Jim

I thought lightweight boots were fine off the glaciers. I wish I would have taken some items for camp dinners, lightweigh stuff like bean flakes or such to supplement the staples that we found available. That said, we bought all our food down there for trips up to 12 days. Some were not the greatest. Maybe someone has been there recently and has a suggestion for purchases? Fuel - we just used white gas.

Well, just a preference. I was there for several months and if I had only two weeks I would explore one park. But that's my bias - I'm the slow and savor type. I hate barnstorming travel.

But they did have really spiffy bikes and bike clothes!

Here's an odd one. I went mt. biking with friends yesterday at Devil's Gulch. Rather than ride up the road or the trail, and then ride the 12 mi single track down, several carloads were doing a shuttle. That's leaving a car at trailhead and then driving the 11 mi dirt road to the top and riding only the downhill. So you drive from seattle to coast 12 mi downhill? Weird.

I would agree with Taylor above, the back side of the Paine circut was ok but you're out in the valleys away from the peaks. His suggestions to explore the interior valleys is much better. But don't ignore some day hikes around the big lakes looking for guanacos. A hike up to see the Moreno glacier is worth it. You would be spread too thin to try and get to both of the big parks in two weeks. We met some nice local in Puerto Natales, but it's a pretty small place. Great small town to sharpen your Spanish skills. Pick up "Trecking in the Patagonia Andes" if you haven't already - it was useful Have fun!

While some of the aspects of the law are a bit dubious (banning grenade launcher attachments?) the ban does limit the capacity of magazines. All law enforcement agencies want the ban to continue and see it as a good effort. Doesn't seem such an imposition to me for an odd weapon type. And Greg - you semi-auto shotgun does not come under the definition of this law - correct?

Gimme a break! This is rich! GW played on his family's name to get into Yale and Harvard, and to get in and out of the guard safely. Of course he got an honorable discharge as a free lunch pass. It's very simple, he signed saying he would fullfill his obligations, the paper trail obviously shows he did not. And he lied about it. To think that his powerful family ties played no role is naive at best.

Do you have your absentee ballot yet?

from commandpost.org

Your spinning Greg. If you had an argument you would not be so annoyed.

Ah, so now we're reverting to the "everyone else was doing it" excuse. I agree with the Scotsman that wasting so much time on this who is the better commander crap and not talking about more important issues is lame. On the other hand the Bushie camp came out swingging with the slimy swift boat issue because Rove felt that he had to attack Kerry's war status. So it's very hypocritical for Bush, who had Daddy's connections give him a free pass into and out of the Guard, while less connected folks, working class kids I went to high school with, got shipped off. Some did not make it back. When such a chickenhawk makes a big deal of the other guys record he deserves all the scrutiny he gets. He signed on and didn't fulfill his commitment, was grounded for his absence, but - surprise! - never disciplined.

A little light on the cockroaches and they scurry away.

link

This is an excellent example of the GOP talking points. When painted into a corner with facts about the dishonesty of your guy - yell Clinton!! Clinton!! It's a great distraction. But funny, I don't see him on the ballot this year.

Hey Greg - Bush handed over his complete files. There is no record of any offical approval of his going AWOL. The Bush camp says this is all the files. Now if there was an offical ok, don't you think Carl Rove would be able to find it? Gimme a break. It's obvious he got special treatment and bailed on his commitment. C'mon Greg - even you have to admit this is pretty lame.

And Bush's "files" include no special dispensation, no early discharge papers, and the Whitehouse spokesman can do no better that say he was honorably discharged. The puffy guy in the flight suit bailed on his contract with the armed forces - went AWOL. Why is it that this administration is so full of chicken hawks - those that went AWOL or got 5 deferments (Cheney).

Oh yea. I'm sure there is a "logical" reason why he got special treatment for going AWOL.

Seems with a little digging the proof is there: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/08/bush_fell_short_on_duty_at_guard/ In February, when the White House made public hundreds of pages of President Bush's military records, White House officials repeatedly insisted that the records prove that Bush fulfilled his military commitment in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War. But Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation, a Globe reexamination of the records shows: Twice during his Guard service -- first when he joined in May 1968, and again before he transferred out of his unit in mid-1973 to attend Harvard Business School -- Bush signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a punitive call-up to active duty. He didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment, the records show. The 1973 document has been overlooked in news media accounts. The 1968 document has received scant notice. Seems he didn't meet the commitments he signed up for, did not get called up for active duty, and faced no punishment. Born with a silver spoon up his nose.

Interesting that during the RNC I don't recall hearing the name "Osama bin Laden" mentioned. Seems we forgotten about him.

I think the DHS has mandated that all such bad guys be referred to as "Evildoers"

This one of your more silly posts PP.

Don't go messing up the conversation with logic!

Son of Easy O - 8 Cascading Crystal Kalidascope 9 Doug's Roof 11 Bonnie's roof 9? Modern Times 10? Welcome to the Gunks 10 Three pines direct 9 Directismma 10 Great lower moderates that will stack up well to anything in the west. High Exposure 6 Shockely's Ceiling 6 High Corner 7 Horseman 6 Disneyland 6 Excellent place to be in the late summer/early autumn

I kinda doubt it. Eating small fish, spending all that time flying back and forth to the old growth from the ocean every day to feed youngin's. They're probably kinda stringy and smaller than a pigeon.

Greg - you're being simple-minded again. If you had a clue regarding the scientific issues involved I'd continue the discussion. Read the murrelet report and then give me a rational argument. Don't just stomp up and down and claim bias for an analysis you can't comprehend or disagree with the results based on nothing but opinion. Otherwise it's just arm-waving like the Bushies. One other minor point. The Bushies went outside their federal agency for the first time for an objective study of the data. We gave it to them and they still didn't like the answer.