CWC01

Uh, maybe they will because the marketplace needs these skills and will demand it? Isn't this why businesses offer benefits in the first place? Can you give an example of an RN working 36--32--even 24 hours weekly who isn't offered medical benefits? My wife is in the medical field, and anyone working over 24hrs/week gets benefits. You are one stupid tosser, proving once again you know absolutely about the subject matter you are discussing. So let me enlighten your backward thinking sorry ass. After Reagan signed into law, anyone working 30 hours or more is considerate full time employee. Nurses work on mostly 12 hour shift schedule, so most of them work 3x12 hours=36 hours. Under current law, they have to receive benefit as FT employees. People who work now under 30 hours can receive benefits, but the contribution will be reduced. So what it will mean for me and my wife is simple fact, that republifuck assholes will force us to pay more then a double rate for the health insurance. So it's not about receiving benefits, but at what rate. May your waits be long, and injections painful. Why do nurses deserve special treatment over anyone else working a swing shift?

The war on vaginas

It's a rich culture.

I remember when Washington State first commuted Charles Manson's execution, what an example it set.

The economy has improved during the Obama administration but I can't really think of anything else that is better today than under Bush. My insurance has tripled, our government smuggled weapons into Mexico (Mexicans and a BP officer died) and then covered it up, the attorney general was held in contempt and then threatened by a federal judge, an IRS scandal, heightened race relations tension, etc. The parts of the government Obama actually has direct control over, or heavy influence, is actually in the shitter. But yeah, the economy is better so I guess we have that.

Water and a towel is torture and can't be tolerated. We should learn from other cultures. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/16/us-pakistan-school-idUSKBN0JU0JO20141216

Is that why you led with the gun related insults? Just a few seconds on gun control advocacy social media sites clearly demonstrates there is a vitriolic us vs. them mentality. Gun control is demonstrably about more than just controlling violence. do tell us what gun control is about. Being that gun control comes from voter mandate. (the feds are under the firm grip of NRA so there is no chance of gun control coming from big brother) what do the voters have as far as a grand scheme for gun control? Gun control advocacy media sites may not be a good resource for what the truth really is. One could call it a unbiased fact source. Any gun based vitriolic us vs them mentality is a story told by the people selling fear of "takin our guns away". Its just about plain old control. Gun ownership is a wedge issue and gun control is a plank of the left. Gun control zealots are as bad as religious zealots. SSDD.

You wish, Heller confirmed the right of the individual to bear arms. There hadn't been an individual mandate in 100 years.

Is that why you led with the gun related insults? Just a few seconds on gun control advocacy social media sites clearly demonstrates there is a vitriolic us vs. them mentality. Gun control is demonstrably about more than just controlling violence.

The easiest way not to get arrested for dope is to not possess said dope. It's not a hard concept...

The burden of being such a hero must be overwhelming, how do you do it?

In other words "It's not their fault". Like I said, thinly veiled racism of white guilt.

According to you, black people are victims of the police. When they burn down their own cities it is not their fault. However, whites are genetically privileged and don't know the plight of blacks and poverty. It's what you've been saying...

The thinly veiled racism of white guilt always strikes me as odd. It's as if you're saying minorities can't chose right from wrong. It's not very hard to figure out who had the largest impact in Mr. Brown's life.

Maybe police can starting doing field checks for maturity.

18 is an adult and Brown attacked a cop. Brown made a series of very poor decisions that led to his death. He alone is responsible for the outcome. The bar for a grand jury indictment is significantly lower than a guilty conviction yet the officer was still not indicted even with all of the social pressure.

I am sure you have spent a ton of time in a ghetto. You are speaking like a true expert. Newsflash- white kill whites as well. Wonder how the white america would react if a black cop shot an unarmed 18 y/o white guy? You don't have to wonder any longer. Black cop shoots unarmed white "kid".

Steering this back on track; Comcast actually has been doing this since 2012 in certain test markets. They're starting to broaden these "tests". Although amount of data supplied by ISP is not really the issue of net neutrality. It's how the data is supplied and at what rate it's supplied to the end user. Good points. My take on this whole thing is that the bandwidth providers don't want to make the capital investments necessary to handle massive amounts of additional traffic unless they can get paid to do so. As things stand now - there are a few sites that generate a massively disproportionate share of the traffic, and they've basically cut a deal with the cable companies to compensate them for the load they're putting on their networks. Under a model where consumers pay by the gig - this sort of deal-cutting isn't necessary since the amount of money they take in is more directly proportional to the amount of data they move. Actually, almost all consumers pay by the gig already and are capped, whether they know it or not. The real issue is that services like Netflix are interrupting the revenue stream of ISP's like Comcast who also sell cable subscriptions. Comcast intentionally slows Netflix because it has various financial interests to do so. The problem lies in the fact that internet subscribers paid for a service and Comcast (among others) is not providing it (stated bandwidth speeds). There are other net neutrality issues but Netflix/consumer-side is the easiest to understand. People and organizations are paying for a service and they are not receiving what they were promised. In my opinion it is fraud. ISP's should not be allowed to restrict service because it interferes with their other commercial interests. They are either an ISP or they aren't. Introducing the FCC into the middle I don't think helps, a good old fashion class action suit is probably a better solution.

Your summary doesn't seem to match the legislation. The legislation says board members acting as advisors are forbidden from reviewing or evaluating their own work. Maybe I need to be a scientist in the EPA to fully understand the magnitude but on the surface the legislation appears as though it is trying to reduce conflicts of interest. The entire legislation: https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1422/text

I can only imagine your delivery in person is as forced as your text. The fact that you even had to type this...

The political tide ebbs and flows and the electorate is fickle. In the wake of a local shooting, Washington was flooded with money from a private source (Bloomberg) and paid signature gatherers. This doesn't really reflect the popular opinion of the rest of the country (or even the PNW) and is normally pointed out with haste when the cause is from the right and backed by the Koch brothers. Of course, Washington isn't really leading anything, Seattle is pretty irrelevant overall. If draconian gun laws are your metric for "leading by example" then DC, Chicago, Detroit, New York, and all of California have you beat by 20 years. Your spin is entertaining. This country is pretty evenly split between the right and left with the center making the final decision. Time to answer the phone, 2006 is calling to welcome you to minority-party status for the next 8 years. 2014 [img:left]https://lawofmarkets.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/obama-map-of-congressional-districts.jpg[/img] 2006 [img:left]http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2006/housemaplarge.png[/img]

Perhaps something a little more definitive to what has been posted here and elsewhere. from the final rap station: -30m* cord will get you to the top ramp and easily down climbed. -40m cord will get you to the first ramp / belay stance for first pitch on north ridge approach. -50m+ will get you to the notch on north ridge. *Belaying the first pitch will be a bit more creative with less than 40m.

Very. They are cut short in the waist for a harness and fairly thin in the legs. I can't speak to their ultimate durability but I like mine in the dozen or so times I've worn them. The fit is what I like about them most among the features you listed. My only complaints are no double front zipper and lame cuff eyelets. I dropped mine off yesterday to have rivet eyelets installed by a seamstress.

Thanks, I've climbed it a few times but don't want to drag a 60m up again.

Anyone know the rap length for the final rap to get down? I thought I read it can be done with a 40m cord but want to confirm.