RiverViewer

Very cool! Your threads always rock...how much longer do we get to have them? Your offices are moving, aren't they?

Great touch with the kid in the shot...does he belong to you? I can just imagine how cool it would be to have that shot if you were that kid, especially if you ended up living in Chicago or something!

That building is the Eckert. Used to be a hotel, and is now apartments. A good friend lived in the 1st floor unit on the right. Had 14' ceilings...interesting about the retail...

Definitely a great thread idea - though a depressing one...that is a grand house...

Depends on what your musical tastes are...I think it's fantastic!

^To be completely honest with you - so do I! That doesn't mean invading every dysfunctional unstable state in the world - diplomacy, economic pressure and incentives, etc. - there are lots of methods. All of which are made infinitely more effective by the credible threat of force.

I'm sure it will be a pedestrian-friendly urbanist auto lot!

^Looked at in the context of other wars, this has been remarkably, amazingly well-executed. There's really no comparison. Just look at Washington in New York during the Revolution, or the Canadian invasions during the War of 1812, or the Red River campaign during the Civil War, or Belleau Woods in WWI, or Guadalcanal in WWII, or the whole first month of the Korean War, etc., etc., etc.. But the overall goal was extremely ambitious - rebuilding a country after decimating it for 12 years. It's never been a sure bet, and still isn't - but I've always thought it was worth the risk.

Snapped a picture of the building this evening:

^I doubt it. The recorded highest point is Campbell Hill, at 1,549 feet above sea level. http://www.netstate.com/states/geography/oh_geography.htm Everything in this area ranges between about 600 feet above sea level and 900 feet above sea level. So to be taller than Campbell Hill, Mt. Rumpke would have to sit on top of the tallest peaks in the area, and then stick up more than 600 feet above it...

I'm a fan of NOTL, but that's because it caters to me in a number of ways, and its shortcomings don't affect me: 1) I can walk there from Walnut Hills - it's a long walk, a couple miles, but it's downhill, through the parks, over the bridge...it makes for a fun hike with my wife, great for a beautiful day. Then dinner, a movie, drinks, and a cab home. 2) It's got a variety of food. Not a huge variety - but enough that you can get pizza or fish or a burger or pasta or Turkish or sushi or just a smoothie and popcorn with ice cream afterwards. 3) It's got a big-ass bookstore. Few things are as engaging as a big-ass bookstore, chain or no. Great way to kill time before the movie. And its shortcomings: 1) Not a great variety of retail - and I couldn't care less. A bookstore's all I need. 2) Not a lot of bars - and I couldn't care less. Everybody's got Maker's Mark, and everybody's got ice. I just want a quiet corner to chat with my wife or with friends while getting lit. 3) Things close down early - but so do I. You aren't going to see me out whooping it up at 1:30 in the morning - I'm normally smoking when I'm out, and I don't smoke often enough that it doesn't really take it out of me, so I'm normally winding down early. All that being said, it's still just an occasional thing. I prefer downtown for a night of dinner and drinking, no doubt. But for me personally, I'm very pleased it's there.

Here's what it says in their FAQ: Question: Can I take my own pictures? Answer: For everyone’s safety, especially those down below, we do not permit climbers to take their own cameras on the bridge climb. We do take great photos for you though and each person gets a complimentary group photo. We are happy to take additional photos for you, just ask your guide.

Yeah, no cameras. I'm sure it's for safety - gotta keep your hands free. They'll give you a picture of your group on top of the bridge, though - yeah, ooo, great, thanks.

^Or a credit card advance fee. It's a banking fee, like any other. And while I agree with you, that it's a rip-off, I've certainly been in situations where the rent's due, and I didn't have the jack to pay it. Luckily, I've had friends and family I could go to for a short-term loan, but if you didn't, this wouldn't be an entirely unreasonable way of getting the cash. And from the payday advance place's point of view, they need to charge high enough fees to make up for the money they lose when someone skips on the debt. That being said, the folks who run them do make a ton of money - the fees don't have to be that high. And places that roll loans over are effectively accruing interest at the rates decried - which is why many states have laws against rolling them over. But unsecured loans always have high fees - that's just how it works. Go to a bank and get a signature loan, and you'll pay 15%+ interest. This is really no different, except that at least here, the interest stops on the date on your check.

I just got the Seeger tribute album today. Only listened to the CD, so I haven't seen any of the DVD stuff (yet), but yeah, it's great. The "My Oklahoma Home" live is far better than the album version, but the "Oh, Mary, Don't You Weep" on the album is just top notch. Old Dan Tucker, Erie Canal, Pay Me My Money Down - fantastic. Hmm...looking at the track listing, "This Land Is Your Land" doesn't show up on the DVD either...is that just from the concert, or did he put that tune out somewhere else?

Yeah, good janitors are only appreciated by the folks who do the hiring, and people with allergies!

You walk in on a Saturday, write a check for, say, $175, and they'll give you $150 in cash. They'll hold your check until the next Friday and deposit it then. When you fill out the paperwork, Truth in Lending laws require that they show you what that fee is, in terms of an APR, and they often work out to being 500%+; but that's deceptive - it's not an APR, because interest doesn't continue to accrue on the debt at that rate. It's a fee. If your check bounces, and you don't pay it back for a year, you're not going to have to pay back $750 or something - they'll collect $175 on you. Your "effective APR" has dropped below 17% - that's better than a lot of credit cards. So the consumer is informed of the effective APR - how many of them understand what that means, that I don't know. But really, it doesn't matter - I'm sure they fully understand that they're writing a $175 check, and they're walking out of there with $150 in cash. That's very straightforward.

Look, all of this is like a peeing contest..."your anonymous hate-mailing morons are more vitriolic than ours!" "No, ours are far less offensive than yours are!" I hope folks can see how 1) right-wingers are more likely to be exposed to the extremes of left-wing hate, and vice-versa, 2) each group's subjective perception of that vitriol is going to be influenced both by what they've seen and whether they're the ones being attacked, and 3) the whole debate is nothing more than a distraction - at the very least, it's entirely non-productive. Responsible voices don't do things like call all Liberals unpatriotic. Honest, they don't say that, it's a false charge. There may be letters to the editor, I'm sure there are blog posts, and obviously there's hate mail that claims otherwise - but that ain't what I think, it ain't what folks I read think, and I wouldn't support someone who thought it. Yes, Anne Coulter is full of vitriol - and I don't pay attention to her, because I'm simply not interested in what she has to spew. Another fallacy this brings up is the implication that somehow the individuals who support a policy are a good means by which to judge the wisdom of that policy. Sure, if Pat Robertson is all gung ho for some policy, I'm going to give it a second look, because my "don't trust this" antennae will be vibrating...but really, if someone poses the question, "lots of hate-filled morons think building a border fence is a good idea - what does that tell you about the wisdom of that policy?", the answer is, "not much at all." Whether we should build a border fence is a policy question that should be answered by considering the security risks of not having one, the humanitarian implications, the geopolitical impact of building it, the costs, etc., etc. - it's not a question that should be decided based on the psychological impact the loss will have on those who disagree with you. I'm excessively liberal in most all things - of the Wilsonian liberal strain, the non-isolationist strain. I favor the war in Iraq in exactly the same way I favored Clinton's war in the Balkans - the same way any Truman Democrat would support both. I don't think that makes me a hate-spewing gay-bashing oil-hungry racist demogogue; and neither does it make those who disagree with me into America-hating anti-family leftist communists. But the point is, even if I were a hate-spewing gay-bashing oil-hungry racist demogogue, it wouldn't change whether the policy was wise to pursue or not. That's the risk we all run, of conflating the arguer with the argument. And so, coming full circle...I understand, there are some really hate-filled folks out there: I've seen a lot of those morons coming after righties; and with this, we see such morons coming after this 15-year-old. OK. And? And this means what, exactly? We should change our foreign policy because Bush's supporters include some idiots? Is that really a wise way to approach foreign policy?

...yeah, that's Cleveland, Memphis, San Antonio, Phoenix, Milwaukee, Indiana (beat by the team that got beat by the team that won the finals)... And the Cavs/Pistons was the only Eastern Conference series to go 7 games. Everyone else won or lost in 5 or 6...

^Yeah, you shot me down there.

I think the etymology is from toasting someone. It's positive...if someone is "the toast of the town," they're important and respected and folks are all agog over them. So the Toast of Pittsburgh would be a superlative and appreciated thing... At least, that's what I think he meant!

Say, Monte, maybe we should put together a mini Summer Meet - see if ColDay will lead us on a tour of Spring Grove with an eye to park design, then maybe a thorough Northside tour, and see where it all goes...

I definitely don't support the senders of hate mail on either side, Anne Coulter included. And further, I resent the implication (not by you, X, but by this 15-year-old) that I do. And I'd bet you'd find that the same is true of most folks on both sides of the debate. And furthermore, I'd observe that she's rather unlikely to accomplish much of anything, if "winning the debate" is her goal - one does little to change minds by asserting that your opponents' arguments are summed up by the anonymous rantings of illiterate hate-mail senders. I should clarify what I was saying above - the arguments of anyone, a 15 year old or a 50 year old history professor or a Senator or anyone, should be weighed on their merits. But the opinions of learned professor, or a Senator, or an expert in the field, should be granted more weight than the opinions of a 15-year-old who hasn't even finished high school. I don't think that's a knock on them personally, and I'd happily entertain their arguments - I'm just not going to consider their judgements to be as likely to be founded on a wise, patient consideration of the facts.

The content of their arguments, I've got no problem with that. Let's look at this one...nearly 100MM Americans are represented by the hate mail received by a 15 year old. Yeah, I change my mind.

^They can have all the opinions they want. One just has to decide how much weight to give them. And if you're 15, you don't know shit about shit, and you can opine all you want, but I'm sorry, I'm gonna have a really hard time giving a shit.