tvashtarkatena

Let it go, My Child. Your tonguelashing shrunk him to a microscopic speck, and he can no longer reach the keyboard.

Well, Porter, here's to new blood.

I think she got the site's general rythm down pretty fast....

I'm not bleeding...are you? I weep the Blood of our Savior from my palms and feet. COOL! can i watch? Yes, but there's a 'witness' fee.

I'm not bleeding...are you? I weep the Blood of our Savior from my palms and feet.

OK. Dararius; it's safe to show us pictures of your naked ass, now.

Are we done sticking branding irons into LA Girl?

Are we a loving, supporting tribe once again?

So has everyone calmed down and wiped the blood off their chins?

No, Seahawks claimed at one time that he was in his 40s, not that it matters. He just posts like a 5 year old.

Look, I don't know jack shit about your life and make no judgements whatsoever about it...just as you shouldn't about some crazy little LA chick. My point was this: What does YOUR life look like to her? It might look pretty unnattractive, because she's just looking at the crib notes, without the feelings, history, loyalties, growth, and gargantuan sex toys that make your life fulfilling. Same rules apply both ways. I guess I just have a problem with a bunch of adults ganging up on a kid, and, I'm sorry, but 20 years old is still pretty much a kid. Now somebody like Seahawks? OK, fuck him in the ass with a wheat combine. That's different.

If Muffy's life isn't a negative, why was my statement of simple fact a cheap shot? SHe's an adult, isn't she? I think you get my point. Muffy, nor anyone else, is ever in any position to dictate how another person, particularly one as young as this, should approach adulthood "just because they did it this way". It's always best to watch what's on our own plates and, if need be, rub it all over our crotches in a slow, circular, loving motion.

20 is an adult. like it or not. I was engaged to be married and fixing to have my first kid when i was 20. she is not very mature for certin, however she is an adult. You got yourself knocked up at 20 and you feel superior to this chick? OK. no not knocked up. I was planning a family with the man i was in love with. i made both of my babies on purpose becuase i do know how to use birth controle. My point is that your life; middle aged single mom with no college degree; provides no enviable road map for a 20 year old UCLA student. Think about that before you throw the next stone, girlfriend.

well i never looked good in the first place. yeah, if i thought proportianately that some 15 yr old we're being this freaky, yeah i'd call them out. fact is 20 is a couple years into college and/or the real world. most of the 20yr olds i know are aren't this fruitloopy. i'm not trying to make her look bad. i'm just annoyed by the fact she's a nutter. maybe i should feel sorry for her instead? Maybe you should feel nothing, rather than displaying a really shitty side of yourself over something that just doesn't matter. I mean, you're a scientist, for Christ's sake, and she's a loopy college student studying fashion. What, you want to prove how much better you are than her? A bit of an overmatch, wouldn't you say?

20 is an adult. like it or not. I was engaged to be married and fixing to have my first kid when i was 20. she is not very mature for certin, however she is an adult. You got yourself knocked up at 20 and you feel superior to this chick? OK.

If you think this chick is psycho, Minx, then you must not know any real psychos. She's a chat room participant, and practically still a kid at that; nothing more. Your reaction to her calves, thrift store purchases, and hahas is far weirder and, given your supposedly more advanced maturity, more unfortunate.

Minx, if this chick was 17, or 16, or 15 years old, would you be still be going at it with her like this? Just a question, cuz them ages aren't so much younger than the chick you're trying to make look small right now. Trust me, it ain't making her look bad, sistah.

I have to comment on your fashion sense and design abilities. Are you designing for prostitutes? Or are you designing to be more of an attention whore? I've seen a lot better asses than yours wearing heavy winter clothes. Maybe a bi-guy would want that boy ass. Please see the other butt posts for examples of really hot ass. And as someone else noted, you are tit-less. Are you a little rat girl looking for a bi-guy to do you in the ass? Looks that way to me. Regarding your original post. If you are serious, get the fuck out to a mountain and stop bitching. Man, you are so fucking boring that if I had to car pool to a mountain with you, I would throw you out of the moving car into oncoming traffic. God help the man or woman who ends up having bad sex with you. You are a mess... Jesus, you guys really have the pirhana instinct going here. Given that she's basically still a kid, it's kind of fucked up, frankly. I mean, Clavote, you can't really tell what her ass looks like, those aren't even in the same universe as ho-wear (what, do you rent a room in the Mormon Tabernacle or something?, and who gives a fuck whether or not she's got a certain required size tits? What about this loopy chick brings out the gutting instinct in you and Minx and company? What unfulfilled need does the meanness-without-any-attempt-at-humor satisfy? I'm coming away thinking that the real freakshows here aren't the ones posting pics of their fashion ideas.

I'm a Dr. Pepper man, but then, I've always been kind of a rebel.

More like a framework that is attempted continually to be codified. Our democratic experiment marches on with that document in flux of change and interpretation with each step. Your statement is bound to find support superficially, as most grandiose generalized campaign pronouncements. But, lacking specificity, it's a hollow parade float without mooring. It is in the interpretation where the whole of the matter resides. Well, I realize it's in your fundamental nature to be a prick so I'll just address your misconceptions. Yes, we all know that our democracy is a work in progress and that interpretation of the constitution is required. No shit, Sherlock. Recent presidents, however, have violated the Constitution in some very fundamental ways that should not be so subject to broad interpretation. This trend is definitely weakening the principles that define our democracy and eroding the rule of law; hence my 'monarchy' comments. The President's power to wage war is too great, for example. The Constitution is pretty clear it's limitation. The President should not have authority to spy on Americans. Again, the probable cause and unreasonable search clauses are clear on this. Detentions without due process provide another example of executive power leaving the Constitution behind. I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, have never seen him speak, and am not aware of his personal idiosynchrosies; in any case, they're irrelevant to my original comment, which spoke to his being a labeled a kook for his ideas, not his quirky behavior. I merely pointed out that many of our cherished 'mainstream' ideas have brought us disaster. This does not imply that all of Paul's ideas are sound (if they were, I might be a supporter...as I said, I'm not). Some of them, however, have merit.

Brutality is not what defeats insurgencies. On the contrary, it is more often brutality that fuels them. Academic studies of past insurgencies recommend a threshold troop to populace ratio and proper deployment. In the case of Iraq, these recommendations would require about half a million troops. Patreus did change deployment policies to bring them in line with these studies and achieved some positive results, but our troop deployment still falls far short of recommendations, as it has since the invasion. Still, the past is the past, and the world is dynamic, and Iraq insurgency is proving to be a different animal than anything in the past, so the studies do not provide a complete playbook. There are those who would argue, incorrectly, that brutality and torture are required to break an insurgency, but history proves that informants are much more effective in infiltrating such movements.

If it's a clean, straight line (couloir, clean rock, etc) you can pay out more rope between you to swing leads less often. If it's more zig zag, take coils and pay out less. Put as much or as little pro in as you need to to satisfy you and your partner's confidence level on the terrain. Use long runners to keep the rope drag down. If it's too chossy, you might be better off putting the rope away entirely rather than having it knock a wee giftie down on your second. I can't think of too much more you need to know.

If you're looking for the whole enchilada, climb the N face of Shuksan (30-35 degree snow/neve) and ski down the White Salmon Glacier. It's an amazing circumnavigation of a really oustanding peak, right in the heart of the range, with a reasonable approach (that time of year, anyway).

Why are those men wearing tops?

Anyone who espouses non-mainstream ideas is labeled a kook. Look where 'mainstream' ideas have taken us, however. Paul is a social conservative, and we differ 180 there, but he was prescient about the Iraq debacle and has been issuing accurate warnings about our spending/debt/economy for some time. I agree with his fundamental belief in a smaller, weaker federal government. The monarchy and the hegemony all monarchies necessarily seek has obviously been a complete botch. It's time to return to distributed political experimentation at the state level and gut the federal government, most particularly the power of the presidency. In other words, a return to a constitutional democracy as codified in that document.