Hi Folks,

I’m up to my ears in video training this week and will be back in a few days. In the meantime, feel free to give me some ideas for topics to write about. Thanks!

In the meantime, here are some more pandas courtesy of USA Today.

Kim

Bush gave his final State of the Union address Monday evening. Did anyone watch?

Hopefully if you’re over 21, you realized that this was your very last chance to play the annual Bush SOTU Drinking Game, which has really grown since its inception a few years ago.

The rules have changed as well: added recently or this year are “Mahmoud Ahmadinejad” (1 drink, plus 1 if he pronounces it correctly), “foreclosure” (Yell out the name of your favorite “Monopoly” railroad and drink; Do NOT Pass Go) and “discretionary spending” (1 to 3 drinks, your call).

And, of course, the traditional favorites: “nukular” (1), “freedom” (1) and “terror” (worth 1 drink however it’s pronounced).

Note: I do not condone the irresponsible consumption of alcohol, even for the purpose of celebrating Article II, Section III of the US Constitution.

Here’s to the beginning of the last of eight crazy years. Bottoms up! To democracy!

This NYT story, “Hawaii on a Dime,” is number one on the Times’ “Most Emailed” list this evening.

That’s interesting coupled with the Advertiser’s story today which reports an expected 1-percent-plus drop in visitor arrivals in 2007 from the previous year. Increasing talk about a US economic recession is not going to help the situation.

I guess being the “Most Emailed” means Hawaii is still somewhat interesting to NYT readers! Either that, or nearly everyone who has visited Hawaii has noticed how exorbitantly expensive it is here and can relate.

We locals live with high costs every day. But here’s what writer Matt Gross had to say after a recent visit:

Hawaii is easy, Hawaii has nothing to hide. Hawaii is, touristically speaking, pornographic in its single-minded baring of its assets.

Hawaii is also — duh — expensive. According to AAA’s 2007 Annual Vacation Costs Survey, a family of four could expect to spend $650 a day there on food and lodging, making it the least affordable state in the country — and that doesn’t even take into account Hawaii’s gas prices, consistently among the nation’s highest.

But while daunting fuel costs and overpriced villas surprise no one, Hawaii can be ruthlessly surreptitious when it comes to extracting every last dollar from tourists.

“Ruthlessly surreptitious”? Ouch. But then Gross goes on to talk about almost paying $2.95 for a 12-ounce cup of Kona coffee in Kailua (not Waikiki). And I realized, well, yeah, he’s right.

We’ve always promoted the image abroad of a wonderfully relaxing vacation spot. Visit our beaches, stay at luxury hotels, shop at the gigantic and ever-expanding Ala Moana Shopping Center. All these things, with the exception of the beach, cost money.

Leaving the windward side, Gross and his wife make their way to South Kona and Kauai’s Na Pali coast in search of something “less commercial.” Happily, they find what they’re looking for from Hawaii — beautiful and intimate interactions with nature without it costing them an arm and a leg.

It made me think about a trip I took recently to Costa Rica, whose economy is also based heavily on tourism. It was my first time in the country and I was intrigued by the concept of “eco-tourism,” which is supposed to encourage visitors’ appreciation of history, nature and culture while avoiding the negative environmental impacts of conventional tourism.

Costa Rica is all about eco-tourism. During our short stay we saw monkeys swinging from trees, got close-up with a crocodile while riding down the river in a 10-person boat, hiked up a volcano and witnessed baby sea turtles in Tortuguero hatch from their eggs and scramble towards the tumbling Caribbean Sea. The accomodations were nice, but not fancy, and we spent a lot of time in the rainforest without TV, internet or phones.

Would eco-tourism work in Hawaii? Costa Rica and Hawaii surely have a lot in common in terms of what they can offer travelers. And I still think our beaches are more beautiful.

But I’m not sure. I’m also not sure that moving more towards eco-tourism would be welcomed by all Hawaii residents, although many have talked about the idea.

Eco-tourism also wouldn’t make visiting Hawaii free for visitors. Certainly visiting Costa Rica was less expensive but not cheap. Here, Kona coffee would still be $2.95 a cup.

All the same, it’s interesting that more and more people come to Hawaii to escape the concrete jungle completely and get back to the wilderness, hike hidden trails, go snorkeling, or avoid the restaurants altogether and pack a picnic lunch. Less Ala Moana, more Hanakapi’ai. Maybe we should be taking note.

(Photo: Hanalei River Valley, Kauai, 2007)

A interesting article in the New York Times on Thursday about the measures US Olympic athletes are taking to prepare for Beijing’s notoriously bad pollution.

I took the above photo in January 2005 from an overpass on one of the grayer days in Beijing. On the worst days, you wouldn’t be able to make out the tall buildings in the distance because of the “wuran” (pollution).

When I lived in the city, the “wuran” was definitely something you noticed. Returning from a short walk to the Carrefore down the street, your clothes would smell foul and if you blew your nose, the tissue would turn black. Lovely.

Some researchers say that pollution levels on an average day in Beijing are as much as five times above World Health Organization safety standards. Many athletes with asthma are worried that the bad air conditions will exacerbate their breathing difficulties.

Trainers are telling athletes to avoid training in Beijing if at all possible and are even working out ways for them to possibly compete wearing masks or other super-secretive breathing devices that would give them an advantage over the competition.

Many news sources are really zeroing in on this issue of Beijing’s pollution. Beyond the danger to Olympic athletes, however, the article also mentions how any masks or other gadgets used by American athletes to protect themselves from the pollution could become a political issue:

The I.O.C. spokeswoman Sandrine Tonge said the international federation for each sport made the rules on what athletes can and can’t wear in competition. So it is conceivable that some athletes will wear masks during their Olympic events, but Mr. Wilber [the lead physiologist for the US Olympic Committee] said no Americans would do so.

“I think it would be a huge political issue and an embarrassment to the Chinese people and to the I.O.C. if American athletes wore masks in the event itself,” Mr. Wilber said. “If that image was beamed around the world on TV, it would cause nothing but problems.”

The US Senate on Thursday demanded information from the nation’s 136 wealthiest colleges and universities, led by Harvard and Yale, about how they have raised tuition, determined financial aid and spent their endowments over the last 10 years.

The Senate Finance Committee has recently been pressuring schools to spend more of their funds on financial aid, and has threatened to require them to spend a minimum of 5 percent of their endowments each year, according to the NYT.

Weighing in with the largest endowment is Harvard, whose endowment grew 20 percent in the last fiscal year to $34.6 billion. Yale’s endowment, the second largest, grew 25 percent to $22.5 billion, according to a report released this week.

Harvard and Yale have recently expanded their financial aid programs to make more money available to students with higher family incomes. Last month, Harvard announced that it would now offer financial aid to students whose parents have incomes of $120,000 to $180,000. Yale followed suit this week and will now make financial aid available to students with family incomes of $120,000 to $200,000.

University officials, though, seemed cautious about the idea of Congress mandating how schools spend their endowments.

Is the rising cost of tuition and the supervision of university endowments, especially private universities, something lawmakers should step in on?

Would forcing colleges and universities to spend more of their endowments help address rising college costs?