remains questionable and there is a sound body of epidemiological evidence to refute the hypothesis. The hypothesis has been subjected to critical evaluation in many different ways, using techniques from molecular biology to population-based epidemiology, and with a vast number of independent researchers involved, none of which has been able to corroborate the hypothesis." "1: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007 Dec;82(6):756-9. Epub 2007 Oct 10.Click here to read Links Vaccines and autism: evidence does not support a causal association. DeStefano F. Statistics and Epidemiology Unit, RTI International, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. fdestefano@rti.org A suggested association between certain childhood vaccines and autism has been one of the most contentious vaccine safety controversies in recent years. Despite compelling scientific evidence against a causal association, many parents and parent advocacy groups continue to suspect that vaccines, particularly measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and thimerosal-containing vaccines (TCVs), can cause autism." Etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, It might be worthwhile for you to look through the literature in Pubmed. If there are any journal articles that you find that you'd like to get PDF reprints of, shoot me a PM and I can send it to you via e-mail. JayB - are you a parent?

Can you point me to these studies? I'm interested in seeing how in depth this has been studied. JayB et al....one of anecdotes in this thread and elsewhere is that the those that choose not to vaccinate are either religious wackos, or paranoid ignorants gobbling up conspiracy theories. The irony is that one of the primary discouragers of the MMR vaccination is Dr. Sears, the father of attachment parenting (family bed, anti sleep training, etc.). His reason for not giving your infant the MMR vaccine is that, according to him, the probability of side effects from the vaccine are greater than the odds of contracting the diseases themselves. You can choose to agree or disagree with this reasoning, but it's still REASONing.