I've been listening to George's speeches and press conferences on his first trip to the Middle East. And I'm really dumbfounded, really. His first statement, "I come with hope to foster a vision for peace." Ok, but does he really understand? I don't see it, and either he's blind to the truth and his staff, or his staff is blind and not giving him proper information.
Just listen to NPR's story. Does he really think after 6-plus years of neglect for the area and his staunch support for Isreal and Hamas that he can get peace in a region that hasn't really seen it for nearly 40 years. Is he trying to accomplish something in his tenure to show he's a peace advocate. Like the US' support of Isreal in the recent summer war in southern Lebanon, when we gave cluster bombs to the Isreal military to test them on the Lebanonese people?
What didn't he learn or wasn't informed about two previous presidents Carter and Clinton who had some success at brokering peace there? He thinks he can do better than they could after years of diplomacy by simply showing up with a hope and a prayer, called his plan? Did anyone on his staff or any of his advisors take him aside to say, "George, this isn't the time or place to get into work taking years to establish your credibility let alone anyone listening to you."
Or did he say, "Hell, no. I'm George Bush, and I can do anything. God is on my side. They'll listen to the President of the most powerful nation on earth." I wonder if he only went over there to prepare for a November peace meeting so when he leaves he can say, "Well, I tried to solve their problems, but they didn't want to listen to me.", and say he was a good president for being presidential? Does he forget the job isn't about appearances but substance?
It's funny that the press there isn't putting much coverage in their media, and what is published or aired is either pro-Bush by his supporters, such as the Isreali government owned media, or anti-Bush, by most of the rest of the media there.They seem to be diplomatically calling him both a lame duck and just this side of an idiot in his "vision."
What doesn't he understand that coming in at the last minute with his one-minute manager mentality won't work in a region that has fought for generations doesn't work? He expects the people there to suddenly wake up to their situation and declare him a political savoir? Like he's done in Iraq? Does he really think his presence actually carries any weight there, especially after Secretary of State Rice made the US look ugly over the years with her vists and statements? Remember she was uninvited by the Lebanonese government?
And he thinks embracing Fatah President, Mahmoud Abbas will ensure the Palestinians will follow his lead. And what about Hamas and the Gaza Strip? They're supposed to throw down their arms and agree to follow Abbas as their leader? And then he meets with the Isreali leaders who have advocated removing Palestinians from their former lands? And denouncing the violence on one side, the Palestinians but not the Isrealis, will mean what? To be dominated by Isreal who has vowed to reclaim the land the Palestinians have and now hold?
And to make matters worse he assigned a general to represent the US. What the fuck is he thinking? A general has the diplomatic skills to negotiate with the diversity of interests in the region to accomplish anything? Or is he so stupid he think a general will set them on the path by the force of his will? Like they will obey orders? And the general, representing the military, will be respected as a diplomat?
I'm sorry he's our President and seems to be so blind and naive to think anything is possible so late in his presidency. And I hate to watch the damage he'll do that the next President will have to undo and then set right.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Campaign thoughts
Ok, I read and listened to the analysis of the New Hampshire primary, the endless tallking heads spouting on and on about things they think but don't really know. So, if they can espouse their opinion, I can do likewise from the sidelines. Really? Not. But hey, the power of the Internet, be a blogger and express yourself. And be warned, it's just my opinion of what I hear and read.
So what do I really think of the candidates? Like it matters? Ok, to me maybe, but I haven't decided yet. I'm a totally independent voter with fairly definite views.
First, I'm not enamored with the Republicans. I liked John McCain but that was in 2000 against George Bush. He's since destroyed any credibility with me for pandering to the religious and conservative right, and supporting an increased war in Iraq. While he'll stay the course, I think the rest of his platform would be so flexibile to be useless. But I've always liked his honesty in his speeches about politics. He's best as a Senator.
Both Huckabee and Romney scare me with their religion embedded in their politics. That doesn't represent all the people as they claim but just those they approve of or those who argree with them. What I find ironic about Huckabee and Romney is that people are expressing the same favorable view of them for the same reasons they liked Bush in 2000. He appears to be an upright, honest man with solid values. Ok, but that's not a prerequisite for being President as we've seen with Bush. We were snowballed by this campaigning, so look inside them for what a President should be.
All the rest of the Republicans are toast now.
Second, my favorite Democrat is Bill Bradley. No one had or has his intelligence and knowledge, not even Hillary. Bill Clinton was ok, but I like Bill Bradley's respect for people and his view of the US in the world. I wanted to see a Bill Bradley - John McCain race for they were the (then) two best. The debates would have been great and either one would have made an excellent President. And we got the worst of the lot both in the 2000 and 2004 elections and worst of those for President.
So you see where I sit. And now the current Democrats.
Hillary Clinton scares me because if you look at her record and views beneath and behind the language, she's just to the right of center. I don't want a President who supports the current strategy, or lack of one, in Iraq and Afghanistan. We don't need another 8 years of the same if not more of the worse. And all the rest of the issues, she wanders so much it's hard to know what she believes except generalities that sell but aren't real. They're just words.
And I really don't agree with the comment that women should support Hillary because she's a woman and the progress she and other women have made for women. That's sexist bullshit on the face of it, and I would suggest she may not be the best for women and she doesn't have the track record supporting women's issues any more than Obama and Edwards.
Somehow I struggle seeing her as President, and not because she's a woman, but because her personality and temperament. I have no doubt she has the intellect and experience to be a good President, but she's too much seen as a controlling and pandering. That may be good characteristics for a Senator but not a President, and why history has shown Senators don't make good President, few were elected and fewer were good.
Barack Obama doesn't scare me, but he doesn't have a track record to show what he means and will try to do - try because you still need Congress. Words are ok to run on, but you need substance of your past he doesn't have. I believe he'll be ok as President, but not without mistakes. Let's not forget John Kennedy made lot of mistakes including Vietnam. So while we criticize him, let's give him credit for his other experience in life and work. We do for the other candidates, so why not him?
John Edwards is probably the best of this campaign's lot. He's probably more traditional in the sense of a candidates but he's showing a trend to make positive changes for the country and people. His rhetoric sounds goods but it's the results that would make the difference. I hope he stays in the campaign to keep the others honest. It's a shame he's been over shadowed by the other candidates as he has a lot of ideas to challenge them.
Somehow, on a personal level I think Bill Richardson is an intereting candidates, but he has made too many mistakes in his career to stand against the Republicans. He'll likely make a good Vice President, as probably Edwards will also make. I like his realistic views on some issues which I think could challenge Clinton and Obama's rhetoric. And who doesn't like a President who would sit down with you at a tavern to talk about the world over beers?
And so, that's my thoughts to date. So to the candidates, keep the rhetoric up because I'm not really listening except to hear hot air and have a good laugh. You're cheaper than a comedian.
So what do I really think of the candidates? Like it matters? Ok, to me maybe, but I haven't decided yet. I'm a totally independent voter with fairly definite views.
First, I'm not enamored with the Republicans. I liked John McCain but that was in 2000 against George Bush. He's since destroyed any credibility with me for pandering to the religious and conservative right, and supporting an increased war in Iraq. While he'll stay the course, I think the rest of his platform would be so flexibile to be useless. But I've always liked his honesty in his speeches about politics. He's best as a Senator.
Both Huckabee and Romney scare me with their religion embedded in their politics. That doesn't represent all the people as they claim but just those they approve of or those who argree with them. What I find ironic about Huckabee and Romney is that people are expressing the same favorable view of them for the same reasons they liked Bush in 2000. He appears to be an upright, honest man with solid values. Ok, but that's not a prerequisite for being President as we've seen with Bush. We were snowballed by this campaigning, so look inside them for what a President should be.
All the rest of the Republicans are toast now.
Second, my favorite Democrat is Bill Bradley. No one had or has his intelligence and knowledge, not even Hillary. Bill Clinton was ok, but I like Bill Bradley's respect for people and his view of the US in the world. I wanted to see a Bill Bradley - John McCain race for they were the (then) two best. The debates would have been great and either one would have made an excellent President. And we got the worst of the lot both in the 2000 and 2004 elections and worst of those for President.
So you see where I sit. And now the current Democrats.
Hillary Clinton scares me because if you look at her record and views beneath and behind the language, she's just to the right of center. I don't want a President who supports the current strategy, or lack of one, in Iraq and Afghanistan. We don't need another 8 years of the same if not more of the worse. And all the rest of the issues, she wanders so much it's hard to know what she believes except generalities that sell but aren't real. They're just words.
And I really don't agree with the comment that women should support Hillary because she's a woman and the progress she and other women have made for women. That's sexist bullshit on the face of it, and I would suggest she may not be the best for women and she doesn't have the track record supporting women's issues any more than Obama and Edwards.
Somehow I struggle seeing her as President, and not because she's a woman, but because her personality and temperament. I have no doubt she has the intellect and experience to be a good President, but she's too much seen as a controlling and pandering. That may be good characteristics for a Senator but not a President, and why history has shown Senators don't make good President, few were elected and fewer were good.
Barack Obama doesn't scare me, but he doesn't have a track record to show what he means and will try to do - try because you still need Congress. Words are ok to run on, but you need substance of your past he doesn't have. I believe he'll be ok as President, but not without mistakes. Let's not forget John Kennedy made lot of mistakes including Vietnam. So while we criticize him, let's give him credit for his other experience in life and work. We do for the other candidates, so why not him?
John Edwards is probably the best of this campaign's lot. He's probably more traditional in the sense of a candidates but he's showing a trend to make positive changes for the country and people. His rhetoric sounds goods but it's the results that would make the difference. I hope he stays in the campaign to keep the others honest. It's a shame he's been over shadowed by the other candidates as he has a lot of ideas to challenge them.
Somehow, on a personal level I think Bill Richardson is an intereting candidates, but he has made too many mistakes in his career to stand against the Republicans. He'll likely make a good Vice President, as probably Edwards will also make. I like his realistic views on some issues which I think could challenge Clinton and Obama's rhetoric. And who doesn't like a President who would sit down with you at a tavern to talk about the world over beers?
And so, that's my thoughts to date. So to the candidates, keep the rhetoric up because I'm not really listening except to hear hot air and have a good laugh. You're cheaper than a comedian.
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Saturday Thoughts
This is January 5th. With storms going through paradise, the winds are furious with the sky, creating and moving clouds faster than cars on a freeway. The rain is here, heavier than a hurricane at times and light as a summer storm other times. And everything in between. It's mostly gray with shades of sun and sky peaking through now and then before the winds come again in waves.
Ok, enough dribble about paradise? Beside the campaign? I won't write about the campaign. You've heard or read enough. They're too long, the pundits as well as the campaign. I think we should limit the primaries from May 1 to June 30, conventions in July and the campaign from August 1 to October 31 with nothing on or after November 1. Like it will happen.
Anyway, the news. Walmart. They found a loophole in the laws to save paying taxes. You know they're the company that preaches local support, but all the while they use teams of tax lawyers and accounts to keep from paying state, local and federal taxes. Yes, that's expected? But why then say they support local ecomonies when they really push their employee costs on the local governments while not paying taxes to compensate?
Well, they had this practice of leasing the land they own so they can get the tax write-off of the lease. The branched their land division off from the stores so it appears on paper to be a legal rent. The local branch rents land from the national company. Well, a North Carolina judge disagreed and refused their request for refund of $33 million. Yes, a refund. Not less tax but a refund after a state audit.
The state disagreed and refused to refund the company, or really the store which transfer money to the company. The judge ruled it's a circular arrangement that isn't, on its face, a reasonable transaction since Walmart owns both the company that own land and the company that owns the store. No one benefitted except Walmart. It was a paper exercise where no real money actually changed hands.
Ding, chalk one up for the people against Walmart. Now let's see this nationwide.
Second, whales. A federal judge ordered the Navy to abide by rules to protect whales with the Navy's new more powerful sonar which hurts whales. The Navy even admitted it broke the Endangered Species Act with the sonar and its use, but they said national security trumps environment issues. Sorry, Navy, the whales have rights too, as the judge said.
This is an interesting issue because the Navy with the sonar on subs and sonar buoys around the world tracking submarines, also track whales. Yes, they do and yes they know. After all sonar tracks objects bigger than a small shark, so they know where all the large sea animals are at any time. And you thought our Navy didn't know. They know, they just don't care.
A friend, a retired naval officer who was the war games office, and an article a few years ago confirmed the Navy's sonar knows where all the whales, sharks and other large sea creatures are in real-time. So the judge said they could follow the law then too, in real-time.
Ding, chalk one up for the planet.
Third, Ole George himself. He has said now that he doesn't follow the very same Executive Orders his office writes and he signs which applies to his office and administration. He says he doesn't have to. Gee, like do as I say, not what I do mentality? And strange, there is no law against it. So, Congress is considering it. Like he'll sign it or worse sign it with a signing order he won't follow it?
What a President, and Vice President too, they not only think they're above the law and us, they actually act like it too. Like that's new? Well, more so now.
Fourth, Afghanistan. Did you know since we routed the Taliban into Pakistan, or so we thought, that opium production has increased 300%. While we're fighing Al Qeada and the Taliban, the warlords under our protection have been rebuilding the opium production and all the efforts to irradicate it hasn't even dented it. It's flourished.
So what are we fighting there? Did you know that 93% of the world opium now comes from Afghanistan? At least the Taliban not only outlawed it, they irradicated it. We've help resurrect it. And while people argue the farmers could be growing other crops, we haven't shown they'll make enough money for farmers to survive. Opium keeps them and their families alive financially.
So who's failing here? Ding, maybe us?
Ok, a short week. I'm working on other longer essays, but for now. I'm off for a football weekend. I don't watch college football, but do watch the NFL playoffs. I don't favor any team, just good games. See ya' next week.
Ok, enough dribble about paradise? Beside the campaign? I won't write about the campaign. You've heard or read enough. They're too long, the pundits as well as the campaign. I think we should limit the primaries from May 1 to June 30, conventions in July and the campaign from August 1 to October 31 with nothing on or after November 1. Like it will happen.
Anyway, the news. Walmart. They found a loophole in the laws to save paying taxes. You know they're the company that preaches local support, but all the while they use teams of tax lawyers and accounts to keep from paying state, local and federal taxes. Yes, that's expected? But why then say they support local ecomonies when they really push their employee costs on the local governments while not paying taxes to compensate?
Well, they had this practice of leasing the land they own so they can get the tax write-off of the lease. The branched their land division off from the stores so it appears on paper to be a legal rent. The local branch rents land from the national company. Well, a North Carolina judge disagreed and refused their request for refund of $33 million. Yes, a refund. Not less tax but a refund after a state audit.
The state disagreed and refused to refund the company, or really the store which transfer money to the company. The judge ruled it's a circular arrangement that isn't, on its face, a reasonable transaction since Walmart owns both the company that own land and the company that owns the store. No one benefitted except Walmart. It was a paper exercise where no real money actually changed hands.
Ding, chalk one up for the people against Walmart. Now let's see this nationwide.
Second, whales. A federal judge ordered the Navy to abide by rules to protect whales with the Navy's new more powerful sonar which hurts whales. The Navy even admitted it broke the Endangered Species Act with the sonar and its use, but they said national security trumps environment issues. Sorry, Navy, the whales have rights too, as the judge said.
This is an interesting issue because the Navy with the sonar on subs and sonar buoys around the world tracking submarines, also track whales. Yes, they do and yes they know. After all sonar tracks objects bigger than a small shark, so they know where all the large sea animals are at any time. And you thought our Navy didn't know. They know, they just don't care.
A friend, a retired naval officer who was the war games office, and an article a few years ago confirmed the Navy's sonar knows where all the whales, sharks and other large sea creatures are in real-time. So the judge said they could follow the law then too, in real-time.
Ding, chalk one up for the planet.
Third, Ole George himself. He has said now that he doesn't follow the very same Executive Orders his office writes and he signs which applies to his office and administration. He says he doesn't have to. Gee, like do as I say, not what I do mentality? And strange, there is no law against it. So, Congress is considering it. Like he'll sign it or worse sign it with a signing order he won't follow it?
What a President, and Vice President too, they not only think they're above the law and us, they actually act like it too. Like that's new? Well, more so now.
Fourth, Afghanistan. Did you know since we routed the Taliban into Pakistan, or so we thought, that opium production has increased 300%. While we're fighing Al Qeada and the Taliban, the warlords under our protection have been rebuilding the opium production and all the efforts to irradicate it hasn't even dented it. It's flourished.
So what are we fighting there? Did you know that 93% of the world opium now comes from Afghanistan? At least the Taliban not only outlawed it, they irradicated it. We've help resurrect it. And while people argue the farmers could be growing other crops, we haven't shown they'll make enough money for farmers to survive. Opium keeps them and their families alive financially.
So who's failing here? Ding, maybe us?
Ok, a short week. I'm working on other longer essays, but for now. I'm off for a football weekend. I don't watch college football, but do watch the NFL playoffs. I don't favor any team, just good games. See ya' next week.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
First Real News of the Year
Ok, enough of the revelry, and while many are still taking the week off, a continuation of last week, many are back to the real world outside friends and family. And after a few good days of weather here in paradise, the rain is back, and for the rest of the week into the weekend. But all this rain of late has brought us back to near normal snowpack, which at Paradise in Mt. Rainier NP is now about 9 feet at the 5,400 foot level and more in higher elevations.
Ok, enough gloating about our snowpack, which is important since we're now in until early March, the real snow season. We're past the periods where warm fronts can melt feet of snow in hours - which is usually early November to mid-late December. We can still get these storms but the upper elevations are usually cold enough now to inhibit significant snowmelt, and usually on a few hours of the passing of the storm front. And this time of year there usually is very cold weather behind these storms.
The news? Well, effectively yesterday it is now illegal to text message or use e-mail on any device while driving in Washington State. The law is a result of a serious accident caused by someone using their PDA to send/receive e-mail while they were driving. On top of that effective July 1, talking on cell phones while driving can only be done with hands-free devices, no more one hand on the steering wheel and one on the cellphone.
I for one applaud these laws. I've seen far too many drivers with cellphones stuck to their ear and not watching traffic. They become blind to the flow of traffic and cars and trucks around them. Like everyone, I've seen some really stupid driving at 60 mph on an interstate by someone talking on a cellphone, including being cut off by someone trying to merge or change lanes (cellphone in left ear and not looking), and pulling in front of a semi-truck who had to brake to avoid hitting them.
Ok, enough ranting. Not. The federal government took this into account over 3 years ago when they banned employees talking on cellphones while driving a government vehicle. You have to pull off the road to talk, and if you are caught, like it's not hard to hear them driving or ask them, "Hey are you driving?" while talking to them, you can be fired immediately for creating a hazard. I talked to a field person once who almost drove off a forest service road while driving. All I heard was, "Oh shit, that was close." He pulled off onto a turnout to finish the conversation.
Anyway, an interesting story, love in a sinkhole. Gives you a feeling things aren't so bad, and you can make a difference.
On the other side of the environmental coin, Three Gorges Dam is proving to be the worst man-made environment and national disaster in history as water rises behind the dam creating all sorts of problems, emigration, landslides, sediment accumulation, etc. The only thing the Chinese can do now is minimize the devastion and damage. It's said and done and we have to live with it.
The problem that folks have stressed with the dam is the silt and sediment going through the reservoir system. This is always a problem with dam, but especially so with this dam as the drainage basin produces more than a normal sediment load compared to other river basins. This sediment accumulates behind the dam and must be flushed through to the river below the dam so the normal sediment deposition keeps the lower river hydrology stabilized. It's the constant battle to balance the inflow and outflow of sediment.
Something else? Can I rant about the Iowa primary news? Not? Ok, enough said, I'm tired of hearing the same media rhetoric about or from the candidates. And gladly it's over by Friday with the analysis and pundits. But it's off to New Hampshire now. Geez, let's move everything to the summer before the election so they don't waste our time. Why is it that our nation has the longest election campaign of any major nation? Most of the European countries have about 3 months, and many there and in South America less.
Something else too? Or two? Well, Social Security, as told in the NPR story. The Social Security system is solvent well past 2040 with only minor tweaking now and slowly over time. We don't need private investment plans, major new taxes, decreasing benefits, or whatever else the politicians tell you. It's campaign hype and rhetoric, and remember to ask them the specific questions to prove their case.
Why? Because they can't. They're skimming the bad news to hype a problem that doesn't exist. Several prominent economists have long studied this and said that increasing the taxes slightly on higher incomes (six figures and higher) and raising the ceiling (maximum contribution) will solve the problems for another 75 years. It only takes a 1% tweak. That's not a big issue is it?
The real problem is that we have to do this now than talk about big solutions. It's the issue the politicians don't want to discuss, it doesn't help their voter approval as a problem solver and wins votes for their agenda, all of which will make the problem worse. You see the baby boomers aren't the problem, the polticians are.
Ok, enough for a holiday week. Parting jesture, a photo, and don't forget to look at this photographer portfolio going back over 30 years. Real world stuff. Have a good week.
Ok, enough gloating about our snowpack, which is important since we're now in until early March, the real snow season. We're past the periods where warm fronts can melt feet of snow in hours - which is usually early November to mid-late December. We can still get these storms but the upper elevations are usually cold enough now to inhibit significant snowmelt, and usually on a few hours of the passing of the storm front. And this time of year there usually is very cold weather behind these storms.
The news? Well, effectively yesterday it is now illegal to text message or use e-mail on any device while driving in Washington State. The law is a result of a serious accident caused by someone using their PDA to send/receive e-mail while they were driving. On top of that effective July 1, talking on cell phones while driving can only be done with hands-free devices, no more one hand on the steering wheel and one on the cellphone.
I for one applaud these laws. I've seen far too many drivers with cellphones stuck to their ear and not watching traffic. They become blind to the flow of traffic and cars and trucks around them. Like everyone, I've seen some really stupid driving at 60 mph on an interstate by someone talking on a cellphone, including being cut off by someone trying to merge or change lanes (cellphone in left ear and not looking), and pulling in front of a semi-truck who had to brake to avoid hitting them.
Ok, enough ranting. Not. The federal government took this into account over 3 years ago when they banned employees talking on cellphones while driving a government vehicle. You have to pull off the road to talk, and if you are caught, like it's not hard to hear them driving or ask them, "Hey are you driving?" while talking to them, you can be fired immediately for creating a hazard. I talked to a field person once who almost drove off a forest service road while driving. All I heard was, "Oh shit, that was close." He pulled off onto a turnout to finish the conversation.
Anyway, an interesting story, love in a sinkhole. Gives you a feeling things aren't so bad, and you can make a difference.
On the other side of the environmental coin, Three Gorges Dam is proving to be the worst man-made environment and national disaster in history as water rises behind the dam creating all sorts of problems, emigration, landslides, sediment accumulation, etc. The only thing the Chinese can do now is minimize the devastion and damage. It's said and done and we have to live with it.
The problem that folks have stressed with the dam is the silt and sediment going through the reservoir system. This is always a problem with dam, but especially so with this dam as the drainage basin produces more than a normal sediment load compared to other river basins. This sediment accumulates behind the dam and must be flushed through to the river below the dam so the normal sediment deposition keeps the lower river hydrology stabilized. It's the constant battle to balance the inflow and outflow of sediment.
Something else? Can I rant about the Iowa primary news? Not? Ok, enough said, I'm tired of hearing the same media rhetoric about or from the candidates. And gladly it's over by Friday with the analysis and pundits. But it's off to New Hampshire now. Geez, let's move everything to the summer before the election so they don't waste our time. Why is it that our nation has the longest election campaign of any major nation? Most of the European countries have about 3 months, and many there and in South America less.
Something else too? Or two? Well, Social Security, as told in the NPR story. The Social Security system is solvent well past 2040 with only minor tweaking now and slowly over time. We don't need private investment plans, major new taxes, decreasing benefits, or whatever else the politicians tell you. It's campaign hype and rhetoric, and remember to ask them the specific questions to prove their case.
Why? Because they can't. They're skimming the bad news to hype a problem that doesn't exist. Several prominent economists have long studied this and said that increasing the taxes slightly on higher incomes (six figures and higher) and raising the ceiling (maximum contribution) will solve the problems for another 75 years. It only takes a 1% tweak. That's not a big issue is it?
The real problem is that we have to do this now than talk about big solutions. It's the issue the politicians don't want to discuss, it doesn't help their voter approval as a problem solver and wins votes for their agenda, all of which will make the problem worse. You see the baby boomers aren't the problem, the polticians are.
Ok, enough for a holiday week. Parting jesture, a photo, and don't forget to look at this photographer portfolio going back over 30 years. Real world stuff. Have a good week.
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Happy New Year
Photo public domain by NPS
Nothing like a good photo of a beautiful place to start the year to clear the mind of the matters of the past year and see the new year in a refreashed way so everything is a possibility. At least for a moment, if not a day or even longer? We can always hope, and if we plan right and work hard, we just might get there, and at least we'll get somewhere along the road. And we should never forget it's not the destination that matters, but the journey itself and the people we share our life with along the way.
And so I wish you a happy and properous year to come for you and your family and friends.
You can get the image of this scene at Paradise in Mt. Rainier National Park from the NPS Webcam, where you can also get the recent weather, including the snow depth (in the photo at 9+ feet, normal for New Year's Day 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
