Jim

How about 50 billion flip flops? http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/05/13/iraq.spending.ap/index.html

Ecologists are way cool.

The ambassador and the general were briefing me on the -- the vast majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and we will bring them to justice." --GWB Washington, D.C., Oct. 27, 2003 ""

I think the title is supposed to be humor. The text of the article is well writtten and logical. It's a good summary of the GOP attack-dog style these days of attempting to discredit anyone who points out the effects of policies or provides a viewpoint that is an alternative to theirs. Rather than discsuss the merits of the policies they go for the throat and character assassination . Expect more of the same in this election year.

Jeez- you could walk from anywhere in Seattle to downtown in 3 hours. Where are you commuting from, outer Magnolia? Sounds like the perfect candidate for a bike commute.

Our office is pretty casual and ecologists are no fashion plates so my attire is not a problem. However these ideas may help. It's good you have a shower. Roll clothes instead of folding. If you have to do the suit thing I have no suggestions since I never wear them. One guy in our office brings a few days worth of clothes into the office on the one day of the week he drives to the office. But you at least need a closet to hang clothes. Keep your office shoes at the office in the file cabinet If there's no place to dry a towel then bring a plastic bag for transporting it home. If there's no place to hang smelly bike clothes then do an easy spin into work and go a long loop home for the workout. Ask about getting a clothes rack and wire shelf in the shower area for clothes storage. Another option, but more expensive is joining a gym with lockers nearby the office and storing stuff there.

I get kinda bus sick when trying to read, the damm bus is alway so friggin hot and no one else seems to mind so I'm the one who has to ask the driver to take the heat off stun level, I have fallen asleep and missed my stop by a half mile, and then there was the time a baby threw its food in my hair. I ride most of the time.

Come on now. Not all bikers are idiots; same goes for vehicle drives. Seems to be enough dunces spread among various sub-cultures. Except those chicky-doodles from Bellevue or Mercer Island in the Excursions - a high rate of incidence there.

Most every day it's not hosing, and some when it is, all year. Beats the bus and parking costs! And I get to take the 40 mi loop home in good weather - like today!!

Lots of stories about that ascent. Actually it was welders gloves - as I heard it from Largo himself. But then again that may mean nothing from that story-teller.

It is? Then you shouldn't have any trouble finding me hard facts, not just hints and stories about IRCRC reports. Hellooooooooooo: The Red Cross report from a year ago is factual. It documented quite a number of serious problems at the prison. CNN had a minor blurb on this about 6 months ago and said the army was "investigating". You're flailing oh young one and embarassing yourself.

I've used two Gibbs ascenders. It's just about impossible for the rope to come out of those give that cotter pin backup. But just in case I've used two. I've weighted the rope with a pack and that has worked fine. That said - I would much rather go with a partner but it's adds variety to just bouldering.

Again? We didn't the first time.

Scary eh?

Three years ago, Mark C. Rutzick was the timber industry's top lawyer trying to overturn fish and wildlife protections that loggers viewed as overly restrictive. Back then, he outlined to his clients a new strategy for dealing with diminishing salmon runs. By counting hatchery fish along with wild salmon, the government would help the timber industry by getting salmon off the endangered species list, Mr. Rutzick wrote. Now, as a high-ranking political appointee in the Bush administration who is a legal adviser to the National Marine Fisheries Service, Mr. Rutzick is helping to shape government policy on endangered Pacific salmon. And in an abrupt change, the Bush administration has decided for the first time to consider counting fish raised in hatcheries when determining if some species are going extinct. The new plan, which officials have said is expected to be formally announced at the end of the month, closely follows the position that Mr. Rutzick advocated when he represented the timber industry. (05/08/04) New York Times

i·ro·ny(plural i·ro·nies) noun 1. humor based on opposites: a type of humor based on using words to suggest the opposite of their literal meaning 2. something humorous based on contradiction: something said or written that uses sardonic humor

What we do know is that the International Red Cross documented abuses over a year ago and submitted their report to the Defense Dept. Nothing much was done. Defense kept the information to themselves and didn't report to the Senate Armed Services Committee, which they should have. Defense Dept. classified their investation report to keep it out of circulation - which goes against their own guidelines of only classifying information regarding national security and/or sensitive diplomacy, not to keep the information out of other sectors of our own government. They realized they had a problem, but from their standpoint it was a PR one and they just tried to keep the lid on it, which is typical for this administration.

............great spokesman as he never really says anythig.

Nothing personal. You went from the Gomer sophmoric thing to the anti-semitic baiting thing, back to a sophmoric comment about Amy Goodman. I'd say that's a wide swing in two posts.

You keep bringing up new subjects in this thread when your old ones get trashed. Usual

Kinda like that. The little brown people (unlike us white Americans) have a tough time with democracy. Here's the full column. Oh? Who? Appearing Friday in the Rose Garden with Canada's prime minister, President Bush was answering a reporter's question about Canada's role in Iraq when suddenly he swerved into this extraneous thought: "There's a lot of people in the world who don't believe that people whose skin color may not be the same as ours can be free and self-govern. I reject that. I reject that strongly. I believe that people who practice the Muslim faith can self-govern. I believe that people whose skins aren't necessarily -- are a different color than white can self-govern." What does such careless talk say about the mind of this administration? Note that the clearly implied antecedent of the pronoun "ours" is "Americans." So the president seemed to be saying that white is, and brown is not, the color of Americans' skin. He does not mean that. But that is the sort of swamp one wanders into when trying to deflect doubts about policy by caricaturing and discrediting the doubters. Scott McClellan, the president's press secretary, later said the president meant only that "there are some in the world that think that some people can't be free" or "can't live in freedom." The president meant that "some Middle Eastern countries -- that the people in those Middle Eastern countries cannot be free." Perhaps that, which is problematic enough, is what the president meant. But what he suggested was: Some persons -- perhaps many persons; no names being named, the smear remained tantalizingly vague -- doubt his nation-building project because they are racists. That is one way to respond to questions about the wisdom of thinking America can transform the entire Middle East by constructing a liberal democracy in Iraq. But if any Americans want to be governed by politicians who short-circuit complex discussions by recklessly imputing racism to those who differ with them, such Americans do not usually turn to the Republican choice in our two-party system. This administration cannot be trusted to govern if it cannot be counted on to think and, having thought, to have second thoughts. Thinking is not the reiteration of bromides about how "all people yearn to live in freedom" (McClellan). And about how it is "cultural condescension" to doubt that some cultures have the requisite aptitudes for democracy (Bush). And about how it is a "myth" that "our attachment to freedom is a product of our culture" because "ours are not Western values; they are the universal values of the human spirit" (Tony Blair). Speaking of culture, as neoconservative nation-builders would be well-advised to avoid doing, Pat Moynihan said: "The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society. The central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself." Here we reach the real issue about Iraq, as distinct from unpleasant musings about who believes what about skin color. The issue is the second half of Moynihan's formulation -- our ability to wield political power to produce the requisite cultural change in a place such as Iraq. Time was, this question would have separated conservatives from liberals. Nowadays it separates conservatives from neoconservatives. Condoleezza Rice, a political scientist, believes there is scholarly evidence that democratic institutions do not merely spring from a hospitable culture, but that they also can help create such a culture. She is correct; they can. They did so in the young American republic. But it would be reassuring to see more evidence that the administration is being empirical, believing that this can happen in some places, as opposed to ideological, believing that it must happen everywhere it is tried. Being steadfast in defense of carefully considered convictions is a virtue. Being blankly incapable of distinguishing cherished hopes from disappointing facts, or of reassessing comforting doctrines in face of contrary evidence, is a crippling political vice. In "On Liberty" (1859), John Stuart Mill said, "It is, perhaps, hardly necessary to say" that the doctrine of limited, democratic government "is meant to apply only to human beings in the maturity of their faculties." One hundred forty-five years later it obviously is necessary to say that. Ron Chernow's magnificent new biography of Alexander Hamilton begins with these of his subject's words: "I have thought it my duty to exhibit things as they are, not as they ought to be." That is the core of conservatism. Traditional conservatism. Nothing "neo" about it. This administration needs a dose of conservatism without the prefix.

It sure will: http://www.awolbush.com/kerry-vs-bush.asp

No conservative slacker himself, George Will takes Bushie to task: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64323-2004May3.html "This administration cannot be trusted to govern if it cannot be counted on to think and, having thought, to have second thoughts. Thinking is not the reiteration of bromides about how "all people yearn to live in freedom" (McClellan). And about how it is "cultural condescension" to doubt that some cultures have the requisite aptitudes for democracy (Bush). And about how it is a "myth" that "our attachment to freedom is a product of our culture" because "ours are not Western values; they are the universal values of the human spirit" (Tony Blair)." In other words - the dolt we have for a president is at it again.

Be careful with the yoga route. Many instructors are not very "back aware" and are too agressive. I would strongly recommend the Seattle Holistic Center at the Good Shepard Center in Wallingford. They have a 6 week class called "Heal your back". It's taught by Collette, who was a nurse and had some major back problems herself. She is a great instructor. Once you take that class then you can take her open classes. I've found that it has helped my chronic back problems quite a bit. One other word of advice - mix up your exercise routine. Walk, swim, climb, use weights, bike. Don't get too discouraged - it's a temporary thing you can work through.

The nasty angled log is history. It is still in the creekbed but has been pushed to the side, downstream, and is now parallel to the main flow. You can cross in the same vicinity where this long now lives, but I doubt the improvised crossing that was put in last week will last one storm flow. Maybe some group will re-install the old log crossing, which is pretty big. Also, there is a creek within 200 m of the trailhead that used to have a simple, 25 ft long bridge. Only a remnant of this remains. Most of the cross pieces are gone, leaving the two main beams with nothing in between. The creek is only about 3 m wide and calf deep so you can dash across, or you can walk on the beams, one foot on each side. Hope this helps, I would still go unless you've got some newbies of sorts. Then again they could think it exciting.