Monday, September 08, 2008
Oh well
I turned 41 last week and the day itself was nuts. Work has been 24x7 for a while on this crappy performance problem. And Tam had IDO hours so it was me, the boys, and work. I had a great time hanging with the boys... they are so great. This weekend it was just us. Reid lost his sandal playing in yard. I asked, 'where is your shoe?' and he walked over to the HD 3-wheeler and pointed under it. There it was. Understanding well for 16 months ;) I love those boys, Max started grade 1 and is very studious and mature. I keep thinking how did I get such good kids? Max has T-shirt that says: I try to be good, but I take after my Dad. :)
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
YouTube - Randy Pausch Last Lecture: Achieving Your Childhood Dreams
This is an inspiration. Lead your life well! Teach your children well.
YouTube - Randy Pausch Last Lecture: Achieving Your Childhood Dreams
Sit down with Max and watch this.
YouTube - Randy Pausch Last Lecture: Achieving Your Childhood Dreams
Sit down with Max and watch this.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
BWCAW 2008
Had a very nice time with Grandpa Tom, Todd, Max and I. Learned about WIND. Made our own camp after bushwacking using GPS. Todd and I had to play in the 2+ foot waves in 25+ mph winds. Rounding the point was a BREEZE, well a blast. Grandpa Tom really liked it. And we had a fairly tough trip. Max totally rocked and didn't complain at all.
Friday:
Got in. Lake was white out! Deep fog. No visual cues. Got lucky with 3rd campsite open on Caribou. Prayed the it was open! Low and away from lake. 1000's of dragon flies! Turned out good because of severe T-storms away from wind on lake. From technicals this was the worst campsite I've stayed at, but thank God we got it. Got some hail and 3 heavy storms rolled through the evening. But we had tent and tarp up. Heavy rain made a river through our kitchen. ;)
Sat:
Nice morning! Sun and hung by lake sitting on canoe drinking coffee all of us. Nice temps, high 60's, but windy! 30+ winds. Todd and I drifted trolling West on the lake. Caught a 10in smallie. But were moving fast. Paddle back was 1+ hour hard paddle against wind around some nasty points. Should have known to follow wind means later you have to fight it.
Sun:
We are bailing for Clearwater. Went downwind west on caribou to the up down portage. Max did great. Forest service guys seemed concerned with the 'little guy' and the lake we were headed to...
The sheltered bay gave way to the Eastern side of Clearwater in 25 mph winds. Campsite was far\north side of this end of lake. Empty earlier in the day with wind hammering it, Feds though it should be open. I spied the tent once we were in 2 foot waves with x-wind. Max was concerned, but didn't get upset. Maybe some white knuckles? I knew there was no way I was doing a 180 in this wind. Wind pushing us to E shore with big rocks wasn't looking promising. Had to try to land. I jumped out onto the rocks to keep the kevlar from dumping. Max asks "Dad that rock is flat, can I jump to that!!" yep, and I threw the bags up on the ridge as water and wind crushed us. Tom and Todd landed too. We sat on the pine ridge overlooking the water\wind blast. Whew. Now what? Last campsite on lake was around bend. I figure with this wind there had to be someone on it, but... Todd and i hit the water to scope it out. BIG waves = good technique or disaster. Was a nice ride pounding that 180 in the wind and riding the point downwind. ;) Campsite full. I was tempted to land and tell them we were desperate. But Todd and I spied a red pine area somewhat flat next to shore. Camp? Landed the canoe entered the way point and went on hunt over the ridge bushwacking to find Max and Tom. No problem. We all then grabbed packs and hiked through the rough stuff. Max loved it. Then Todd and I hiked back to get other canoe and last packs. Another wild ride. Then made camp. It was windy but comfortable. Prayed again for less wind in AM. Plan first light hit it and head East else stay another day socked in with wind.
Mon:
Slept OK. Was ready as soon as I could see. out of tent at 4am. We had camp down by 5:15 and were heading east. No whitecaps around the point! Nice sunny morning. Paddled hard for 2 hours. At end wind was just starting and I had a tough time once in a while. Landed at entry point and Todd and I paddled on with just the canoe to outfitter. Beautiful day ahead. Did more before 9am than most people do all day. Listened to 'freefore' on way out of woods. ;) Stunning day 60's and SUN. I have never seen it so clear. You could see hundreds of miles to WI from the north shore. Stopped at Temperance. Stopped at Lutsen for $70 lunch on deck. Gondola and alpine slide. Dad kept saying, I got to bring Judy...
Dad and Todd got up the next morning and cruised home to head to afternoon work. We all had a great time. Dad wants to go again. Next trip??!!!
Friday:
Got in. Lake was white out! Deep fog. No visual cues. Got lucky with 3rd campsite open on Caribou. Prayed the it was open! Low and away from lake. 1000's of dragon flies! Turned out good because of severe T-storms away from wind on lake. From technicals this was the worst campsite I've stayed at, but thank God we got it. Got some hail and 3 heavy storms rolled through the evening. But we had tent and tarp up. Heavy rain made a river through our kitchen. ;)
Sat:
Nice morning! Sun and hung by lake sitting on canoe drinking coffee all of us. Nice temps, high 60's, but windy! 30+ winds. Todd and I drifted trolling West on the lake. Caught a 10in smallie. But were moving fast. Paddle back was 1+ hour hard paddle against wind around some nasty points. Should have known to follow wind means later you have to fight it.
Sun:
We are bailing for Clearwater. Went downwind west on caribou to the up down portage. Max did great. Forest service guys seemed concerned with the 'little guy' and the lake we were headed to...
The sheltered bay gave way to the Eastern side of Clearwater in 25 mph winds. Campsite was far\north side of this end of lake. Empty earlier in the day with wind hammering it, Feds though it should be open. I spied the tent once we were in 2 foot waves with x-wind. Max was concerned, but didn't get upset. Maybe some white knuckles? I knew there was no way I was doing a 180 in this wind. Wind pushing us to E shore with big rocks wasn't looking promising. Had to try to land. I jumped out onto the rocks to keep the kevlar from dumping. Max asks "Dad that rock is flat, can I jump to that!!" yep, and I threw the bags up on the ridge as water and wind crushed us. Tom and Todd landed too. We sat on the pine ridge overlooking the water\wind blast. Whew. Now what? Last campsite on lake was around bend. I figure with this wind there had to be someone on it, but... Todd and i hit the water to scope it out. BIG waves = good technique or disaster. Was a nice ride pounding that 180 in the wind and riding the point downwind. ;) Campsite full. I was tempted to land and tell them we were desperate. But Todd and I spied a red pine area somewhat flat next to shore. Camp? Landed the canoe entered the way point and went on hunt over the ridge bushwacking to find Max and Tom. No problem. We all then grabbed packs and hiked through the rough stuff. Max loved it. Then Todd and I hiked back to get other canoe and last packs. Another wild ride. Then made camp. It was windy but comfortable. Prayed again for less wind in AM. Plan first light hit it and head East else stay another day socked in with wind.
Mon:
Slept OK. Was ready as soon as I could see. out of tent at 4am. We had camp down by 5:15 and were heading east. No whitecaps around the point! Nice sunny morning. Paddled hard for 2 hours. At end wind was just starting and I had a tough time once in a while. Landed at entry point and Todd and I paddled on with just the canoe to outfitter. Beautiful day ahead. Did more before 9am than most people do all day. Listened to 'freefore' on way out of woods. ;) Stunning day 60's and SUN. I have never seen it so clear. You could see hundreds of miles to WI from the north shore. Stopped at Temperance. Stopped at Lutsen for $70 lunch on deck. Gondola and alpine slide. Dad kept saying, I got to bring Judy...
Dad and Todd got up the next morning and cruised home to head to afternoon work. We all had a great time. Dad wants to go again. Next trip??!!!
Brain Teasers Forum > can you deal with infinity?
Mind blown. I think its because my Pandora station now playing is "Pink Floyd"
Brain Teasers Forum > can you deal with infinity?
Brain Teasers Forum > can you deal with infinity?
Friday, May 02, 2008
The debate we need to have By Henry A. Kissinger
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/07/opinion/edkiss.php?page=1
The debate we need to have By Henry A. Kissinger Published: April 7, 2008
The long-predicted American debate about national security policy has yet to occur.
Essentially tactical issues have overwhelmed the most important challenge a new administration will confront: how to distill a new international order from three simultaneous revolutions occurring around the globe.
These are a) the transformation of the traditional state system of Europe; b) the radical Islamist challenge to historic notions of sovereignty; and c) the drift of the center of gravity of international affairs from the Atlantic to the Pacific and Indian Oceans.
Conventional wisdom holds that disenchantment with President George W. Bush's alleged unilateralism is at the heart of European-American disagreements.
But it will become apparent soon after the change of administrations that the principal difference between the two sides of the Atlantic is that America is still a traditional nation-state whose people respond to calls for sacrifices on behalf of a much wider definition of the national interest than Europe's.
The nations of Europe, having been drained by two World Wars, have agreed to transfer significant aspects of their sovereignties to the European Union. Political loyalties associated with the nation-state have proved not to be automatically transferable, however. Europe is in a transition between its past, which it is seeking to overcome, and a future that it has not yet reached.
In the process, the nature of the European state has been transformed. With the nation no longer defining itself by a distinct future and with the cohesion of the European Union as yet untested, the capacity of most European governments to ask their people for sacrifices has diminished dramatically.
The disagreement over the use of NATO forces in Afghanistan is a case in point. In the aftermath of Sept. 11, the North Atlantic Council, acting without any request by the United States, invoked Article 5 of the NATO Treaty calling for mutual assistance. But when NATO set about to assume military responsibilities, domestic constraints obliged many allies to limit the number of troops and to constrict the missions for which lives could be risked.
As a result, the Atlantic Alliance is in the process of evolving a two-tiered system - an alliance à la carte whose capability for common action does not match its general obligations.
Over time, one of two adaptations must take place: either a redefinition of the general obligations or a formal elaboration of a two-tiered system in which political obligations and military capabilities are harmonized. This might be accomplished by assigning out-of-area projects to a European reaction force, which would then create an ad hoc alliance of the willing.
While the traditional role of the state in Europe is diminished by the choice of its governments, the declining role of the state in the Middle East is inherent in the way they were founded.
The successor states of the Ottoman Empire were established by the victorious powers at the end of the First World War. Unlike the European states, their borders did not reflect ethnic principles or linguistic distinctiveness but the balances achieved by the European powers in their contests outside the region.
Today it is radical Islam that threatens the already brittle state structure via a fundamentalist interpretation of the Koran as the basis of a universal political organization. Radical Islam rejects claims to national sovereignty based on secular state models, and its reach extends to wherever significant populations profess the Muslim faith.
Since neither the international system nor the internal structure of existing states has legitimacy in Islamist eyes, its ideology leaves little room for Western notions of negotiation or of equilibrium in a region of vital interest to the security and well-being of the industrial states.
That struggle is endemic; we do not have the option of withdrawal from it. We can retreat from any one place like Iraq but only to be obliged to resist from new positions, probably more disadvantageously. Even advocates of unilateral withdrawal speak of retaining residual forces to prevent a resurgence of Al Qaeda or radicalism.
These transformations take place against the backdrop of a third trend, a shift in the center of gravity of international affairs from the Atlantic to the Pacific and Indian Oceans.
Paradoxically, this redistribution of power is to a part of the world where the nation still possesses the characteristics of traditional European states. The major states of Asia - China, Japan, India and, in time, possibly Indonesia - view each other the way participants in the European balance of power did, as inherent competitors even when they occasionally participate in cooperative ventures
In the past, such shifts in the structure of power generally led to war, as happened in the case of the emergence of Germany in the late 19th century. Today the rise of China is assigned that role in much alarmist commentary.
True, the Sino-American relationship will inevitably contain classical geopolitical and competitive elements. These must not be neglected. But there are countervailing elements. Economic and financial globalization, environmental and energy imperatives, and the destructive power of modern weapons impose a major effort at global cooperation - especially between the United States and China.
An adversarial relationship would leave both countries in the position of Europe after the two World Wars through self-destructive conflict with each other, while other societies achieved the pre-eminence they sought.
No previous generation has had to deal with different revolutions occurring simultaneously in separate parts of the world. The quest for a single, all-inclusive remedy is chimerical.
In Europe, the civil society is congruent with the political structure of states but not - at least yet - with the political structure of the European Union.
In the Middle East, civil society is being shaped by transnational forces at odds with the internal structure of many states.
In the Atlantic area, the challenge is how to evolve institutions that bring the willingness to sacrifice for the future into balance with the requirements of international order.
In the Islamic world, the jihadists are prepared to sacrifice all notions of civil society to the pursuit of an apocalyptic utopia.
In Asia, in terms of classical diplomacy, two kinds of adjustments will define 21st-century diplomacy: the relationship between the great Asian powers, China, India, Japan and possibly Indonesia, and how America and China deal with each other.
In a world in which the sole superpower is a proponent of the prerogatives of the traditional nation-state, in which Europe is stuck in a halfway status, in which the Middle East does not fit the nation-state model and faces a religiously motivated revolution, and in which the nation-states of South and East Asia still practice the balance of power, what is the nature of the international order that can accommodate these different perspectives?
Are existing international organizations adequate for this purpose? If not, which changes would be desirable? What goals can America set realistically for itself and the world community? Can we make the transformation of major countries a condition for reliable progress, or need we concentrate on a less crusading purpose?
What objectives must be sought in concert, and what are the extreme circumstances that would justify unilateral action? What is the style of leadership most likely to achieve these aims?
This is the kind of debate we need, not slogans driven by focus groups for daily headlines.
Henry A. Kissinger heads the consulting firm Kissinger & Associates. Distributed by Tribune Media Services.
The debate we need to have By Henry A. Kissinger Published: April 7, 2008
The long-predicted American debate about national security policy has yet to occur.
Essentially tactical issues have overwhelmed the most important challenge a new administration will confront: how to distill a new international order from three simultaneous revolutions occurring around the globe.
These are a) the transformation of the traditional state system of Europe; b) the radical Islamist challenge to historic notions of sovereignty; and c) the drift of the center of gravity of international affairs from the Atlantic to the Pacific and Indian Oceans.
Conventional wisdom holds that disenchantment with President George W. Bush's alleged unilateralism is at the heart of European-American disagreements.
But it will become apparent soon after the change of administrations that the principal difference between the two sides of the Atlantic is that America is still a traditional nation-state whose people respond to calls for sacrifices on behalf of a much wider definition of the national interest than Europe's.
The nations of Europe, having been drained by two World Wars, have agreed to transfer significant aspects of their sovereignties to the European Union. Political loyalties associated with the nation-state have proved not to be automatically transferable, however. Europe is in a transition between its past, which it is seeking to overcome, and a future that it has not yet reached.
In the process, the nature of the European state has been transformed. With the nation no longer defining itself by a distinct future and with the cohesion of the European Union as yet untested, the capacity of most European governments to ask their people for sacrifices has diminished dramatically.
The disagreement over the use of NATO forces in Afghanistan is a case in point. In the aftermath of Sept. 11, the North Atlantic Council, acting without any request by the United States, invoked Article 5 of the NATO Treaty calling for mutual assistance. But when NATO set about to assume military responsibilities, domestic constraints obliged many allies to limit the number of troops and to constrict the missions for which lives could be risked.
As a result, the Atlantic Alliance is in the process of evolving a two-tiered system - an alliance à la carte whose capability for common action does not match its general obligations.
Over time, one of two adaptations must take place: either a redefinition of the general obligations or a formal elaboration of a two-tiered system in which political obligations and military capabilities are harmonized. This might be accomplished by assigning out-of-area projects to a European reaction force, which would then create an ad hoc alliance of the willing.
While the traditional role of the state in Europe is diminished by the choice of its governments, the declining role of the state in the Middle East is inherent in the way they were founded.
The successor states of the Ottoman Empire were established by the victorious powers at the end of the First World War. Unlike the European states, their borders did not reflect ethnic principles or linguistic distinctiveness but the balances achieved by the European powers in their contests outside the region.
Today it is radical Islam that threatens the already brittle state structure via a fundamentalist interpretation of the Koran as the basis of a universal political organization. Radical Islam rejects claims to national sovereignty based on secular state models, and its reach extends to wherever significant populations profess the Muslim faith.
Since neither the international system nor the internal structure of existing states has legitimacy in Islamist eyes, its ideology leaves little room for Western notions of negotiation or of equilibrium in a region of vital interest to the security and well-being of the industrial states.
That struggle is endemic; we do not have the option of withdrawal from it. We can retreat from any one place like Iraq but only to be obliged to resist from new positions, probably more disadvantageously. Even advocates of unilateral withdrawal speak of retaining residual forces to prevent a resurgence of Al Qaeda or radicalism.
These transformations take place against the backdrop of a third trend, a shift in the center of gravity of international affairs from the Atlantic to the Pacific and Indian Oceans.
Paradoxically, this redistribution of power is to a part of the world where the nation still possesses the characteristics of traditional European states. The major states of Asia - China, Japan, India and, in time, possibly Indonesia - view each other the way participants in the European balance of power did, as inherent competitors even when they occasionally participate in cooperative ventures
In the past, such shifts in the structure of power generally led to war, as happened in the case of the emergence of Germany in the late 19th century. Today the rise of China is assigned that role in much alarmist commentary.
True, the Sino-American relationship will inevitably contain classical geopolitical and competitive elements. These must not be neglected. But there are countervailing elements. Economic and financial globalization, environmental and energy imperatives, and the destructive power of modern weapons impose a major effort at global cooperation - especially between the United States and China.
An adversarial relationship would leave both countries in the position of Europe after the two World Wars through self-destructive conflict with each other, while other societies achieved the pre-eminence they sought.
No previous generation has had to deal with different revolutions occurring simultaneously in separate parts of the world. The quest for a single, all-inclusive remedy is chimerical.
In Europe, the civil society is congruent with the political structure of states but not - at least yet - with the political structure of the European Union.
In the Middle East, civil society is being shaped by transnational forces at odds with the internal structure of many states.
In the Atlantic area, the challenge is how to evolve institutions that bring the willingness to sacrifice for the future into balance with the requirements of international order.
In the Islamic world, the jihadists are prepared to sacrifice all notions of civil society to the pursuit of an apocalyptic utopia.
In Asia, in terms of classical diplomacy, two kinds of adjustments will define 21st-century diplomacy: the relationship between the great Asian powers, China, India, Japan and possibly Indonesia, and how America and China deal with each other.
In a world in which the sole superpower is a proponent of the prerogatives of the traditional nation-state, in which Europe is stuck in a halfway status, in which the Middle East does not fit the nation-state model and faces a religiously motivated revolution, and in which the nation-states of South and East Asia still practice the balance of power, what is the nature of the international order that can accommodate these different perspectives?
Are existing international organizations adequate for this purpose? If not, which changes would be desirable? What goals can America set realistically for itself and the world community? Can we make the transformation of major countries a condition for reliable progress, or need we concentrate on a less crusading purpose?
What objectives must be sought in concert, and what are the extreme circumstances that would justify unilateral action? What is the style of leadership most likely to achieve these aims?
This is the kind of debate we need, not slogans driven by focus groups for daily headlines.
Henry A. Kissinger heads the consulting firm Kissinger & Associates. Distributed by Tribune Media Services.
Last month
Trivia was fun! The Sunday night culmination was as good as ever. Dana stopped by at 11 for a drink and to check out the trivia thing. Then got drunk with the team from down the hall after midnight. Nevermind their age. OMG! Even went disc golfing on Monday.
Colorado trip was nice! Had pipe dream about buying real estate in Breck. Skied Loveland, then Breck, then A-Basin. Breck conditions were perfect on back of peak 10. It was the best 2 hours of skiing i've ever done. Almost mystical.
ReidO torpedo took his first 2 steps a few days ago! Another month, watch out.
Max is liking soccer. Coaching is hard cause the kids just lose focus. But Max is fast and running circles around kids. He will soon need more competition.
The river last Sunday was as high as it has been. looks like about 90% tile. Mason verified the canoe race is only like this 1 in 10 years. The water cleaned up the bed in front of house... it also took our logs seats! Rod, Hunter and I did a quick 2 mile run on Sat. River was at about 9 feet. Saw some serious current and some Big powerful standing waves. interesting. I bet hitting the big and little falls now would be a crazy prop. Tam and I got sitter so she is paddling with me on race tomorrow. I could have done by myself and got a plack... last year only 1 person did solo canoe. But I love spending time with Tam.
Colorado trip was nice! Had pipe dream about buying real estate in Breck. Skied Loveland, then Breck, then A-Basin. Breck conditions were perfect on back of peak 10. It was the best 2 hours of skiing i've ever done. Almost mystical.
ReidO torpedo took his first 2 steps a few days ago! Another month, watch out.
Max is liking soccer. Coaching is hard cause the kids just lose focus. But Max is fast and running circles around kids. He will soon need more competition.
The river last Sunday was as high as it has been. looks like about 90% tile. Mason verified the canoe race is only like this 1 in 10 years. The water cleaned up the bed in front of house... it also took our logs seats! Rod, Hunter and I did a quick 2 mile run on Sat. River was at about 9 feet. Saw some serious current and some Big powerful standing waves. interesting. I bet hitting the big and little falls now would be a crazy prop. Tam and I got sitter so she is paddling with me on race tomorrow. I could have done by myself and got a plack... last year only 1 person did solo canoe. But I love spending time with Tam.
Friday, April 04, 2008
Ol' Smashioned
getting psyched up for trivia this year. i love the boy, but missed last year due to his birth. there's something about trivia.
so this year, Doug and I discussed a better stocked bar. So, I'm bringing fixings for old fashioneds. my personal fav is Crown and 50/50. but the old man got me into Korbel so i like the brandy now, too. plus, the brandy old-fashioned is the WI state drink. exactly how pops drinks them.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050610075029/http://www.thedailypage.com/going-out/eats/news/managedit.php?intEatsNewsID=390
so trvia will be a good buzz as always. And I can't wait to introduce my fav drink to the trivia kids. ;)
so this year, Doug and I discussed a better stocked bar. So, I'm bringing fixings for old fashioneds. my personal fav is Crown and 50/50. but the old man got me into Korbel so i like the brandy now, too. plus, the brandy old-fashioned is the WI state drink. exactly how pops drinks them.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050610075029/http://www.thedailypage.com/going-out/eats/news/managedit.php?intEatsNewsID=390
so trvia will be a good buzz as always. And I can't wait to introduce my fav drink to the trivia kids. ;)
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
ZEITGEIST, The Movie - Google Search
I watched this and was interested and astounded. I don't believe this, but there may be some truth to parts of it.
ZEITGEIST, The Movie - Google Search
ZEITGEIST, The Movie - Google Search
Friday, January 25, 2008
One step up and two steps back
Back in the day, I liked todd rungren and jackson browne who seem kind of similar, but springsteen I just never really got.
For whatever reason, this song really has struck a chord with me. I always thought springsteen was OK, but I've started to really like the boss these days.
Maybe its because I had to get up at 3am on New Year's Day cause our furnace was dead and I live in MN... Or more likely its cause I'm an 'older' man now and being married for a while. :)
One Step Up Lyrics by Bruce Springsteen
Woke up this morning the house was cold
Checked the furnace she wasn’t burnin’
Went out and hopped in my old Ford
Hit the engine but she ain’t turnin’
We’ve given each other some hard lessons lately
But we ain’t learnin’
We’re the same sad story that’s a fact
One step up and two steps back
Bird on a wire outside my motel room
But he ain’t singin’
Girl in white outside a church in June
But the church bells they ain’t ringin’
I’m sittin’ here in this bar tonight
But all I’m thinkin’ is
I’m the same old story same old act
One step up and two steps back
It’s the same thing night on night
Who’s wrong baby who’s right
Another fight and I slam the door on
Another battle in our dirty little war
When I look at myself I don’t see
The man I wanted to be
Somewhere along the line I slipped off track
I’m caught movin’ one step up and two steps back
There’s a girl across the bar
I get the message she’s sendin’
Mmm she ain’t lookin’ to marry
And me well honey I’m pretending
Last night I dreamed I held you in my arms
The music was never-ending
We danced as the evening sky faded to black
One step up and two steps back
For whatever reason, this song really has struck a chord with me. I always thought springsteen was OK, but I've started to really like the boss these days.
Maybe its because I had to get up at 3am on New Year's Day cause our furnace was dead and I live in MN... Or more likely its cause I'm an 'older' man now and being married for a while. :)
One Step Up Lyrics by Bruce Springsteen
Woke up this morning the house was cold
Checked the furnace she wasn’t burnin’
Went out and hopped in my old Ford
Hit the engine but she ain’t turnin’
We’ve given each other some hard lessons lately
But we ain’t learnin’
We’re the same sad story that’s a fact
One step up and two steps back
Bird on a wire outside my motel room
But he ain’t singin’
Girl in white outside a church in June
But the church bells they ain’t ringin’
I’m sittin’ here in this bar tonight
But all I’m thinkin’ is
I’m the same old story same old act
One step up and two steps back
It’s the same thing night on night
Who’s wrong baby who’s right
Another fight and I slam the door on
Another battle in our dirty little war
When I look at myself I don’t see
The man I wanted to be
Somewhere along the line I slipped off track
I’m caught movin’ one step up and two steps back
There’s a girl across the bar
I get the message she’s sendin’
Mmm she ain’t lookin’ to marry
And me well honey I’m pretending
Last night I dreamed I held you in my arms
The music was never-ending
We danced as the evening sky faded to black
One step up and two steps back
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)