Well, it's been a while since I blogged, so I thought I'd update everybody on what has been happening with me.

I was laid off from Toyota Motor Sales at the end of January. I really enjoyed the time I spent working there, not only because of what I did, but because of the people I worked with. I am looking for a new job in an archive or museum. I have interviewed for a few jobs including one in Beaumont Texas that I really want.

I am currently living off of unemployment in eastern Arizona in a town called Show Low. Want to see where it is? Here's the Google map of - Show Low. There were two main reasons I moved here. First, it's FAR cheaper to live here than where I was living, in Torrance, CA. And second, my parents live in the area. They have been a big help to me financially and mentally. I was freaking out for a while before I moved here, but they encouraged me a lot and talked me into moving to Arizona.

While I look for a job, I volunteer at a couple places in the area. First, I help out in the computer lab of the Show Low library. They put on classes for the nearby residents to attend. I also volunteer at the local hospital. There I am working in the gift shop.

Other than that, I have started biking a lot in the area. This area is GREAT for hiking an biking trails. I've biked a couple trails already and I'm working my way up to some of the harder trails. It's pretty difficult though because this is a very mountainous area and some of the trails can have steep uphill sections. I will get there though, assuming I stay here long enough.

Well, that's enough for now. I'll try to post more often.

This post only really applies to California voters because I'm going to give you all my voter guide for the California propositions. If you don't live in California, feel free to comment about them. If you do live in California, go to: http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/ and read what these are.

First the four bonds:
Prop 1A-SAFE, RELIABLE HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN BOND ACT.
Prop 3-CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL BOND ACT. GRANT PROGRAM. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Prop 10-ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES AND RENEWABLE ENERGY. BONDS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Prop 12-VETERANS’ BOND ACT OF 2008.
My vote: NO-on all four. It's not that I don't support hospitals for children, alternative fuel and/or energy, a high speed train in California, or veterans. My issue is that California is addicted to bonds. Bonds mean borrowing and California does WAY too much of that. We (the tax payers) have to pay these back with INTEREST. Borrowing is one of the reasons that the government can't get a balanced budget done. It's time to stop this. Every election, we are asked to approve at least a few of these, and they almost always pass. I will not even look at the text of the proposition. I will vote NO on just about ANY bond measure that I can. And, I encourage ALL Californians to do the same. BTW, I will also vote no on any L.A. County or Torrance (there are a couple of Torrance school bonds on the ballot) bond issues.

Prop 2-STANDARDS FOR CONFINING FARM ANIMALS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: NO This prop is aimed primarily at chicken farms. I personally do not really care how my food is grown as long as it is 1. safe 2. cheap 3. the animals are not being tortured. On the last point, as far as I know no chicken is being tortured by being kept in a small cage. I also buy the notion that if chicken raisers are forced to do this, they will move their farms elsewhere and it will cost more for eggs as a result. BTW, California is the 6th biggest egg producing state.

Prop 4-WAITING PERIOD AND PARENTAL NOTIFICATION BEFORE TERMINATION OF MINOR’S PREGNANCY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
My vote: YES This is a very mild prop. It allows for PARENTAL NOTIFICATION, not CONSENT. I would rather have consent, but notification is OK. At least this keeps SOME control in the hands of parents over their kids. There are also loads of provisions that allow the minor girl to get around this law if say her parents are abusive, etc...

Prop 5-NONVIOLENT DRUG OFFENSES. SENTENCING, PAROLE AND REHABILITATION. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: NO This would stop nonviolent drug offenders from going to prison and allow a bunch of them out of prison. It would also put some more money into drug rehabilitation programs. I vote no because I've heard from several officials who know more about this than I do that this would allow ANY person who has committed a violent offense to claim that he/she was on drugs at the time. That could make that crime a nonviolent offense and that person would get drug counseling instead of prison. That is nonsense. Plus, this was financed primarily by George Sorros. Enough reason for me to vote no on this.

Prop 6-POLICE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNDING. CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND LAWS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: YES This would mandate almost $1 billion in the budget for law enforcement efforts in California primarily to local law enforcement. It would also increase the penalties for certain gang and drug-related crimes. There are a few other provisions. The $1 billion mandated bothers me, but that money would come from the budget so the Socialists in Sacramento would be forced to put at least that amount into their budget every year. And, I am very much in favor of increasing penalties for gang members. Next, we need to build more prisons in this state.

Prop 7-RENEWABLE ENERGY GENERATION. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
My vote: NO This prop is extremely complicated but has to do with making public utilities in California subject to something called a Renewables Portfolio Standard. Privately owned and operated utilities are currently required by the state to increase the amount of renewable energy they generate by 1% a year. This would require the same from the public utilities. It would also give A LOT more power to California's Energy Commission and take power away from local government who generally regulate their own public utilities, if they have one. I have an issue with this last part. I think public utlities should be run by locals not a big state organization that is not responsive to local interests. Plus, this prop is VERY complicated. I tend to vote no on propositions that are this complicated.

Prop 8-ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME–SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
My vote: NO This is the anti-gay marriage initiageive. It would prohibit same-sex marriage and it would put it in the California Constitution. I wavered a bit on this but ultimately I am against this because I don't think California government (or ANY government) has any business getting involved in MARRIAGE. Marriage in my mind is primarily a religious institution. I DO think same-sex couples should have the same rights that straight couples do. But to my mind, that is not marriage, it's a CIVIL UNION. I personally don't care if same-sex couples get hitched. But the fact is that most religions will NEVER allow same-sex marriage. And we MUST respect that. But, the government getting involved in marriage is not right.

Prop 9-CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. VICTIMS’ RIGHTS. PAROLE. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.
My Vote: YES This prop changes the rights of the victims of crimes. It allows them to include more of their family in parole hearings. And it allows representatives to attend these hearings to speak for the family. The prop changes quite a few provisions having to do with parole hearings. One of the better ones is a mandate that a judge when deciding on a parole must consider the safety of the victim of the crime first and foremost. Another is that when a criminal has to pay restitution for his/her crimes, the money goes first to the victim(s) of thier crime. I really like this prop. I REALLY like the last two items I listed. I am quite frankly surprised that restitution is NOT given to victims first. So, this is a BIG yes.

Prop 11-REDISTRICTING. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.
My vote: 100% YES The main provisions of this prop would take the power to redraw state legislative districts from the legislature and give it to a new "Citizens Redistictring Commission." Most of this commission would be chosen at random from a list of eligiable candidates. The rest of the committe would be chosen by the committee itself. Their would be 14 commissioners, 5 from each major party and the other 4 from other parties are independents. This commission would be responisble for redistricting for the next decade. There are also some changes in the considerations that must be used to redraw districts. This would affect primarily the state legislative districts and Board of Equalization (taxes). There are provisions in there to change the considerations for U.S. Rep districts, but the actual responsibility for drawing those districts would remain with the CA legislature. I have NEVER been a fan of the state legislature drawing its own districts. It always guarantees the same distribution of Democrat and Republican seats. I am tired of hearing about state districts that are so gerrymandered that it looks like the Amazon River. This is a very sensible sollution. Plus, I am happy with the amount of compensation these commissioners would get, $300 per day plus expenses. That is not much, but it is enough for a job that needs to be done once every ten years. I say YES YES YES!!!! Anything to get the legislature out of the job of drawing their own districts.

Mr. Schwarzenegger, I am a 38 year old single man living and working in Torrance, California. I live in a studio apartment and make about $45,000 a year. I voted for you in the 2003 recall of Governor Grey Davis. I did this because of your promise to hold the line on spending in Sacramento and to never raise taxes on Californians. I believed you did this out of a serious fiscally conservative ideology that I was led to believe you had. I also voted for you in 2003 because I thought you of all people would be a person who would fight for the people of California against what I saw (and still see) what was (and still is) happening in the California legislature. I thought you would be the concrete wall that would hold up under the brunt of the Democrats in the legislature who continually spend more than they take in in taxes.

With the announcement of your budget compromise, I have been proven wrong. You want to increase sales taxes by $.01 which will generate (you hope) $5 billion every year. That is $5 billion that the ordinary tax-payers of California simply do not have. I'm sure you realize that California has the highest sales tax rate (7.25%) in the country. I'm sure you realize that Los Angeles sales taxes are at least 8.25% and in some areas of this county they are even higher. I'm sure you know that Los Angeles county voters are probably also going to vote on an initiative to raise sales taxes another half cent in order to fund mass transit projects. With everything taken into account, that will be an almost 10% sales tax if your proposed budget gets passed. Do you really think that in a slowing economy that Californians should be forced to pay nearly 10% on all products they buy? I have also learned that in order to get your tax plan passed, you are willing to allow sales taxes to be charged on services such as hair cuts, Internet service and lawyer services. Why do we have to pay a tax on things that we traditionally have never had to pay taxes on? I do know that the $.01 sales tax increase will be temporary in your budget and will be lowered in three years. When was the last time you saw any temporary tax actually ended? I know I am only 38, but I have never seen that. Government always finds a way to make such "temporary" sales taxes permanent. And with a legislature dominated by tax-and-spend liberals there is simply no way they will ever let that tax increase end. Besides, you will be out of office eventually because this is your last term. You will not have to deal with the results of your tax increase and the likelyhood that it will become permanent.

You have said in the past that you do not want Californians to have to pay for the "mistakes" of past legislatures and governors. Why is it now necessary for you to make us pay for the same mistakes that have been made since you took office? You have been in office for 5 years. You have signed several bloated budgets with ever-increasing amounts of spending in them. You are the last person who gets to see the budget and either approve or reject them. You had to have clearly seen that the budgets that the legislature passed spent too much money. Why didn't you reject them? I know you now see yourself as a "compromiser" on this issue. But I did not elect you in 2003 to be a compromiser. I elected you to hold the line on spending and not raise our taxes (see concrete comment above).

Because you are a famous actor, body builder and politician, you do not know exactly what ordinary Californians go through having to go to work every day, pay their bills and generally try to live a normal life. You do not know that the vast majority of us do not think of the state government all that much. We do not wake up and think about how the government is going to improve our lives. I understand some people in California do. People represented by the public employee unions probably do. One of the other reasons I voted for you in 2003 was because of your promise to stand up to these unions and do what was best for all Californians. That is yet another promise you have failed to keep. They continue to complain anytime "cuts" are proposed to any program that involves them and run ads in newspapers and TV saying that services will be cut because of budget cuts. Why have you not kept your promise to reign them in? Another thing, these unions represent a small fraction of the total California population. Why do I, and the majority of Californians, have to be bullied by a minority of workers in this state?

Another one of the several reasons I voted for you in 2003, was because of your promise to go to Washington and demand payment from the Federal Government for the services that illegal immigrants take from this state, another promise you failed to keep. This state pays at least $10 billion in services to people who should not be here. They take up spaces in overextended hospital emergency rooms. They drive on our freeways without driver's licenses. They get their children educated in our schools taking up valuable space that should be used for the children of citizens. In addition, money is spent in this state to incarcerate illegal alien criminals. Do you really think that California's citizens must be forced to pay for people who should not be in this country? And, isn't it time to actually force the Federal Government to pay for incarcerating illegal alien prisoners as they are obliged to do by law?

The final point I will bring up is that a sales tax is not like any other tax. Income, capital gains and other taxes do not impact middle and lower income earners nearly as much as a sales tax. A sales tax is charged on all goods (and if you get your way services), that we purchase. This will have a bigger impact on the middle class and even more so on the lower class. As I said above, I make about $45,000 a year in income. At that income level and because I live in state that has an already high cost of living, I am poor. I do manage to pay my bills and feed myself, but I have very little left after I do these things. Is it right for the government to raise taxes on people like me who basically live paycheck to paycheck? Recently I started looking for jobs in other states. I am doing this partially because of the high cost of living in California. A budget that includes a sales tax increase will make me consider even more seriously moving out of California to a state that doesn't cost as much to live in. I am willing to accept a lower income than what I currently receive because I know that I can do more with the money that I make. I understand that I am just one person. I understand that this is just one situation. But, I know I am not the only one who makes my income, or close to it. I know I am not the only one who lives paycheck to paycheck. I know I am not the only one who is considering a move out of California because of the high cost of living. And, I know I am not the only person who would consider a sales tax increase a further reason to consider moving out of this state.

In a message board I frequent, we've been having a discussion about horse racing since this weekend was the running of the Kentucky Derby. It brought up this discussion about zoos.

I am not a big fan of zoos. I've been to a few, and most are awful. The worst I remember was the Indianapolis Zoo. I went when I was a kid living in Indianapolis. Even though I was a kid, I still remember how dirty the place was including the cages. And the cages were tiny. I have heard they made improvements, but I'm sure it hasn't improved much. The best I've ever been to is the National Zoo in D.C. Big, clean cages and very big place.

But, all this zoo talk made me think about my objections to a zoo. The biggest one is the fact that the animals are all in cages. I realize most of the animals were born in captivity. But, that doesn't take away from the fact that they are and should be wild animals fending for themselves. I just really don't like seeing these poor animals caged.

This also got me thinking a bit more philosophically and about humanity's place in nature. I've always felt that no matter how technologically advanced we have gotten with all the gadgets to entertain us and make us feel good about ourselves, that we are still animals and we are still part of nature. This is one of the reasons I am not such a big believer in this whole Global Warming nonsense. If you take humanity as just a collection of animals, then the fact that we pollute the planet is just a fact of nature. Yes, I know, we are thinking animals capable of changing our environment on a massive level. Yes, I know we have an impact on nature. But, again, we ARE a PART of nature.

Anyway, if you want to you may respond.

Disclaimer: This post was written by Mitch Brown and reflect his views. If you don't like them, that's OK. Just don't be a douche about it.

ILLEGAL immigration

You will NEVER hear or see me say any of the euphamisms that the PC crowd has come up to hide these people. You never hear or see me say "undocumented worker" or simply "immigrant" or "guest worker" or anyother term that hides the fact that these people are hre ILLEGALLY. They are ILLEGAL immigrants (or aliens).

Now that I have gotton that on the table I will tell you all what I think of this major issue. First, I will attempt to answer the reasoning of those who support open borders.

"Illegals work hard for a living." Sure,I acknowledge that they do. They work hard for almost nothing. However, this does not make up for the FACT that they are NOT supposed to be here. Working hard does not automatically qualify you to live in any society.

"Illegals do the jobs that legal Americans won't do for pay that they won't do." I reject this completely. I hear so many people complain about the unemployment problems in this country. I hear people whine about the "fact" that there is no job for them for whatever reason. As long as I know that there are people who don't have a job, I will NEVER accept the premise that given the opportunity to work, they would pick the farm produce or build the houses or do any number of jobs that illegals do today. As for the pay, if a legal American has to be paid more than an illegal to do the same job, that is fine by me. I can accept higher prices for whatever they produce. Why? See below.

"Illegals pay income taxes to the state and federal government." First, for a large number of illegals, this is simply not true. A lot of illegals (maybe most) get paid under the table. Meaning they get their pay in cash without having a dime taken out for taxes. Second, for those illegals who actually do pay taxes, because their pay is so low (in general), they pay very little in taxes to begin with. Plus, those who do pay taxes may get a REFUND on those taxes.

"This is a country of immigrants." Yes, this is most certainly a country of immigrants. LEGAL IMMIGRANTS. Most who came over from Europe during 19th and 20th century came here in boats and were taken to one of the ports of entry and processed. They all got their proper papers so they could work here legally. Most became citizens (or their children did) eventually. Most of those who came from Asia during this same time period did the same (or nearly the same). This country continues to welcome LEGAL immigrants to this country as we should. Those people should bring with them a few things (in my opinion). 1. Some educations. 2. A willingness to work. 3. A willingness to assimilate into American society. ILLEGAL immigrants certainly are willing to work. However, the other two may be a bit lacking. This is esspecially true with #3. Most of those illegals who protest in favor of open borders seem to have no intention to ever assimilate into our society. They have strong roots in Mexico or Central or South America and they don't seem to be willing to cut those roots.

"Illegals give far more to this country than they take from it." All one has to do is walk into an emergency room in Los Angeles to see just how much these people are taking from this country. Hospitals that have emergency rooms MUST provide care. Some emergency rooms have been forced to close because they can't possibly take care of all the people, a large portion of them illegal, who don't have insurance and can't pay for care. Schools in California and other states are simply being overrun with the offspring of illegals in these states who automatically become citizens and are entitled to a free public education. Auto accidents caused by illegals cost citizens and governments MILLIONS of dollars because most don't have insurance. The older illegals in this country have and will continue to be a burden on legal citizens as they get older. Most don't have health insurance, so they draw money from the government in order to survive. There are just so many ways that illegals take from this country that far outweigh the benefits that this country makes from their labor.

"Those who oppose illegal immigrants are racist." I am sure there are some who are. However, it is unfair to label everybody who opposes what happens as racist. I have said this before, and I will say it again. This is NOT (to me and most people on my side) an IMMIGRATION issue. It is an ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION issue. I am no more or less racist than the next guy. But, I will NOT accept the notion that simply because I want to protect MY country and the CITZENS of MY country that I am a racist.

Well, that is it for now. I will say more later on this issue as the mood strikes me. Please feel free to respond.

These comments are made by Mitch Brown. No other person contributed to this post. If you don't like what he has said, that's fine. Let him know. But please be respectful.

Well, it has been a while since I last posted a message to those few (probably) who look at my blog. So, I thought it would be a good time to update you on what I have been doing.

I graduated in early June (YEAH!!!!!!!!!!) I now hold an MA in History. I did very well my last semester in school scoring two A's. I only had on in-class class. That was the History class I mentioned in my last non-political blog. The other "class" was my archival internship with Marshall. I got an A in that of course. It was a fun internship, and I really learned a lot from him (in both the internships I did with him). The third "class" was my comps which I ended up passing with relative ease. I worried a lot about those, but they actually weren't that bad. That was only a credit/no credit thing so it didn't count towards my GPA.

Graduation was excelent. I have some photos to post on my Yahoo photos page of it (as well as some other things). I will get to that eventually. We (grad students) got to sit up front and be called up first. We also got to wear a special hood that made us stand out. It was pretty cool.

Well, I have a job. I now work at Toyota in Torrance. I work there and for them, but I get paid by a company called Library Associates. They are basically a employment agency for library people and archivists. So, technically I am employed by them. I am paid by them and I get benefits from them.

Anyway, I interviewed for the job on the Friday after graduation (which was that Thursday). I bought a new suit specifically for the interview (my first). Apparently it went VERY well because I was offered the job that same day. I was SO happy. I began my job on June 13th.

I have now been working at Toyota for about 2 months, and the job is going pretty well. I like all the people I work with (and for). My boss, Dennis has a PHd in History. I didn't know that until 2 weeks into the job. The guy is very intelegent. His boss, Ron, is a very nice guy. And the woman I work with, Amy, I also very nice. They have all helped me a lot in this job.

I also recently moved out here to Torrance. I have rented a small studio apartment not far from Toyota. It is on the border between Redondo Beach and Torrance. The beach is about 10 minutes drive from here. I am going to go buy a bike this weekend so I can spend more time there (and do some other exploring).

Well, that is about it. I am sure I missed some stuff, but that is OK.

BTW, look for my next politcal blog soon. I am in the process of writing it.

What is the EU and the UN going to do to force Iran to stop enriching uranium? They are negotiating with the thugs in Tehran but I have no doubt that the negotiations will not work. Even if Iran agrees to stop their activities, what is the guarantee that they won't do so in secret?

Another thing. The EU and the UN are completely uable to back up anything it says anymore. The EU has threatened to take Iran to the UN and try to get sanctions placed on that country. But, what if the sanctions don't work? Is the UN willing to back up its words with actions if this doesn't stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon? Are we going to see the same situation we did when Iraq did basically the same thing? The UN has no teeth unless consequences are placed on the offending nation if they don't comply.

The Democrats think thier 2 straight presidential loses has to do with the way they run their PRIMARIES? Let me be the first to let them know that that is NOT the reason they have lost.

The reason this party has lost twice is because they have lost touch with the majority of Americans. They are now the party of the ultra-liberal, Sorros-supported minority. They are the PC tainted party that cannot understand why a large part of America is turning against them. They are the party that uses race and class as weapons in a continuing attempt to get votes.

A piece of advice you Democrats, get rid of all the far left bias in your party (or at least cover it) and run campaigns similar to Bill Clinton's campaign. As much as I dispise the man, I do recognize the genius of his two presidential campaigns. He was an highly charasmatic, handsom candidate who knew how to talk to the people. He also had the fortune of the fact that NOBODY knew him before the '92 election.

By the way you Democrats out there, I HOPE you people nominate Hillary Clinton to be your candidate in '08. You will see the biggest GOP margin since Reagan if she runs. People KNOW who she is and what she has done. And the GOP will NOT let people forget her or who she REALLY is.

SOME THOUGHTS ON CHRISTMAS

First let me say that I am an Athiest. I have no reason at this point in my life to believe in a divine being of any type and don't see any day that I would become a believer.

I also am against organized religion in all forms. I have learned through many classes and much experience that religion is simply not for me. I view all of them as simply organizations that take advantage of people in some form. I also don't think a person needs to be part of an organized religion to believe in a divine being (i.e. God). Last, I will say what I say to anybody who I discuss these beliefs with. Religion is the single biggest cause of war, death and destruction in human history. I simply do not want to be affiliated with any group with a history that most religious groups have.

Now, having said all of that, I want to talk a bit about the use of God in America and specifically about Christmas and attempts to take it out of American society.

I for one will NOT critisize people for celebrating their own religious holidays. I am a firm believer in a lot of the ideals of the Christmas holiday. How can anybody oppose ideas such as peace and good will towards our fellow humans? This along with other ideals are central to the celebration of Christmas. Even though I am an Athiest, I DO agree with these ideals and will not oppose any display of such things.

For this reason and others, I am highly distressed by the attempts of secular groups such as the ACLU and others to take Christmas out of public display. I have heard many stories of the ACLU in particular threatening state and local government organizations with lawsuits if they don't take down what they feel are displays of Christian symbols during Christmas. Examples include the exclusion of religious Christmas music from concerts in schools and exclusion of nativity scenes in front of city halls and other government buildings accross America.

This nonsense has gone to the extreme. I was listening to a radio talk show last night. The guest's son was told he could not attend a dance because he was dressed up as Santa Claus. I could not believe the reaction of these people at the school. Santa Claus for DECADES has been a COMMERCIAL figure with VERY LITTLE in the way of religious relevance.

I think one of the answers to the ACLU and others is for these towns, school boards, etc.... to go to hell so to speak. But unfortunately, most of these town governments can't afford to be taken to court by the ACLU. So, they cave in to them.

Anyway, that is enough for now. I will comment more on this later.

Disclaimer: What is written above are the thoughts of MITCH BROWN only. If you don't agree with what is written here, that is fine. Just don't bitch about it.

Well, I went and visited the folks in AZ over the past week. We went skiing twice, once last Thursday and again this Monday. It was fun. I took a lesson on Thursday. As usual, I looked like a fool, but I did get better. I need to get much better though. The way I ski is murder on my knees. I took some pictures too. I will be posting those later to my Yahoo site.

It was COLD up there. When I left on Thursday, it was 12 degrees. It took me about 11 hours to drive back. My parents live in Lakeside-Pineview which is in eastern AZ. It's really a nice place, it's up in the mountains and there is snow everywhere. The area is lightly populated and there are no skyscrapers. It's a long drive, but it is worth it.

Well, I am back in Northridge now. I am on duty for Christmas and New Years. I am looking foward to my LAST semester at CSUN. I am taking my Masters comps in April. That will be interesting. I need to study a lot between now and then. I am also taking a class called Renisance (sp) and Reformation. I can't wait for that one. I took a class from the same teacher last semester on Medievial Europe which was VERY interesting. I will talk more about that later. Last (but certainly not least), I am doing another internship with Marshall in Special Collections. This one will be paid, which is NICE.

In addition to all this, I need to look for a job. I have to work in my resume in January and send it to as many places as I can. I hope to have a job in an archive somewhere before I graduate. Needless to say, there are MANY changes coming in my life and MANY things need to get done before then.

Anyway, that is it for now.

Take a look at the pictures I took during my visit here.