Jim

Bush Continues To Mislead on Job Creation Last month, President Bush released a personally signed report promising that his economic plan would create 2.6 million new jobs by 2004. 1 When data suggested that this would not be possible, he "distanced himself" from the report and "declined to endorse the jobs estimate" publicly during an Oval Office appearance.2 Now, with a new jobs report showing that his economic program continues to fall short, the president has resorted to outright dishonesty.3 Specifically, the president deployed Labor Secretary Elaine Chao to Capitol Hill last week to claim that he never actually signed the report. She told lawmakers the president "doesn't sign this report."4 Sources: "2.6 million jobs on way, Bush says", Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 02/11/04 "The Challenger Gets Mentioned Early", Washington Post, 03/09/04. "Bush declines to endorse prediction of 2.6 million jobs", Baltimore Sun, 02/19/04. "Americans Drop Out of Labor Force, Posing Risks for Bush, Fed", Bloomberg, 03/08/04.

I have that nice blue covered guide book that came out, what, 10 years ago? Can't remember the author - maybe it's out of print now.

I've researched this a bit in relation to a chronic ligament issue. There's only two guys you want to even consider going to in WA - Dorman - a kind odd guy in Federal Way, and another guy in Bellevue (sundquist - something like this - pm me & I could look it up). There are quite a few folks out there willing to inject you with anything but only a couple with a track record in WA. Prolo has been around since the 50's but got a bad rap in the medical journals when someone died because of it - long story, bad treatment. Most often it involves a series of shots over a month to 6 weeks. C. Everrett Koop (ex-surgeon general) is a proponent of prolo - lots of info on his website. Data that has been published shows stimulated production and lay down of collegen on injured ligaments - and clinic trials that show 80% improvement in patients. Which translates to some improvement in 80% of those tested. So no guarantees. And in WA it is not covered by insurance and expect to pay between $300 - $3000 depending on how many sessions, location of injury, etc. Physical therapy should also always go with prolo treatment. Check out the book "Prolo your pain away" by the Dr. Hauser. Interesting reading but he is also selling.

I think Josh has the word. Go as light as possible - you can still get up quite a few peaks w/o gear, just need some glacier travel equipment. I'd linger as much as you can along the way - camp at a couple of the cols if the weather allows. Fun place.

One of my favorites is Van Trump Park to Camp Hazard. Just as high as Muir w/o the crowd.

This just shows again how the Shrub has no policy to stand on other than continuing to try and scare the public. Let's not elect this guy, we didn't the first time.

Sounds like fun but my legs are soooo tired from bombing down the knee-deep powder lines at Crystal yesterday. Had entire runs to myself. Heads up on the avy scene on Saturday, be careful. I think I'll be painting and giving my legs a rest.

But snow level going to 6000 on Saturday. Going for a ski tomorrow! ...A SNOW ADVISORY IS IN EFFECT FROM 4 PM THIS AFTERNOON UNTIL 4 PM THURSDAY AFTERNOON FOR THE WEST SLOPES OF THE CENTRAL AND NORTH CASCADES... MOIST WESTERLY FLOW BEHIND A PACIFIC COLD FRONT WILL BRING SIX TO TWELVE INCHES OF NEW SNOW TO THE WEST SLOPES OF THE CASCADES TONIGHT AND THURSDAY. SNOWFALL WILL DEVELOP IN THE CASCADES TODAY...WITH A COLD FRONT MOVING ACROSS THE AREA THIS EVENING. SNOW WILL CONTINUE TONIGHT AND THURSDAY IN THE MOIST WESTERLY FLOW BEHIND THE FRONT...WITH THE SNOW LEVEL REMAINING NEAR 2000 FEET. THIS EPISODE WILL PRODUCE WIDESPREAD ACCUMULATIONS OF SIX TO TWELVE INCHES OF NEW SNOW ALONG THE WEST SLOPES OF THE CASCADES BY THURSDAY AFTERNOON.

If things are so great in the rtw states, then why is there such a strong correlation between rtw and level of poverty? Hmmm. Maybe someone else is raking in the difference? http://www.citizencomputing.org/USPoverty99.html

I've had some experience with unions. My old man worked in union shops all his life. When a machine lopped off the ends of two of his fingers it was the union that made sure he got the correct medical care and that his position was available when he came back. If it was up to the company he would have been tossed aside. I worked for the teamsters back east for a while, loading trucks between undergrad and grad school. Yea, they did pinch your paycheck for dues but if it weren't for them there would be no collective bargining. And that's what big business wants, the ability to call all the shots. On the other hand their are some stale unions around. A frined worked in the NYC mechanics shop for the subways. Bascically he was told to dial it back a bit because he was too efficient. That was in the 80s, now there's more of a cooperative atmosphere between the union and mgmt.

How about his dentist?

Huh? Because folks with $110k plus salaries are feeling job insecurity?

Actually, as a practicing wildlife ecologist (25 yrs), biodegradable flagging is the norm these days, at least in enviornmental work. It should be the choice for any marking, but some folks don't know or want the vinyl stuff that does last a long time. The biodegradable stuff is easy to find, check out Foresty Suppliers or Ben Meadows catalogs.

Didn't Dennis Rodman marry Carmen Electra?

I think this is what Bush is doing with his national guard records.

I consider myself progressive on social and environmental issues and conservative on fiscal issues. The backbone of true conservative politics used to rely on fiscal responsibility - a truely conservative approach to government spending, a cautious approach to foreign affairs, and encouraging free enterprise. The neoconservative movement is stripping away many of these goals. We have bloated and growing federal spending, increasing subsidy programs (largest farm bill and wasteful military spending), a foreign policy based on speculation and isolation from the world community, and an increase in business and financial mergers and a corresponding decrease in competition. This group is pegging the meter in the wrong direction.

Hmmm. Food for thought. Sounds like Ja Man would build more character and (hopefully) help with my crack climbing while Ancient Art is a cruise with a Dr. Suess finish. Thanks for the specifics.

No, No. I need your opinion on Ancient Art or Ja Man - which would you go for if you had one tower day available?

So, I'm planning a trip to Moab in April that will be a mix of climbing, and then some biking and hanging with family and friends. I'll have time for one day of cragging and one tower day. So if you had the choice would you climb Ancient Art on Fisher Towers (short 10ish section otherwise 5.8) or Ja Man on Sister Superior (10c). Background: I would rather climb a 10c face any day over a 5.9 crack, which, I know, means I should climb more cracks.

Give it a try and you'll see. Change in grip forces you to pull way harder with the arm w/o the towel while using muscles in the towel arm differenly. Ow, ow, my tendonitis hurts just thinking about it.

And my overall point is that this thread runs through all of the justifications for the war. I would have disgreed with the decision, but had more respect for the administration if they had stated their true reasons for going to war. That Saddam is a despot, that we need to protect the oil resources, and that we intend to make this an example of democracy in action in the middle east. But instead they tried to scare the public and justifiy it with what they knew was false and purposefully twisted information. It was not the intel or lack thereof. Later gotta get some work done.

Ok lets settle for a moment on this specific issue. The Bush administration said that Kamel's testimony indicated that there Saddam had a wealth of WMDs and used this as part of the overall war justification. Newsweek and the UN testimony transcrips show that Kamel said the EXACT OPPOSITE, that Iraq had no weapons. He never said that there were WMDs in Iraq after the Gulf War. So why did the Administration say Kamel said there were WMDs. The administration had the transcripts. They lied because they wanted to scare the public.

And I'm saying that any of the stuff the Bush admin put up can easily be shown to be false by someone with half a brain. It's difficult to respond to generalities. I've given several examples of lies - show me a piece of evidence that they used of justification that was true - or at least thought of as true by the intellegince community. But you can't because there is none. It's not gray. Everytime I point out a direct lie you start talking about the gray zone. That's the current spin and it doesn't hold water.

Yes they did lie. They said Kamel stated that there wer WMDs in Iraq. As the newsweek article points out he said the exact opposite. The Bushies had the transcripts. That is a lie and distortion of the fact. Next you're going to say they made a misktake in reading comprehension. Pitiful.

But the point is that anyone who looks at the evidence cannot seriously come to the conclusion that there were any trace of WMDs. Here a summary of an issue that actually made it to the mainstream press. THERE WERE NO WEAPONS AND THEY KNEW IT. The Bush administration also made much of Iraq's purchase of high-strength aluminum tubes, which it claimed were used in the enrichment of uranium for nuclear weapons. Outside experts questioned that claim from the very beginning, and the International Atomic Energy Agency reported in early January 2003 that the tubes were for short-range artillery rockets. There were also many dissenters within the U.S. government, especially among experts in the Department of Energy, who doubted that the aluminum tubes were suited for gas centrifuges needed for uranium enrichment. Perhaps the biggest revelation contradicting the official administration line on Iraq WMDs was a story in the March 3 issue of Newsweek (released February 24) about Iraqi General Hussein Kamel, Saddam's son-in-law, who had headed Iraq's weapons program. Kamel had defected from Iraq in 1995 and was killed upon his return in 1996. On many occasions, Bush administration figures had cited Kamel's testimony to UN weapon inspectors in an attempt to show that Iraq was still hiding weapons of mass destruction, even though Kamel had left Iraq in 1995. The reporter who wrote the Newsweek story, John Barry, had recently obtained a transcript of Kamel's 1995 testimony to the UN weapon inspectors, in which Kamel revealed that "that after the Gulf War, Iraq destroyed all its chemical and biological weapons stocks and the missiles to deliver them." You read that right: destroyed them. Barry wrote that Kamel's testimony "raises questions about whether the WMD stockpiles attributed to Iraq still exist." Barry noted that "Kamel was Saddam Hussein's son-in-law and had direct knowledge of what he claimed: for 10 years he had run Iraq's nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile programs." The writer added that a military aide who defected with Kamel "backed Kamel's assertions about the destruction of WMD stocks." And Barry revealed that Kamel had also given his story to the CIA and British intelligence in 1995 When the Newsweek article appeared, the CIA denounced it as false, but an original transcript of Kamel's testimony to the UN inspectors was produced that confirmed the story.