T1B

You know Mikey, you'll be driving through Adirondack Park which is pretty nice for the U&R and it's bigger than Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, Glacier & Everglades combined.

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:You know Mikey, you'll be driving through Adirondack Park which is pretty nice for the U&R and it's bigger than Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, Glacier & Everglades combined.

He might also want to pack a parka and long underwear. The temps have been known to drop into the low 50s some mornings.

Mikey wrote:but we had a 2 year old and a 4 year old with us and they hadn't been weather-hardened yet.

Ahhh... ya see, I haven't blasted any slapshots through wifey's 5 hole yet, so I'm not qualified to speak on any children related topics. I will have to take your word for it, I guess. You get a pass... this time. :brad:

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:You know Mikey, you'll be driving through Adirondack Park which is pretty nice for the U&R and it's bigger than Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, Glacier & Everglades combined.

Yeah, I've been hoping to have a chance to enjoy some of the scenery in there. I'd been thinking of stopping overnight somewhere in the Adirondacks and do some walking around and whatnot, but the OL is in more of a city to city mode on this trip so most of my wilderness sightseeing will mostly be of the drive-by type.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:

Mikey wrote:but we had a 2 year old and a 4 year old with us and they hadn't been weather-hardened yet.

Ahhh... ya see, I haven't blasted any slapshots through wifey's 5 hole yet, so I'm not qualified to speak on any children related topics. I will have to take your word for it, I guess. You get a pass... this time. :brad:

Dragging along young kids has a tendency to put a damper on a lot of things. Like stopping off the side of a deserted road and climbing in the back seat with the OL. BSMACK will learn about these things pretty soon.

...

Mikey wrote:Yeah, I've been hoping to have a chance to enjoy some of the scenery in there. I'd been thinking of stopping overnight somewhere in the Adirondacks and do some walking around and whatnot, but the OL is in more of a city to city mode on this trip so most of my wilderness sightseeing will mostly be of the drive-by type.

If you can only stop in one place in the Adirondacks, make it Lake Placid.

My brother lived in Keene Valley for 10 years, so I've become very familiar with the lay of the land out there. Here's a few things to do.

• *Take a ride on the Olympic Bobsled run- http://www.orda.org/newsite/todo/summer/bobsled.php
  *Have lunch on the deck of The Cottage on Mirror Lake- http://www.mirrorlakeinn.com/dining-cottage.cfm
  *Visit the site of the Miracle on Ice- http://www.orda.org/newsite/togo/museum.php
  *Drive up Whiteface Mountain- http://www.whiteface.com/newsite/summer/highway.php

Oh, and if you are bringing your golf clubs, I've got some course recommendations if you like. I've either played or heard about most of the courses in the Placid area.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:...

Dude... fucking RACK!



Sin,
JACK

smackaholic wrote:She was being circled by a few wolfs who were apparently trying to have her cubs for lunch.

Question for the Westerners -- what do you suppose the odds are that the Eastern greenhorn's "wolves" were coyotes?

Dunno.

All the coyotes around here are too busy escorting Mexican nationals across the border to worry about a bunch of bear cubs.

Dinsdale wrote:what do you suppose the odds are that the Eastern greenhorn's "wolves" were coyotes?

Are you saying there's no wolves in Yellowstone, Marlin Perkins?

No, not at all, GoGrabThatRhinoJim.


What I'm saying, is that a green-assed northeastern dweeb that thinks driving around the Midwest in a beater motorhome is fresh wouldn't know the fucking difference.

Big shaggy dog, right?

And there were WATERFALLS.

I mean... we're talking about a guy who thinks a 10% grade is steep.

Dinsdale wrote:GoGrabThatRhinoJim.

Watch here as Jim "accidentally" falls from our helicopter as we're flying over a lion's den in Southwest Kenya. Check out the amazing footage of my brave companion fending off these hungry beasts. Have you ever seen flesh being torn from bone in such a savage manner? My name is Marlon Perkins. Thanks for joining us on another episode of The Mutual of Ohama's Wild Kingdom.

smackaholic wrote: Being black bears, poppa bear was nowhere to be found, ofcourse.

Fuck you.


If you can take the time to post these, you can uplink a sampler of the photos you've gotten on your camera. And you better have some decent sunrise/sunset photos. Fucking prick.

Dinsdale wrote:No, not at all, GoGrabThatRhinoJim. What I'm saying, is that a green-assed northeastern dweeb that thinks driving around the Midwest in a beater motorhome is fresh wouldn't know the fucking difference. Big shaggy dog, right? And there were WATERFALLS. (remainder of jealous sniveling deleted)

What, you can't bogart in with a personal life experience stories of having one's eyes bathed in majesty?

The best joys are the unexpected joys. I'd imagine it would be a joyfully humbling experience to witness how Nature transforms the beautiful into the ethereal.

Risa wrote:

smackaholic wrote: Being black bears, poppa bear was nowhere to be found, ofcourse.

Fuck you.

Oh, shit -- I missed that first time through.


RACK!

Dinsdale wrote:Oh, shit -- I missed that first time through.


RACK!

My Nogsweeper needs to be recalibrated. RACK Annie for reposting that funnay.

Risa wrote:The best joys are the unexpected joys.

Yeah, like logging on one morning and finding that you’ve been banned, you tedious cunt.

Dinsdale wrote:

Risa wrote:

smackaholic wrote: Being black bears, poppa bear was nowhere to be found, ofcourse.

Fuck you.

Oh, shit -- I missed that first time through.


RACK!

Obviously Smokey the Bear was not a black bear, what with the “Don’t play with matches” thingy.

mvscal wrote:

Risa wrote:

smackaholic wrote: Being black bears, poppa bear was nowhere to be found, ofcourse.

Fuck you.

Truth hurts, doesn't it? Deal with it.

If men -- in general -- wanted to be around their children, there'd be no such ancient stereotypes as the shotgun marriage and the 'ruint woman', and men's contraceptives would be far more cutting edge than women's. Running away from the consequences of unprotected sex isn't a black thing, it's a people thing. Men just have an easier time of making that run.

Slightly off-topic, on a website far, far away....

youwantsome48 wrote: this girl want to have my kid and we just met

all right ive never done this before but this is what happend
i met this girl shes like 20 but we started hanging out and
talking and she told me she wants to have a blonde haired
blue eyed kid well i have green eyes and blonde hair she has
brown hair and green eyes well she asked me the other day
if i would sleep with her and pretty much impregnate her
she said that i didnt even have to be there for the kid that
the kid would be totally taken care of

So what do you think i should do im really confused about
the whole thing so any advice would HELP THANKS.......=)

I think it's a joke, but then again, why even joke about some shit like that. And then I think about the story told a long, long time ago by either Tiger or RIK or one of the southern doctors here, about the tall, mud covered young inbreed coming in with mother hillbilly to get edumucated about birth control. So it's possible.

Mikey wrote:Dunno.

All the coyotes around here are too busy escorting Mexican nationals across the border to worry about a bunch of bear cubs.

You ain't never told a lie :? meanwhile, said coyotes and nationals are trashing national parks and forests and turning the pristine into garbage dumps for plastic, metal and cloth refuse, human bio waste, rusted out cars, and unburied dead bodies.

Risa wrote:Running away from the consequences of unprotected sex isn't a black thing, it's a people thing.

Although there's a modicum of truth there, a simple look at actual statistics would make your point rather laughable.

Dinsdale wrote:

Risa wrote:Running away from the consequences of unprotected sex isn't a black thing, it's a people thing.

Although there's a modicum of truth there, a simple look at actual statistics would make your point rather laughable.

Post them.

mvscal wrote:

Risa wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:
Although there's a modicum of truth there, a simple look at actual statistics would make your point rather laughable.

Post them.

Out of wedlock births:

Black - 68%
Hispanic - 45%
White - 24%
Asian - 15%

Bullshit. That adds up to more than 100%.

Sincerely,

Rhesus in NM

mvscal wrote:Out of wedlock births:

Black - 68%
Hispanic - 45%
White - 24%
Asian - 15%

Out of wedlock is not the same as a man not being around. It just means that, for whatever reason, two people are not married to one another. Those numbers (which you need to provide a URL for, according to RadioFan's prior mod edict) mean less because they are not paired with cohabitation rates.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/lifestyle/ ... tion_x.htm

"People want what marriage signifies: that sense of 'us with a future,' " Stanley says. "But because of the high rates of divorce for the past few decades and many other circumstances, including decreased rates of marriage, there is really a crisis in confidence about the institution of marriage."

.......Stephanie Coontz, author of Marriage, A History: From Obedience to Intimacy or How Love Conquered Marriage, says such a view is common because couples look at marriage as an ideal.

"For many people, marriage is now like the best relationship, and is highly valued as a relationship," she says. "It's 'Wait until we know the relationship is good and solid, and we'll get married.' "

I can't find the study that was in the papers a couple months ago, about white children coping worse than black children when Mama is a serial cohabitationist.

Mama has a man -- or several men. These women are not alone, otherwise so many of them wouldn't have multiple children. Sometimes those men will be positive father figures to those children. Most times -- because it takes a special man to be a bonobo instead of a chimpanzee -- step-fathers who want to be that father figure have to deal with the delicate line of 'how much authority am I allowed when this child is not my blood?' Mothers don't help, or don't know how to help.

And then there are the guys who are only there for the poontang and a place to stay. They're 'there' physically, they're just not there where it matters. They're pad crashing, basically.


So: what is marriage? what is wedlock? what is illegitimacy? Is the child who is receiving child support payments from a man who never married mama illegitimate in the same sense as the child whose father is married to mama, but father is never around?

Just shut the fuck up already, you tedious, race-baiting cunt.


Children in single-parent families, by Race: Percent: 2005

Definition: Children under age 18 who live with their own single parent either in a family or subfamily by race.

United States

Non-Hispanic White 23%

Black or African American 65%

American Indian 49%

Asian and Pacific Islander 17%

Hispanic or Latino 36%

Total 32%


http://www.kidscount.org/sld/compare_results.jsp?i=722

Brutally outstanding.

Rack it.

Goober McTuber wrote:Just shut the fuck up already, you tedious, race-baiting cunt.

http://www.kidscount.org/sld/compare_results.jsp?i=722

Thank you for the link.

Footnote: Updated December 2006.
The data for this measure come from the 2000 and 2001 Supplementary Survey and the 2002 through 2005 American Community Survey (ACS), a special nationwide survey of 700,000 households that the U.S. Census Bureau conducted monthly during each calendar year. (The 2000 and 2001 Supplementary Survey used the questionnaire and methods developed for the ACS.) Use caution when interpreting estimates for less populous states or indicators representing small subpopulations, where the sample size is relatively small. Beginning in January 2005, the U.S. Census Bureau expanded the ACS sample to 3 million households. The ACS, when fully implemented, is designed to provide annually updated social, economic, and housing data for states and communities. (Such local-area data have traditionally been collected once every ten years in the long form of the decennial census.) The data for this variable--like all data from the ACS and the supplementary surveys--reflect annual averages of monthly data. On the ACS, the question regarding whether a person is Hispanic is separate from the question asking whether a person is white, black, Asian or Pacific Islander, or American Indian. Thus, people are asked to indicate whether they are of Hispanic origin and then in a separate question are asked to select a racial group. A respondent can identify more than one race group. Race/ethnic groups represented in this table are not mutually exclusive. The category of white includes only non-Hispanic white. The categories Black or African American, American Indian, and Asian and Pacific Islander include both Hispanic and non-Hispanic. Those in the Hispanic or Latino category include those identified as being in one of the non-White race groups.Single-parent families may include cohabiting couples and do not include children living with stepparents. Children who live in group quarters (for example, institutions, dormitories, or group homes) are not included in this calculation.

Like I said, the Hispanic listing fucks up a lot of shit. That's the one thing the Aryans got right. But they usually say it because they think adding Hispanic numbers in makes Anglo Whites look worse.

Perhaps you can explain, why the only group which does not include both Hispanic and non Hispanic........ is non-Hispanic white?

Also, why are cohabitators -- which doesn't break down into serial cohabitators and long-term cohabitators -- listed as single parents... when there are indeed 2 adult people living in the household? Does that not need to be placed into its own category?

mvscal wrote:http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a83/Ma ... ds_day.jpg

I can't believe you stole a photo from Major Private. Major Private. Of Bitter White Trash Central, romper room. Please. Anyway, I'll take your improperly titled photo, and raise you this little joyous number from last spring's 'protests':



Where are their Daddies?

You remember this, don't you? http://dailypundit.com/?p=10220 (off topic: so many, and none of them can catch up with a fat black kid. Sad.)

Risa wrote:Perhaps you can explain, why the only group which does not include both Hispanic and non Hispanic........ is non-Hispanic white?

You want me to explain why the group labeled non-Hispanic white does not include Hispanics? Maybe because it would no longer be non-Hispanic?

And keep trying to spin away from what you know is the truth. Why don’t you fire up google, and search for single parent households by race. Let me know if find anything that remotely supports your point without the benefit of your race-tinged spinning, you tedious cunt.

Goober McTuber wrote:

Risa wrote:Perhaps you can explain, why the only group which does not include both Hispanic and non Hispanic........ is non-Hispanic white?

You want me to explain why the group labeled non-Hispanic white does not include Hispanics? Maybe because it would no longer be non-Hispanic?

But including Hispanics in what's usually designated as the non-Hispanic Black category is Kosher? I don't think so. Blacks are not Latino, just because both are brown. Hell, out here in New Mexico, blacks have always been categorized as Anglos by the old family Latinos/Spanish and Indians.

So why allow non-Hispanic white a purity of inclusion that's not given to non-Hispanic black, let alone Native American, Pacific Islander and Asian?

The numbers are bullshit. Throw in cohabitators being counted as single parent homes, and there's a problem here.

I take a vacation and come back about the same time as Annie. How can a travel (PET) thread by smackaholic turn into shit? How can Bsmack's baby thread turn into shit?

I'm not going to give up the posters name, but the poster sent me a message not long ago that this was going to happen. Fucking dude is the next Karnak. Give him his own TV show, a white turban and a box full of envelopes.

I'd ask a mod or an admin to clean the shit up but it is like Roto-Rooter cleaning up after Katrina.

Amazing.

Rip City

You can blame that fat slob smackaholic for this whole abortion of a PET. A PET with no photos just invites this sort of thing.

Luther wrote:I take a vacation and come back about the same time as Annie. How can a travel (PET) thread by smackaholic turn into shit? How can Bsmack's baby thread turn into shit?

I'm not going to give up the posters name, but the poster sent me a message not long ago that this was going to happen. Fucking dude is the next Karnak. Give him his own TV show, a white turban and a box full of envelopes.

I'd ask a mod or an admin to clean the shit up but it is like Roto-Rooter cleaning up after Katrina.

Amazing.

Rip City

Nah, it ain't that hard. Just split off the parts that aren't relevant.

Risa wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

Risa wrote:Perhaps you can explain, why the only group which does not include both Hispanic and non Hispanic........ is non-Hispanic white?

You want me to explain why the group labeled non-Hispanic white does not include Hispanics? Maybe because it would no longer be non-Hispanic?

But including Hispanics in what's usually designated as the non-Hispanic Black category is Kosher?

Psst. I believe that including Hispanic Blacks will improve the numbers for Blacks. You just might want to shut the fuck up now.

Luther wrote:I take a vacation and come back about the same time as Annie.

Amazing.

Rip City

Coincidence? I think not. Luther, please shit-can your Risa troll.

Luther wrote: How can Bsmack's baby thread turn into shit?

Because BSmack was involved?

For myself, I think the troll pile-on is pretty funny. There's one of those "taking a smack board too seriously" lessons in there somewhere.

Mikey wrote:You can blame that fat slob smackaholic for this whole abortion of a PET. A PET with no photos just invites this sort of thing.

At least he isn't using canned internet photo's of the places he's been to like m2. Bsmack's photo keeps reminding me of the movie, "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" where Dustin Hoffman looks at dirt mounds and sees the next contact with aliens or whatever. Maybe smackaholic doesn't have a picture hosting site, or maybe he's too busy.

I watched "RV" with Robin Williams the other day. Maybe he's going through that.

Rip City

BSmack wrote:Nah, it ain't that hard. Just split off the parts that aren't relevant.

I thought that was SOP in the first place? :?

Dinsdale wrote:

Luther wrote: How can Bsmack's baby thread turn into shit?

Because BSmack was involved?

For myself, I think the troll pile-on is pretty funny. There's one of those "taking a smack board too seriously" lessons in there somewhere.

Or more like a 'shit reindeer troll = dinsdale' lesson to be applied in there somewhere.


Let the thread be split. No big deal. Smackholic gets his Archive. The rest is the rest of the story.

Well, this isn't Jellystone but it is a "travel" picture and a small donation toward getting back toward smackaholic's travel thread. I took this a couple of weeks ago when I went to the beach at Depoe Bay, Or. I stayed at the Surfrider Resort with my son while Mrs. Luth and Lil Luth were in Hawaii. It was one of those split family vacations since I lived in Hawaii for 3 years.

Anyway, I was walking up to the bar at the resort when I saw all these people standing around the edge of the cliff next to the rooms looking out at the water. People had their camera's etc. and I heard little kids saying, "Whales, whales..."

Before I had left Portland I had accidentally left my nice Canon and the telephoto lens downstairs, so all I had was a small digital that has seen better days. It was a backup camera that I took to Israel and I had dropped it there and it just doesn't work as good as it used to.

Anyway, Orca's were feeding about 35 yards off the beach, just below my room and the deck. I'd see water/air being shoved up through their blow hole and I tried to capture two whales blowin' at the same time. Voila.

Rip City

Luther wrote:I heard little kids saying, "Whales, whales..."

In Depoe Bay, eh?

I usually hear that more when I go to Tillamook, and it's weird -- I'm not even on the beach when I hear them exclaim that.

The mailing address for the resort is Depoe Bay, but it is actually to the north a few miles. Sadly, this beach ain't worth a shit to walk on. Kind of like walking on gravel where you tend to sink down and the walking is tough and painful. Every morning there would be this chubby chick down there with a golf club fashioned into a scoop so she could pick up small rocks. She said she made jewelry...

There were these large rocks just off the beach where the waves would crash up on them during high tide...but overall this beach was meant to "look at" rather than walk on. Many times I heard kids telling their parents, "It hurts to walk on this sand..."

On Wed. and Sundays the resort serves prime rib. I had ate fish for a couple of days and when Wed. rolled along I tried the small cut. Just sat at the bar, had a cup of decent chowder, prime rib, baker and about a half dozen beers. Watched the whales... I also noticed EVERY day that large groupings of kelp seemed to linger in the bay just off the shoreline. Strewn along this stretch was kelp and those bulbous things that kids freak out at. I asked the bartender if the kelp is just a "seasonal" occurrence or did it happen all the time. He said, "the cove keeps that shit here all the time, unfortunately."

So for Mikey and the other Californians who want to travel up here...you might want to forget it. Nothing to really see here except bulbous kelp balls and crap sand. The water is way colder than your SoCal waters. Hell, we just had a couple of kids rip-tided out to sea just the other day. One made it back and the other is Orca food.

And like Dins said, we don't really have sun babes up here. Just chunky chicks with no dental insurance. Pretty sad deal, really.

Rip City