bradleym

it is a sign of our lack of patriotism. you see, we 'liberals' hate america, so we criticize her, mostly unfairly.

Give it to them? How about Obama just not take it in the first place? How about nobody take it. lets just abolish all taxation. that ought to work out real swell, don't you think? is that what you are saying?

jeebus, not another useless strawman argument. this is almost as good as rats in uk hospitals. were you in the grade 6 debating club or something?

Remember, Bill! It's for the children!! And this bradleym guy seems way smarter than you and me, so maybe "Ron Paul" ( ) just isn't the correct vote after all. That settles it, I'm voting for the youth of America. After all, they had it right back in '68! Try again, Bradley. Ron Paul? You do realize he's not on the ballot. Right? I'm not smarter than you, but I am apparently more widely read than you are. On another thread, Mr Coe stated that he was going to write in Ron Paul. Thus while you are correct that Mr. Paul is not on the ballot, and I do realize that, Mr. Coe is going to vote for him anyway. Sorry. Hope you didn't roll your eyes so far that they got stuck.

Just wanted to extend my thanks for the beautiful guide you guys put together, and all the work you have done at Ozone. And congratulations on success in support of such a worthy cause. I wish I could have made it to the event itself--sounds like it was a great one!

Translation: "I think my guy is going to win, but if he doesn't then everyone else is stupid." Waaaaaaaaa. Once again, the mighty FW ignores the real discussion to focus on irrelevancy. How 'bout we talk about the weather underground now, or maybe Obama's muslim heritage? That should help.

This post is so fucked! To retreat into a position where you can claim later that you were right no matter what negative events should come to pass is hardly a positive contribution. I agree that it would be nice to have more 'real' choices, and my vote for Obama hardly qualifies me as an 'Obama lover'. I remain skeptical too, and will adopt a 'show me' stance as a Democratic president and a Democratic congress get to work. I'll be just as critical of their missteps as I am of anyone else. In spite of his lack of relevant experience, which I maintain is irrelevant because there is no relevant experience to prepare one for the presidency, Obama has shown all along, and continues to demonstrate, an appreciation for the subtleties and grey areas inherent in the challenges we face as a nation and a world. He is open to a full range of approaches to addressing those challenges, unlike his opponents, who prattle on about the dangers of socialism. In short, Obama represents an intelligence and a grasp of the problems we face that belie his supposed lack of experience. I actually prefer a candidate who can change his mind and shift strategies and policies. And lest we fall into the trap of supposing that the president is all-powerful, there remain substantial checks on presidential authority in spite of 8 years of darth vader. 30-odd years of deregulation and 'market-only' have helped us get to where we are today, and it is long past time to redress that. It is time to give up on the fantasy of 'small government' which hasn't existed in a long time and doesn't exist today. We are all interdependent, and we are a society of social beings, so a little 'socialism' might not be a bad thing. Why not take an approach that accepts and harnesses the benefits of markets, but also recognizes their dangers? So as you contemplate your vote for Ron Paul, think about that vote for Nader 8 years ago that assisted greatly in installing the current guy with all his 'experience' but the brainpower of a gnat, and then think about your college-age children and their eventual children, and what kind of world you want to leave to them. Voting for Obama is risky, but his demonstrated openness and intelligence and focus on the real issues show that voting 'no' or worse, voting for the republicans again, is even riskier.

Perhaps it means that the most economically coddled and intellectually challenged population on the planet have finally realized collectively (no pun) that whatever the benefits of market economies may be, that they are ultimately self-destructive and require both (real) oversight and (effective) regulation as well as government-sponsored 'investment' into society or the future becomes very grim indeed. I'm predicting Obama by a landslide, but I also retain a healthy respect for the myopia and stupidity of my fellow americans.

A lot of attention has focused lately on the fat cats in Wall St., but to be honest the majority of those working in the ny financial district are proletarians like yourself. I used to work on Water St., in a major bank, and I know a number of people of modest income/bonus who are being devastated by recent events. Most of them were paid significantly less than 6-figure salaries, and their yearly bonuses were unlikely to be more than 5 figures. They have children, mortgages, credit-card debt, just like everyone else, and their future looks pretty bleak right now. These people were not responsible for 'plunging the global financial system into its worst crisis since the 1929', yet they are the first to pay the price. None of them has a golden parachute...

I read this article earlier today. Its a valid argument if all you look at is peak-to-peak, and you never buy stocks at any other time (such as now), and if you measure only by some abstract index. It also neglects the effects of the compounding value of dividends, splits, etc. Kind of simplistic, really, and below the usual standard of the nytimes. But you are right, I could use some luck. I'm not that smart, though when it comes to the securities markets, most aren't.

One week later. Any hot tips? Hah! No hot tips, but here is what I have bought, at huge (and sadly, increasing) discounts: ATVI, TIE, FPL and MEA. Are they good deals at current prices? I think so. Could they go lower? Certainly, and have since I bought in. I have a little more cash, and can buy some more if prices keep falling. Will they become worthless? Unknown, but probably not. Will they be worth more in five years than they are today? Very likely, but there are no guarantees.... I'm also buying the S&P 500 (via a low-cost index fund) all the way down... If I can keep my job, and the market eventually turns around, then this is brilliant. If not, then it doesn't really matter, does it?

i bought on friday, then again yesterday, and i'm buying again today. as jp morgan once observed, 'the stock market will fluctuate', so i have no idea where prices are going from here. but prices are pretty attractive right now for good companies.

I just posted a full set of photos on my site. They may be seen here: Bidean nam Bian

is your last name Smoot or Hawley?

I was wondering what it would be like to go earlier in the year. Even in september there was quite a lot of water coming down. I found that staying on top of the heather was the way to go to avoid bog. the heather springs right back, as though you hadn't stepped on it, and it provides a firm foothold above the muck. It was quite crowded (maybe 50-60 people) when i reached the summit, but it appeared that only I and my comrade had done the arete loop. As I descended the standard route, I thanked my lucky stars I had taken a different route up. The standard route is a boring scramble up rocky switchbacks, through slag and scree, and it is as crowded as the Mt. Hood south route in May. Lots of wankers too. So I agree, definitely use that one only to bail, but not as your way up. Once you reach the lochan and head back into the glen under the main face of Ben Nevis, you leave the crowds behind. We stayed four nights in the Clachaig Inn in Glencoe, and I highly recommend it. Its about fifteen miles away, but it is a 'climbers' and walkers hotel, two stars, with great food and bars and a huge breakfast each morning. Get the 'Whole Hog' breakfast. Sausage, beans, tomato, bacon, black pudding, mushrooms and, of course, haggis...

Trip: Ben Nevis - CarnMorDeargArete Date: 9/23/2008 Trip Report: Climbed the UK's highest peak, via a route that relatively few people take, called the Carn Mor Dearg Arete, a knife-edged ridge connecting the Carn Mor Dearg to Ben Nevis. The weather was fine, a little cloudy and foggy. The views in all directions were spectacular. The route consisted mainly of slogging up trails, then bushwhacking through heather and moss, then scrambling over scree slopes and boulder fields. it was about 19k, and 1300 meters ascent and descent. Here are a couple of photos from the trip. A much longer account may be found here: Ben Nevis Climb Gear Notes: compassmapgpstrekkingpoles Approach Notes: northfacecarpark

only 286 to go...

Trip: Bidean nam Bian, Stob Coire nan Lochan - Date: 9/21/2008 Trip Report: Made it to the highlands, and went on my first hike / scramble, bagging my first munro in the process. it was sunny early on but the clouds moved in partway up. splendid nonetheless. here are some photos. first two are looking towards the A82 from near the summit of Stob Coire nan Lochan. the last is the summit of Bidean nam Bian, 1151 meters, my first Munro. not much of a view today. Gear Notes: boots, trekkingpoles Approach Notes: carpark, you can see it in the photos

evolutionary psychology.

I generally agree with what you are saying here, but i would warn against responding to extremism by allowing yourself to be pushed into an extreme position. someone earlier on this thread mentioned his view that free markets are generally a positive thing, and he was lambasted, which appeared a bit knee-jerk to me. given what we know about humans, (greedy, selfish, myopic), especially humans in groups, in my view the invisible hand is not such a bad guiding principle. unrestrained markets, however, or 'unfettered capitalism', bring out the worst, and are ultimately self-destructive. the past 150 years of economic history have demonstrated that. and the panglossian view that we live in a meritocracy where hard work and playing by the rules results in success, is a sham as the poster above pointed out. we don't all begin in the same place. societies (even our own) have recognized these facts of life, in spite of what their prevailing mythology might hold dear, and have developed various mechanisms to restrain the worst tendencies of free markets. they come in the form of such simple things as roads and common defense, on up to transfer payments and public education (wish we could get to public healthcare, sigh...), as well as active regulation of the various markets. republicans like to pretend that 'big government' is a tax on innovation and a hindrance to wealth creation, and for some it probably is. for society as a whole, however, such things represent necessary checks on the self-destructive tendencies of capitalism and, contrary as this might seem given the common mythology, they actually support and boost the economy. imagine an economy where all roads are private, for example, and then imagine an economy where workers are freed from worrying about employer-provided healthcare. there would be real and impressive economic benefits for all if that constraint were to be removed. it seems like a little rational thought should lead all reasonable people to these conclusions. if the field of economics were the only realm claimed by the republicans, then they would probably fail, but they have cleverly laid claim to, and boosted incredibly, the so-called culture and morality wars, which by their nature shut down rational thought. they have reduced all conversation to 'small government!', 'remove taxes!', 'socialism is evil!', 'national healthcare is socialist!', and other such specious junk. hence the guy driving from his hovel to his crummy job in a beat-up pinto, but with a 'W' sticker on the back bumper. go figure.... anyway, don't let their extremism push you into an extremist position. that is another of their rhetorical tricks, like cherry-picking, diversion and the deliberate confusion of assertion with real thinking.

from nytimes: 'On the campaign trail on Monday, Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, struck a populist tone. Speaking in Florida, he said that the economy’s underlying fundamentals remained strong but were being threatened “because of the greed by some based in Wall Street and we have got to fix it.”' actually, the greed goes all the way up and down the chain, and neither political party/candidate will call a spade a spade. its too dangerous politically. it is the greed of everyman, who bought a house he could not afford, or who refinanced to get cash out so he could buy the monster truck, the aluminum fishing boat, the new SUV with the bling wheels, none of which he could afford on his normal income. all wall street did was figure out how to satisfy everyman's greed, and with effectively no regulation and no adults in charge, it has come to this. but don't expect mccain or obama to point that out. it is always easier to blame the 'other', this time shadowy wall street fat cats. they are always available. everyman needs them, but hates them too...

i'm in deutschland right now, where the water is socialized, so i'm good.

isn't it ironic that all these years of 'free-market' sway, unfettered by 'socialist' or 'big-government' policy and regulation have now led us to the brink of the largest government intervention in history. chomp, chomp, ouroboros....

you really should read at least the review then of the book jay mentions - he goes through a ton of examples of where differences crop up between various versions of the bible and shows exactly how they were intentionally changed by scribes intent on solving specific theologic arguments going on at the time of the translation - interestingly, the changes required in order to push forward the argument were extremly minimal, oftentimes only a single word. try 'Book of J', a translation of portions of the pentateuch by Rosenberg with an excellent intro by Bloom. demonstrates well the disparate sources used to construct the various narratives, and delves into the differing motives of both writers and redactors.

You want to play semantic games? Fine, I'll go as far as to say that it's open to some interpretation. Regardless, whether she means "Bush is sending our soldiers on a mission from God" or "pray that Bush is sending our soldiers on a mission from God", the implications are equally disturbing. In either case it's explicit that Bush is acting or has the means to act according to God's Will. The sheer fuck-upedness of that in itself should make most people want to wet their pants. But it raises even more important questions about how and where democratic principles and practices enter into the picture with a world-view like that. As a woman of God, will Sarah Palin then be acting in accordance with God's Will? As simply as I can put it, I don't want someone's personal understanding of their God and his/her/it's Will imposed over what should be (has supposedly been designed to be) the open processes of democratic governance. When politicians claim to be acting in accordance with or claim they want to act in accordance with their (remember us, the ones that don't believe in your God, but are citizens just the same?) God, they place their beliefs and their policy decisions above their duty to represent all of us. Not just the 51% dumb superstitious clucks that elected them. Is that clear enough? Any of this ringing a bell? High school civics? Liberal democracy? Hello? if your real reasons might not add up, or they clearly stem either from a desire for personal gain or from a simplistic view of how you wish the world worked (but doesn't), then you just invoke the almighty and the discussion is at an end. that usually works, especially in this country.