Bosterson

Ok. As I said before, this shooting is not really a political issue (unless you're talking about gun control) because the kid was clearly suffering from some sort of mental disorder and wasn't acting out party politics of some kind. But you threw down that gauntlet, so I thought I'd take it up out of curiosity. I don't know much about Ted Kaczynski, and I turned to Wikipedia, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here. But that said, wasn't he an anarchist of some kind? He doesn't appear to be at all associated with "leftist" politics, unless you're implying that environmentalism is by default leftist. (But that'd be silly. Environmentalism in its true form should not be a party issue; it just becomes one due to its connection to government and regulation, where party lines split.) Describing Kaczynski's manifesto (italics added): Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with the shooting in Arizona.

I think you're misusing this word... You must be confusing this with corporate America...

Dude, the Elizabeth Ann Duke thing happened like twenty years ago. Not so relevant to the current climate of anything... And if that's your point, I completely agree with you. Contemporary US politics are retarded on both sides. However, political polarization and politically-motivated violence are different things. Just so's we're clear.

Also, as enlightening as it is to debate over which political party has more violent rhetoric, it's about as relevant as the more general discussion post-shooting about political rhetorical vitriol in general. That's a totally legitimate subject (why is political rhretoric so vitriolic right now, and why do we stand for it?), but doesn't really have that much to do with Saturday's shooting (as the details stand now, at least). The kid seems like he had some serious mental illness issues going on. I am interested to hear more about that once the details are released. That kind of thing transcends political party affiliation and really makes the politics irrelevant to any discussion of what happened. Yes, he may have targeted a politician (a highly visibile target, it should be said), and he may have discussed issues relevant to politics, but he also made nonsensical Youtube videos about mind control. The political vitriol makes a good story, but as some Tea Party founder said on NPR (and loathe as I am to agree with anything he'd say), you can't blame Sarah Palin for this. He also noted that one of his neighbors was killed in the shooting, and really, no one is discussing the other victims in detail. It was a tragedy for a lot of people, not the least of which are the ones who weren't politicians or judges or 9 year old girls. If we insist on turning this event into the genesis of a political discussion, what is relevant is how this obviously unwell kid got ahold of a semiautomatic Glock in the first place...

Did you read the article about the crimes she was accused of? This is the first sentence. (italics added) Again, explain to me how property damage and murder are equivalent in any way.

Everyone has "condemned" this attack, though do note that most politicians have lead their statements with the words "I am horrified" (note the prominence of the first person singular), and then continue with what could be summarized as: Eric McDavid??? Rob, are you really trying to convince us that damage to property (industrial/environmental sabotage) is the equivalent of murder?

Well played, sir: "You can't prove anything, and neither can I, so you're wrong!" So neither side can prove anything, therefore I am wrong? hahahahaha, I hope you see the irony as clear as I do in your post. No dude, what you quoted was me restating what you'd said. If you'd bothered to quote my next sentence, I said that the rational, non-conspiracy explanation seems pretty well proved. Stop being retarded.

Well played, sir: "You can't prove anything, and neither can I, so you're wrong!" Actually, from what I've seen, the "plane flew into building and it collapsed" explanation is pretty well supported by video footage, photos, eyewitness accounts, laws of physics, etc. I thought you were talking about wool? I don't think "but what if it had been a conspiracy" is a convincing argument to people who were educated past preschool... Also: I would like to see someone do a study that measures the correlation between people's beliefs in retarded 9/11 conspiracy theories and their levels of implicit racism towards poor, brown Muslims from other countries. Cause seriously, a bunch of dirty towelheads punked the greatest country in the free world? No way, brah. Must have been a government conspiracy!

Loose Change is just about the dumbest movie ever: college kids with too much money and free time set out to "debunk" 9/11. Hijinks ensue.

The 911 Truth movement is like the Flat Earth Society for the 21st century.

Just so we're clear, I do not think there is any store in town that, if you bought someone a jacket as a gift, and they tried it on and it didn't fit, and the tags were still on it (since tags do not inhibit trying a jacket on), and they hadn't decided to wear the jacket to the grocery store and back just to make sure it was ok (since jackets do not fit better outside the house than in), that store would not be happy to accept a return of that jacket and give you your money back or credit or whatever. That jacket would go right back on the shelf for the next person, as it was still new merchandise. What we're talking about is buying a jacket and wearing it for a few months and deciding it doesn't fit, and then deciding that somehow the manufacturer must be at fault and returning that jacket and expecting to get your money back. Caveat emptor. Dude, in no world is Eddie Bauer/First Ascent "local." All the FA stuff is made in China, which I would assume is at least partly why it's so cheap. And if you want good deals, why not shop at OMC where pretty much everything is on sale? Also, w/r/t China, remember back in the day when Arc'teryx stuff was actually made in Canada, and people were willing to pay a premium for that? Well FA is sort of like the anti-that: high end cheapness, looks fancy but cost pennies to make. They're like the Mad Rock of the outerwear market. Also, for the record, I do not think REI "sucks." REI is REI. It's a big box outdoor store. It has good gear for some common outdoor pursuits - it's not Big 5 or GI Joe's or whatever the generic "outdoor" (read: hunting) store is these days. But REI is not a specialty climbing shop, and of course they don't carry super specific climbing gear (though it seems like an ice screw holder would imply ice screws...) or stuff from small companies that don't have the brand presence of TheNorthPataMarm'teryx. (Though employees in the climbing section who've never heard of Smith or Squamish? WTF?) We should be glad for this. It's why small climbing shops are still in business.

Actually, this one is tricky because I think from the perspective of liability they have to do this. Climbing softgoods aren't like other equipment in that you die if they fail. It's too bad they can't give that kind of thing under the table to their employees, but if the harness turned out to have been used and ended up failing, they'd probably still be liable... (It's the same problem with food companies being liable for sickness caused by unsold food they gave away for free. Our good samaritan laws haven't caught up yet with sensibility and conservation.) BTW, took me a sec to figure out what the hell a "dead bird" harness was. I like it.

I don't think anyone here is against warranties per se. Things break cause they're badly designed or cause there was a manufacturing error or whatever. I am totally in favor of companies warrantying their stuff within reason. (Though note that those kinds of problems really should go to the manufacturer, not to the retailer. Most good manufacturers already have reasonable warranties for their products, which makes retailer warranties like REI's redundant. If everyone who had a problem with their gear had to contact the manufacturer and send it back, the dishonest/exploitative returns would get weeded out pretty fast... Also note that no non-retail companies - ie, the manufacturers who sell their gear to REI to be resold - offer the kind of 100% satisfaction guaranteed warranty we're talking about. I'm ready to stand corrected on this if anyone knows of one, but can you imagine a climbing shoe company saying something retarded like "We GUARANTEE that everyone will love this shoe, it will fit everyone's foot, everyone will be able to climb 5.14, etc., or your money back!"??) I think for the purposes of the discussion we've been having about return policies, what we're all talking about is the sketchy returns like people who return climbing shoes for new pairs when the rubber wears out (never saw that coming!), or this woman at Patagucci who returned a $200 cashmere sweater she'd been wearing because it made her "look old." Truest statement yet.

If Chevron started giving out free gasoline, that still wouldn't mean we'd be better off driving as much as we wanted. REI's return policy is not some sort of mistake that we're "taking advantage" of - it makes them money, and there are economic, environmental, and social repurcussions for that. One can have an opinion either way about whether or not it's a good thing, but we consumers are the ones who ultimately condone it or not. If it continues to exist, we are the ones who let it. Taking consideration of this is called being a responsible consumer.

@DavidW - amen. Also: most gear (esp. textiles) are made overseas where labor is cheaper. I used to work at a store (starts with a P- and ends with -atagonia) where there was a similar no-questions-asked return policy, and we did indeed have people trying to return fucking 10+ year old clothing (someone returned - I shit you not - some Chouinard clothing!). That kind of return policy is practicable because for them - a retail store, as opposed to wholesale, like REI - anything they're selling in the store is priced 4 times as much as it costs to make and put on the shelf. Even at REI, all those jackets and sleeping bags are sewn by Chinese people who get paid a pittance of our minimum wage. If gear were made in USA, the labor prices would be astronomical and 1) people would not be able to buy gear on their every whim (no Arc'teryx jackets for soccer moms), and 2) no company would actually be able to have a 100% satisfaction return policy. Gear would either be repaired when necessary, or -gasp- would be made properly the first time around. Dishonest returns would be denied. Another problem with 100% satisfaction return policies is that they're sort of a nuclear arms race between competing stores - how many people shop at REI (which, as we've established, has an ice climbing section with no ice screws) because they want to be able to return anything at any time, vs shopping at a small store that can't afford that kind of policy? The Cascade Climbers-type crowd (ie, real users) may not defect to REI, but all the casual users will, and then with the customer base gone, the small shops go out of business...

Your CL post is expired. What's the Marmot bag? (If it's not a current model, then what's the fill, bag weight, etc.)

I find that the EB First Ascent stuff fits really weird. I'm a medium in most men's stuff, depending on the brand and the cut (eg, Arcteryx fits perfectly, some Patagonia stuff is tight in the shoulders, etc.), and the medium First Ascent jackets are *really* tight under the arms and through the lats, which makes the sleeves ride up the arms and is otherwise very constricting. The large, however, is *still* kind of tight under the arms (manageable, but still not perfect) and baggy everywhere else. I would definitely go to a store and try their stuff on before you buy any of it online. Also, their line is kinda new, and I haven't heard a lot of long term reviews, but I'm suspicious of the durability...

Never used - still in the box with tags attached. Sort of blue-gray color. $40 Local pickup in Portland.

I'm going to be traveling through Washington for a few days next week en route to Missoula, the Tetons/Yellowstone, and eventually Chicago, and was wondering if anyone knew good free car camping spots (BLM land is fine) somewhat proximal to I-90 in the general Snoqualmie Pass or Cle Elum area.

I would give 3-4 days in Yosemite, Bishop, and J-Tree. Two of those are national parks, and if you're going to pay the $20 to get in, get the most for your money. Plus, why would you climb somewhere crappier when you could be in the best climbing spots in the state? Note that there's no water inside J-Tree (unless that's changed in the past few years) so fill up in a convenience store in town before you enter the park. If you're going up the coast and you feel like bouldering and you like sandstone, go to Castle Rock (about 45 min NE of Santa Cruz).

Cut is different, as I recall. The Cap 4 is way more fitted. I'd want the R.5 as a super lightweight midlayer piece to wear on top of a baselayer on cold-ish days when you want something warmish but not too warm because you're moving.

Men's medium, color not so important. I've been kicking myself for years for not picking one of these up back when they made them.

Anyone in the Portland-ish area have a hangboard or some old climbing holds they don't want? I'm facing the possibility of a knee injury that might require surgery (going to the doctor tomorrow to find out!) and if I'm going to be immobilized, it'd be good to have some holds to play around on in the basement just to keep my body occupied. Thanks!