New and experienced climbers over 50 #37
|
dragons wrote: Orienteering is a decades old relative formalized RACE. Lots of variants - night-o, ski-o, bike-o... The others are much more recent - more akin to fantasy QUESTS |
|
apogee wrote: I read the SALT article and my main takeaway is that NR editors are a bunch of assholes. It's no secret the states SALT applies to are donor states who pay more to the federal government in taxes than they get back even with the SALT deduction. Meanwhile low tax Republican states are welfare states who get subsidized through the federal government by states like California, New York and New Jersey. This has been going on for generations and is one of the reasons those red states can keep their state and local taxes low. The editors criticize SALT states for having high state and local taxes but don't criticize the red states for being welfare states. |
|
I don't know that the editors are 'assholes' per se, but they certainly show the same bias on facts and information as any other media source. Makes taking them seriously when they whine about media bias pretty hard to do, and reinforces the reality that there is no media source that is entirely 'unbiased', and it is entirely up to ourselves to round out our understanding. Edit to add: I listened to the NR Editors podcast for a while, and while I do appreciate Rich Lowry, I gained the impression that most of the other editors can be excessively dramatic in expressing their views. There is also the sense that NR knows their form of conservatism is clearly on the downswing with the GOP in recent years, and that they are struggling to remain relevant and heard in all the media noise. Probably explains why some of their stuff can be a bit hyperbolic at times. I wonder how William F Buckley would see this... |
|
apogee wrote: One thing that stood out to me from recent events is the way NR initially tried to muddy the waters about the Minnesota shooters political preferences. The way they did this was trumpeting the fact that Gov. Dayton, a Dem, appointed him to a nonpartisan board and then Walz reappointed him. This even though the guy was a conservative evangelical and strong Trump supporter. |
|
Emil Briggs wrote: Did you see the new biography of Buckley? |
|
WF WF51 wrote: I have not read it yet. My overall view of WFB is decidedly negative but he did try to use reason to promote his viewpoints. The current crop of conservative intellectuals is more like a bunch of monkeys throwing feces. |
|
I did watch this WFB documentary (there's another one out, isn't there?)- he was definitely a mixed bag of actions over the course of his life, but his role in conservatism in his era was pretty impressive. His smarmy attitude could be pretty off-putting, but his debating with forceful logic made him a formidable opponent in any discussion. Among the current NR editors, Lowry and Dougherty are reasonable to listen to (even if you don't agree with them), but Geraghty & Rothman often fit in the category of fecal launching hominids, with Cooke somewhere in between. In terms of reasonably rational conservative perspective, NR is about the only one out there- pretty much any other media source that is considered 'conservative' is just a cesspool of hyperbolic ranting and disinformation. The mushroom cloud of populist brainless thinking has eclipsed about everything out there. |
|
|
|
My dad was a hard core conservative who killed fascists in 1944 and 45. He usually thought that the govt was right and we should obey the law. He would be absolutely horrified right now. |
|
Emil Briggs wrote: The biography won't change your mind. |
|
Terry E wrote: Ah. It was the book by M. R. O'Connor |
|
Does anyone really think we are likely to bomb Iran? As usual, Congress isn’t showing any inclination to be associated with such a decision- maintaining such distance will save their political bacon when it went completely upside down. The decision is pretty much Trump’s- most of his MAGA base doesn’t want to be involved with such international entanglements, and then there is the well-established fact that TACO…he doesn’t seem to like actual physical conflict and wars in general. Seems like the likelihood of bombing Iran is very low, and his claims of ‘I might…or I might not’ are just the usual bloviation. If not for his childish impulsivity, this would feel much more secure. |
|
apogee wrote: I tend to agree with you that it's unlikely to happen. He enjoys being the center of attention but can get that just as readily from threats as from actual conflict with less risk of things going sideways. That being said he's deteriorating mentally at an ever increasing pace and, unlike his first term, is surrounded entirely by sycophants. So while the chances are small they're not zero. |
|
Alex Smith wrote: I’m with Alex. I seem to recall Trump was just a few months into his first term when he ordered the “Mother of all Bombs” on Afghanistan with a lot of bluster about how terrified Afghan forces (and civilians) were. During his early briefings wasn’t he overly inquisitive about using nuclear weapons? Also given his aggressiveness with ICE and immigration, I think he likes to be seen as the strongman.
|
|
But if we can just give the bombs to Israel and let them blow people up it won't make our hands dirty right? I wonder what our massive defense industry thinks |
|
I hope you are all wrong, and it wouldn't be surprising if it turned out that this has all been a(nother) Big Beautiful Bloviating Bluster. On the other hand, it wouldn't be surprising if Trump's erratic behavior resulted in going big, too. All of this chaos is exhausting. |
|
I seem to always get in trouble on Hunk Rock. I don’t know why but there’s always a white knuckle moment on an approach or descent. Now that I’m almost a professional stemming pro I wanted to check out this corner. I know there is a route here. Dihedrals are going to be my new Superpower.
|
|
M M wrote: You need planes capable of carrying them and Israel doesn't have those. I'm not an expert on the subject but from what I've read one reason Israel refrained so long from attacking Iran directly in an attempt to eliminate their nuclear facilities was because they knew they didn't have the necessary capability. The distances are large and the targets are heavily fortified. The one hope of success was getting the US to join in. |
|
California king snakes are beautiful snakes! |
|
M M wrote: This is a snake I desperately wanted to pick up, he was just so pretty. His skin looked like black and white velvet. |