Way to go, Dubya

Instead of sending more troops, why doesn't George go? He can ride around in one of the poorly armed vehicles and dodge roadside bombs.

When is this country going to be willing to admit we have the biggest moron in history for a president and remove him?

The Iraqies are fighting for their country. What are we fighting for?

WASHINGTON - Military leaders are struggling to choose Army units to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan longer or go there earlier than planned, but five years of war have made fresh troops harder to find.

Faced with a military buildup in Iraq that could drag into next year, Pentagon officials are trying to identify enough units to keep up to 20 brigade combat teams in Iraq. A brigade usually has about 3,500 troops. The likely result will be extending the deployments of brigades scheduled to come home at the end of the summer, and sending others earlier than scheduled.

Final decisions — which have not yet been made — would come as Congress is considering ways to force President Bush to wind down the war, despite his vow that he would veto such legislation.

In the freshest indication of the relentless demands for troops in Iraq, Maj. Gen. Benjamin R. Mixon, commander of coalition forces in the north, told reporters Friday that his troops have picked up the pace of their attacks on the enemy in Diyala province, northeast of Baghdad.

"Could I use more forces? No question about it," Mixon said, adding that he had asked for more.

The top U.S. military commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, said a day earlier that it was likely that additional U.S. forces will be shifted to areas outside the capital where militants are regrouping, including Diyala. The region has become an increasingly important staging ground for militant groups, including al-Qaida in Iraq.

"There have been about 30 percent more offensive actions and attacks. Many of those are initiated by us; some are initiated by them," Petraeus said from a military base outside of Tikrit.

"I am cautiously optimistic that in the next 30 to 60 days that we're going to see some significant differences in the security situation in Diyala." If not, he said, he'll go back and ask for still more support.

Petraeus said Thursday that the U.S. buildup in Iraq would need to be sustained "for some time well beyond the summer" to garner the needed results.

Maintaining increased troop levels, said military officials, will require troops to return for what could be their second or third tours in Iraq or Afghanistan, and force military leaders to juggle the schedules to give soldiers a full 12 months at home before returning to battle.

The officials would speak only on condition of anonymity, because no final decisions have been made and no formal requests for the forces have come from commanders in Iraq. But they said it is beginning to appear likely that Petraeus will ask to maintain much of the buildup at least through the end of the year, and possibly into 2008.

One official said planners are scrambling to figure out what combination of units and schedules can be fashioned that could give Petraeus what he wants and have the least negative impact on the troops.

The complex scheduling must identify which units would have been home for 12 months and be trained and ready to go, plus whether the needed equipment would be available and what impact a schedule change has on other plans for the equipment or troops months down the road.
Combat troops, meanwhile, are coming to realize that the Pentagon can't fulfill its commitment to give soldiers two years at home for every year they spend deployed.

At Fort Drum, N.Y., the 1st Brigade of the 10th Mountain Division is already training for a return to Iraq this summer. The brigade, which spent a year in Iraq and got home last summer, is not yet on any official list of units scheduled to deploy, but it's likely to go in late summer.

"It's prudent planning for us to be prepared to go back in a year," said Fort Drum spokesman Ben Abel.

Military officials also acknowledge that units scheduled to come home later this summer — such as the 3rd Brigade, 25th Infantry Division — could be forced to extend their tours by up to 120 days to maintain the Baghdad security buildup.

Initially, the Bush plan called for sending 21,500 extra U.S. combat troops to Iraq — mainly to Baghdad — with the last of five brigades arriving by June. So far two of the brigades have arrived in Iraq. The latest estimates indicate that up 7,000 support troops may also be needed, including more than 2,000 military police.

America's Song for Iraq

Here is our Iraq War song, paraphrased from a certain play about 30 years ago.

Our beleagured soldiers singing to Dubya:

We've been living to win here.
Dying to win here, but it shouldn't be like this.
This was unexpected,
What do we do now?
Could we start again please?

Chaney singing to Dubya:

I've been very hopeful, so far.
Now for the first time, I think we're going wrong.
Hurry up and tell me,
This is just a dream.
Oh could we start again please?

Pelosi singing to Dubya:

I think you've made your point now.
You've even gone a bit too far to get the message home.
Before it gets too frightening,
We ought to call a vote,
So could we start again please?

America singing to Dubya:

We've been living to win there.
Dying to win there, but it shouldn't be like this.
This was unexpected,
What do we do now?
Could we start again please?

Dubya singing to Iraq:

I think you've made your point now.
You've even gone a bit too far to get the message home.
Before it gets too frightening,
You ought to call a vote,
So could we start again please?

Could we start again please? (Repeat for 5 more years)

Rocky Balboa singing to the world:

Could we start again?

What a couple of Washington Legislators are thinking

S-1832.1 _____________________________________________
SENATE JOINT MEMORIAL 8016
_____________________________________________
State of Washington 60th Legislature 2007 Regular Session
By Senators Oemig, Regala, Kohl-Welles, Kline, Spanel, Fairley,
Kauffman, Fraser and Prentice

Read first time 02/15/2007. Referred to Committee on Government
Operations & Elections.

1 TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE AND THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF
2 REPRESENTATIVES, AND TO THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF
3 THE UNITED STATES, IN CONGRESS ASSEMBLED:
4 We, your Memorialists, the Senate and House of Representatives of
5 the State of Washington, in legislative session assembled, respectfully
6 represent and petition as follows:
7 WHEREAS, On September 8, 2006, when summarizing a bipartisan Senate
8 investigation into prewar intelligence on Iraq, Senator John D. (Jay)
9 Rockefeller IV, the Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on
10 Intelligence said that, "The Committee's investigation into prewar
11 intelligence on Iraq has revealed that the Bush Administration's case
12 for war in Iraq was fundamentally misleading. The Administration
13 pursued a deceptive strategy of using intelligence reporting that the
14 Intelligence Community had already warned was uncorroborated,
15 unreliable, and in critical instances, fabricated."; and
16 WHEREAS, The President, the Vice President, and members of the
17 President's Administration appear to have deliberately misrepresented
18 the severity of the threat from Iraq by providing distorted
19 intelligence to Congress and the public in order to justify war with
20 Iraq; and
p. 1 SJM 8016
1 WHEREAS, The war with Iraq has cost the lives of many Washington
2 state residents and squandered taxpayer money from the state of
3 Washington; and
4 WHEREAS, The President has publicly admitted to conducting
5 electronic surveillance of thousands and perhaps millions of American
6 civilians without seeking warrants; and
7 WHEREAS, Washington state residents are likely to have been subject
8 to this electronic surveillance; and
9 WHEREAS, The President, the Vice President, and members of the
10 President's Administration have acted to strip American citizens of
11 their constitutional rights, based solely on the discretionary
12 designation by the President of a United States citizen as an "enemy
13 combatant"; and
14 WHEREAS, Such offenses, if committed, are subversive of
15 constitutional government to the great prejudice of the cause of law
16 and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of Washington
17 state and of the United States of America; and
18 WHEREAS, Petitions from the country at large may be presented by
19 the Speaker of the House according to Clause 3 of House Rule XII; and
20 WHEREAS, Jefferson's Manual section LIII, 603, states that
21 impeachment may be set in motion by charges transmitted from the
22 legislature of a state; and
23 WHEREAS, If the President and/or members of his administration
24 committed such offenses, ignoring these offenses would undermine core
25 American values of truth and justice; and
26 WHEREAS, Impeachment is a process defined in the United States
27 Constitution by which charges are brought against a President or Vice
28 President or civil officers of the United States; and
29 WHEREAS, The filing of these charges is followed by a trial in the
30 United States Senate that determines guilt or innocence;
31 NOW, THEREFORE, Your Memorialists respectfully request that, in
32 order to preserve confidence in the office of the Presidency and the
33 Executive branch, our senators and representatives in the United States
34 Congress determine whether there is sufficient evidence to charge
35 President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney with the
36 above offenses and, if so, to follow the Constitutional process of
37 impeachment.
SJM 8016 p. 2
1 BE IT RESOLVED, That copies of this Memorial be immediately
2 transmitted to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker
3 of the House of Representatives, and each member of Congress from the
4 State of Washington.
--- END ---

Gov's take on climate change

EXECUTIVE ORDER 07-02
WASHINGTON CLIMATE CHANGE CHALLENGE

WHEREAS, there is scientific consensus that increasing emissions of greenhouse gases are causing global temperatures to rise at rates that have the potential to cause economic disruption, environmental damage, and a public health crisis;

The drivers of climate change are global, but the effects of climate change on Washington are local and unique, including our dependence on snowpack for fresh water, our reliance on hydropower for energy, and our significant amount of shoreline;

According to the University of Washington’s Climate Impacts Group, the effects of climate change are already being felt in the state of Washington in the form of average yearly temperatures rising faster over the 20th Century than the global average, mountain glaciers in the North Cascades losing up to a third of their area since 1950, snow pack in the Cascades declining by 35%, peak spring river runoff occurring 10 to 30 days earlier and the proportion of stream flow that arrives in summer decreasing as much as 34% in sensitive river basins; and

WHEREAS, Washington has taken significant actions to address climate change, including:

• Adopting the 2005 Clean Car Act requiring certain automobiles to meet tougher emissions standards beginning with 2009 models;

• Retrofitting 50% of school buses and 20% of local government diesel engine vehicles to reduce highly toxic diesel emissions;

• Leading the nation in requiring fuel suppliers to ensure that 2% of the fuel they sell is biodiesel or ethanol;

• Leading the nation in adopting high performance green building standards and having one of the most energy efficient building codes in the nation;

• Implementing the best energy efficiency standards for appliances;

• Passing a clean energy initiative to increase the amount of energy efficiency and renewable resources in our state’s electricity system;

• Purchasing hybrid and low emission vehicles for state agency use;

• Adopting the Columbia River Water Management Act, which will work toward meeting the water storage needs for agriculture, communities, and salmon; and

WHEREAS, Washington has tremendous opportunities to build a healthier and more prosperous future by embracing the challenge of climate change through expanding our clean energy economy;

Washington’s rural communities can gain economic benefit through the production of renewable fuels, keeping more of the money Washington residents spend on imported fuels here at home; and

WHEREAS, Washington has worked closely with California and Oregon in establishing the West Coast Governors’ Global Warming Initiative and is working with other western states to address climate change in a coordinated effort and through the Western Governors Association; and

WHEREAS, Washington’s vast hydroelectric system must be taken into account in any regional or national climate program; and

Washington State must continue its work to be prepared for the inevitable impacts of climate change.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Christine O. Gregoire, Governor of the state of Washington declare the state’s commitment to address climate change by:

1. Establishing the following greenhouse gas emissions reduction and clean energy economy goals for Washington State:

• By 2020, reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the state of Washington to 1990 levels, a reduction of 10 million metric tons below 2004 emissions;

• By 2035, reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the state of Washington to 25% below 1990 levels, a reduction of 30 million metric tons below 2004;

• By 2050, the state of Washington will do its part to reach global climate stabilization levels by reducing emissions to 50% below 1990 levels or 70% below our expected emissions that year, an absolute reduction in emissions of nearly 50 million metric tons below 2004;

• By 2020, increase the number of clean energy sector jobs to 25,000 from the 8,400 jobs we had in 2004; and

• By 2020, reduce expenditures by 20% on fuel imported into the state by developing Washington resources and supporting efficient energy use.

2. Implementing the significant policy actions taken in 2005 and 2006 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. These actions will move Washington State to at least 60% of the 2020 goal and grow the clean energy economy by:

• Working to ensure cars sold in Washington meet stringent emission standards beginning with 2009 models;

• Retrofitting the most polluting diesel engines in school buses and local government vehicles;

• Working with farmers, entrepreneurs, fuel distributors and retailers to assure that biofuel feedstocks are grown in Washington; that refiners, blenders and distributors of biofuels create family wage jobs in Washington; and that the public can purchase fuel blends that reduce our dependence on imported fuel;

• Constructing high performance green buildings;

• Maintaining the highest levels of efficiency in our state’s energy code and regularly updating and enhancing those standards;

• Examining compliance with appliance efficiency standards and updating and enhancing those standards;

• Implementing the requirements of the Energy Independence Act by adopting rules that help utilities to succeed in meeting their renewable energy targets;

• Pursuing new water resources in Eastern Washington, including water conservation projects, developing new storage and new creative water management alternatives; and

• Reducing energy use by state agencies by achieving the goals established in Executive Order 05-01, Establishing Sustainability and Efficiency Goals for State Operations.

3. Achieving at least the remaining 40% toward the 2020 goal for Washington State and planning for our future, I, FURTHER, order and direct:

A. The Director of the Department of Ecology and the Director of the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development in consultation with a broad range of stakeholders to develop a climate change initiative, Washington Climate Change Challenge, to achieve the goals of this Executive Order. Executive Cabinet agencies are directed to provide their full assistance and support in developing Washington Climate Change Challenge. I invite the Office of the Insurance Commissioner, the Commissioner of Public Lands, institutions of higher education, and members of the Legislature to assist in this effort.

B. The Director of the Department of Ecology and the Director of the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development shall include representatives from business, including transportation, forestry and energy sectors, agriculture, local, county and regional governments, institutions of higher education, labor unions, environmental groups and other interested residents as appropriate in the development of Washington Climate Change Challenge.

C. Washington Climate Change Challenge shall address the following elements and process steps:
i) Consider the full range of policies and strategies for the state of Washington to adopt or undertake to ensure the economic and emission reductions goals are achieved, including policy options that can maximize the efficiency of emission reductions including market-based systems, allowance trading, and incentives;

ii) Determine specific steps the state of Washington should take to prepare for the impact of global warming, including impacts to public health, agriculture, the coast line, forestry, and infrastructure;

iii) Assess what further steps the state of Washington should take to be prepared for the impact of global warming to water supply and management;

iv) Initiate active involvement by the state of Washington in the development of regional and national climate policies and coordination with British Columbia;

v) Recommend how the state of Washington, as an entity, can reduce its generation of greenhouse gas emissions;

vi) Work with the state of Washington’s local governments to maximize coordination and effectiveness of local and state climate initiatives; and

vii) Inform the general public of the process, solicit comments and involvement and develop recommendations for future public education and outreach.

D. The Director of the Department of Ecology and the Director of the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development shall submit Washington Climate Change Challenge to the Office of the Governor within one year of the signing of this Executive Order.

This Executive Order shall take effect immediately.

Signed and sealed with the official seal of the state of Washington, on this 7th day of February 2007, at Olympia, Washington.

By:
Christine O. Gregoire
Governor

January is Warmest on Record

LiveScience Staff
LiveScience.com

The average global temperature last month was the highest for any January on record, according to NOAA, climbing to 55.13 degrees Fahrenheit, which is 1.53 degrees warmer than the 20th-century average.

The global reading, an average of measurements taken over land and sea, beat out the previous record for a January, set in 2002 at 54.88 degrees.

Land temperatures especially peaked at a record-high 3.40 degrees warmer than average.

The warm January was at least partly the result of an El Niño weather pattern that began last September and continued into January, combined with the continuing global warming trend, NOAA reported today.

The most unusually warm temperatures were measured in the Northern Hemisphere, far from the equator. Large parts of Eastern Europe and Russia experienced temperatures more than 8 degrees above average, and temperatures more than 5 degrees above average occurred in much of Canada. The snow cover in January in Europe and Asia was the second lowest on record.

The warming was less pronounced in the 48 contiguous United States, where the average January temperature was just under 1 degree above the 20th century average.

Scientists say no single weather event or warm month can be blamed on global warming, but that more extreme conditions are likely as the planet's climate changes and strings of warm months are indeed evidence of climate change.

An upper-level wind pattern brought warmer-than-average temperatures to the East and colder-than-average temperatures to the southern Plains states and much of the West.

Hundreds of daily low temperature records were broken during a mid-January cold snap in Arizona and southern California.

Snowfall was below average in most of the Rockies, meaning that water supplies could plummet later this year. Drought is already occurring in 25 percent of the contiguous United States, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor, at the end of January. Droughts are worst now in southern Texas, Wyoming, the western High Plains, and northern Minnesota.

Last year was a record warm year in the United States. The past nine years are all among the 25 warmest on record for the contiguous United States, a streak unprecedented in records dating back to 1896. Scientists say 2007 could be the warmest yet globally.

Colts

I love football and Indianapolis.

DA BEARS

Well, I don't mind the Bears in the Superbowl, although I would have preferred Seattle. However, unless they can revive Jim McMahon, they will be a cannon fodder team for even the worst defense in the NFL.

Payton wasn't awsome, Marvin wasn't marvelous. The Indy special teams were a half point short of awful. But, the defense, the defense, the defense. And watching Joseph and Dominick made everyone who could remember go Edgrinn who?

Kind of fun to get to say, "Let the Bear offense play. Please."

All over until next year.

Weenie

wee·nie /[wee-nee]
–noun
1. Informal. a wiener.
2. Slang. penis.
3. Slang. an insignificant, disliked person.
4. Slang. A person, especially a man, who is regarded as being weak and ineffectual.
5. Football. Rex Grossman

Too Little, too Late

My pledge to focus on global warming, climate change, whatever, appears to be too little, too late. Doesn't matter if people believe in global warming or not. Rather than debate it, we need to start thinking about how to live with it. If nothing else, waterfront is going to be more literal.

By SETH BORENSTEIN

PARIS - The world's leading climate scientists said global warming has begun, is "very likely" caused by man, and will be unstoppable for centuries, according to a report obtained Friday by The Associated Press.

The scientists — using their strongest language yet on the issue — said now that world has begun to warm, hotter temperatures and rises in sea level "would continue for centuries" no matter how much humans control their pollution. The report also linked the warming to the recent increase in stronger hurricanes.

"The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone," said the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — a group of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments.

The phrase "very likely" translates to a more than 90 percent certainty that global warming is caused by man's burning of fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame.

What that means in simple language is "we have this nailed," said top U.S. climate scientist Jerry Mahlman, who originated the percentage system.

The 20-page report, which was due to be officially released later in the day, represents the most authoritative science on global warming.

The new language marked an escalation from the panel's last report in 2001, which said warming was "likely" caused by human activity. There had been speculation that the participants might try to say it is "virtually certain" man causes global warming, which translates to 99 percent certainty.

The panel predicted temperature rises of 2-11.5 degrees Fahrenheit by the year 2100. That was a wider range than in the 2001 report.

However, the panel also said its best estimate was for temperature rises of 3.2-7.1 degrees Fahrenheit. In 2001, all the panel gave was a range of 2.5-10.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

On sea levels, the report projects rises of 7-23 inches by the end of the century. An additional 3.9-7.8 inches are possible if recent, surprising melting of polar ice sheets continues.

But there is some cold comfort. Some, but not all, of the projected temperature and sea level rises are slightly lower than projected in a previous report in 2001. That is mostly due to use of more likely scenarios and would still result in dramatic effects across the globe, scientists said.
Many scientists had warned that this estimate was too cautious and said sea level rise could be closer to 3-5 feet because of ice sheet melt.

Nevertheless, scientists agreed the report is strong.

"There's no question that the powerful language is intimately linked to the more powerful science," said one of the study's many co-authors, Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria, who spoke by phone from Canada. He said the report was based on science that is rock-solid, peer-reviewed, and consensus.

"It's very conservative. Scientists by their nature are skeptics."

The scientists wrote the report based on years of peer-reviewed research and government officials edited it with an eye toward the required unanimous approval by world governments.
In the end, there was little debate on the strength of the wording about the role of man in global warming.

The panel quickly agreed Thursday on two of the most contentious issues: attributing global warming to man-made burning of fossil fuels and connecting it to a recent increase in stronger hurricanes.

Negotiations over a third and more difficult issue — how much the sea level is predicted to rise by 2100 — went into the night Thursday with a deadline approaching for the report.

While critics call the panel overly alarmist, it is by nature relatively cautious because it relies on hundreds of scientists, including skeptics.

"I hope that policymakers will be quite convinced by this message," said Riibeta Abeta, a delegate whose island nation Kiribati is threatened by rising seas. "The purpose is to get them moving."

The Chinese delegation was resistant to strong wording on global warming, said Barbados delegate Leonard Fields and others. China has increasingly turned to fossil fuels for its huge and growing energy needs.

The U.S. government delegation was not one of the more vocal groups in the debate over whether warming is man-made, said officials from other countries. And several attendees credited the head of the panel session, Susan Solomon, a top U.S. government climate scientist, with pushing through the agreement so quickly.

The Bush administration acknowledges that global warming is man-made and a problem that must be dealt with, Bush science adviser John Marburger has said. However, Bush continues to reject mandatory limits on so-called "greenhouse" gases.

But this is more than just a U.S. issue.

"What you're trying to do is get the whole planet under the proverbial tent in how to deal with this, not just the rich countries," Mahlman said Thursday. "I think we're in a different kind of game now."

The panel, created by the United Nations in 1988, releases its assessments every five or six years — although scientists have been observing aspects of climate change since as far back as the 1960s. The reports are released in phases — this is the first of four this year.

The next report is due in April and will discuss the effects of global warming. But that issue was touched upon in the current document.

The report says that global warming has made stronger hurricanes, including those on the Atlantic Ocean, such as Hurricane Katrina.

The report said that an increase in hurricane and tropical cyclone strength since 1970 "more likely than not" can be attributed to man-made global warming. The scientists said global warming's connection varies with storms in different parts of the world, but that the storms that strike the Americas are global warming-influenced.

That's a contrast from the 2001 which said there was not enough evidence to make such a conclusion. And it conflicts with a November 2006 statement by the World Meteorological Organization, which helped found the IPCC. The meteorological group said it could not link past stronger storms to global warming.

Fields — of Barbados, a country in the path of many hurricanes — said the new wording was "very important." He noted that insurance companies — which look to science to calculate storm risk — "watch the language, too."