rob

I heard that sometimes people smoke pot in the Muir hut, is that true?????

Sounds like you agree with me. IN GENERAL, Conservatives tend think rich people got there because of their own hard work, or at the very least that they deserve their good fortune. And certainly I've met enough rich people to know that hard-work is definitely the secret-sauce for success, but also it requires a certain amount of good fortune that many people are simply born without. Many of our most successful entrepreneurs would have been miserable failures had they been born without certain advantages. So many people are born with an amazing legacy which conservatives tend to discount -- they associate personal success with financial success more than I think is appropriate. Had I been born to a completely different legacy with different parents and different values I may have ended up one of those guys begging at a freeway on-ramp. Republicans tend to assume all americans have equal opportunity, and therefore rich people deserve their good fortunes. They tend to assume that the poor are there because of "their own poor choices." They tend to believe that merit and personal ability are the deciding factor for success. It's a cute idea, and I hear you and other conservatives make this argument ALL THE TIME, so it's amusing to hear you reject it while basically confirming it at the same time. Additionally, conservatives tend to be much more likely to assume the poor are simple "milking the system" and are more likely to use words like "welfare moms" and tend to be more distrustful of public assistance. This is because they think that success is defined by one's actions. In a large degree this is true, but not as much as they think. Conservatives also tend to refuse to accept that our capitalist system ensures that there will always be poor people. But of course, this is true. After all, the majority of people -- by definition -- cannot be above-average. If everyone were rich, nobody would be. I would much rather see conservatives admit that our capitalistic system ensures a certain percentage of underprivileged wage-earners but attempt to argue the poor are better off than in other economic systems. But, that would assume a level of non-bias that you just don't see these days.

+1. any kind of oxygen-based detergent is the way to go with synthetics. I wash A LOT of lycra. "SportWash" works really well, too, but I think it's basically glorified oxyclean.

The basic premise all of the OWS types seem to agree on is that the wealth distribution in America is totally unfair, and that the disparity is intentionally perpetrated by the rich against the poor. I think it's a fair argument. But that's why your conservative friends hate it -- conservatives wrongly assume that rich people got rich on personal merit alone, and that "anyone" could do it if they only worked hard enough. To conservatives, poor people tend to be lazy, dishonest and stupid whereas the rich are hard-working, honest and industrious -- that's why they're rich and the poor are poor. It all makes sense to them that way.

That's what the mullet is for

also, it helps if she's actually interested. Dragging her along because you want a "climbing girlfriend" may not work if she's not so inclined. But if she IS so inclined, then it should be fairly simple to introduce her to it.

God, can you even imagine having a girlfriend who was into all the same activities you were? I mean, if she had her own group of friends, I guess it could work, but what if you introduced her to it and she loved it but all of her climbing friends were your friends? How would you ever get any air? Is it just me? Better be cautious.

Obviously, the answer is EPO and testosterone. Why do you even have to ask?

Regressive corporate shill!!!!!

Yes, but FOR FREE!!!!!

For example, they could put windmills on electric cars so that they could charge themselves while they drive. Simple! But of course the auto companies will never go along with such a simple solution because they're all in the pockets of big oil.

your mom's exciting

FREE ENERGY!!

Following all your posts on this tread; you seem like a spoiled brat. Nah, he just sounds "sensitive." I suppose we all have our quirks. For instance, I'm extremely selfish and ungrateful.

My parents never hit me, but my brother sure used to beat the shit out of me. But, now I'm bigger than he is and I've got a hot girlfriend, so it doesn't bother me anymore. See what I'm saying?

dude, sounds like you need to fucking get over it. Are you going for the chip-on-both-shoulders "balanced" approach or something? If I whined about all the bad shit that's happened to me, my balls would have shriveled up and fallen off long ago. That's what happens, you know. I only say this because I care. sickie

It's not kevbone's resistance to spanking that people were making fun of, it was his insistence that it's bad to make children do things they don't want to do or force them to follow rules.

That's your fantasy? My fantasies are always more x-rated.

You're next! ;-) One down, one to go

God, they got all old and fat, just like the Pixies.

Oh, also no regulation of the pharmaceutical industry. lol. GO RON PAUL!!!!

Still, at least things are not as bad as they would be in a Ron Paul administration. Can you even imagine? No regulation of the banking industry, no regulation of the stock market, no regulation of the environment -- it's like a corporate wet dream.

awesome link, thanks. I'm not sure I can even give the ACLU any money anymore after the citizens united debacle.

I've been hit by cars a few times, now -- once while jogging on the sidewalk. I've never been hit by a car whilst climbing, however.