While I run out to do some work and run a few errands I’ll leave you with the Olympia City Council meeting from Feb. 6th for your entertainment.

While I do not smoke, I accept that some people do and hence avoid the pubs where they congregate. I would never have thought that it would become illegal to smoke in public places. That is left to the loonies in California.

- Graham, Reading, England

along with their classification as vertebrates

The enemy within:

Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, have decided against using congressional power to force a quick end to U.S. involvement in Iraq, and instead will pursue a slow-bleed strategy designed to gradually limit the administration’s options.

That’s not what I call it.  I call it chickenshiite.  If you haven’t the courage of your convictions nor the testicular fortitude to stand up and call for a direct cut-off of funding and declare a vote for defeat, get the hell offa my planet.

The legislative strategy will be supplemented by a multimillion-dollar TV ad campaign designed to pressure vulnerable GOP incumbents into breaking with President Bush and forcing the administration to admit that the war is politically unsustainable.

Produced, no doubt, by alZawahiri’s production company.  And paid for my ME?!?!?!? I think not.

Pelosi and other top Democrats are not yet prepared for an open battle with the White House over ending funding for the war, and they are wary of Republican claims that Democratic leaders would endanger the welfare of U.S. troops. The new approach of first reducing the number of troops available for the conflict, while maintaining funding levels for units already in the field, gives political cover to conservative House Democrats who are nervous about appearing “anti-military” while also mollifying the anti-war left, which has long been agitating for Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to be more aggressive.

Though I fail to see how this could possibly avoid abandoning the troops in harm’s way.

The House strategy is being crafted quietly, even as the chamber is immersed this week in an emotional, albeit mostly symbolic masturbatory [e-C], debate over a resolution expressing opposition to Bush’s plan to “surge” 21,500 more troops into Iraq.

Sneaky? Slithery underhanded weasly creepy… [oh, no!  that’s nuance.]

“There’s a D-Day coming in here, and it’s going to start with the supplemental and finish with the ‘08 [defense] budget,” said Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, who chairs the Air and Land Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.

STFU and go back to selling prostitot wear, you legacy loser.

“What we have staked out is a campaign to stop the war without cutting off funding” for the troops, said Tom Mazzie of Americans Against Escalation of the War in Iraq. “We call it the ‘readiness strategy.’”

Tom Mazzie [muzzie? irony?] is the spokespuppet for the “andi-war left”—the owners of Peloisi / Murtha, et al.  They claim to be [yet another] coalition among:

SEIU [Service Employees International Union]
MoveOn.org Political Action
Center for American Progress *cough*Hillary*cough*
USAction
Win Without War
Vote Vets [Wes Clark]
Campaign for America’s Future
USSA [United States Student Association]

that’s one helluva vipers’ nest.

Murtha’s proposal, which has been kept under tight wraps, is likely to pass the House next month or in early April as part of the supplemental spending bill, Democratic insiders said, if the language remains tightly focused and does not threaten funding levels for combat forces already in the field. The battle will then shift to the Senate. Anti-war groups like Mazzie’s are prepared to spend at least $6.5 million on a TV ad campaign and at least $2 million more on a grass-roots lobbying effort. Vulnerable GOP incumbents like Sens. Norm Coleman of Minnestoa, Susan Collins of Maine, Gordon Smith of Oregon and John Sununu of New Hampshire will be targeted by the anti-war organizations, according to Mazzie and former Rep. Tom Andrews, D-Maine, head of the Win Without War Coalition.

...If the Senate does not approve these new funding restrictions, or if Senate Republicans filibuster the supplemental bill, Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership would then be able to ratchet up the political pressure on the White House to accede to their demands by “slow-walking” the supplemental bill. Additionally, House Democrats could try to insert the Murtha provisions into the fiscal 2008 defense authorization and spending bills, which are scheduled to come to the floor later in the year.

“We are not cutting funding for any [unit] in Iraq,” said the aide, who admitted the Democratic maneuver would not prevent the president from sending some additional forces to Baghdad. “We want to limit the number who can go ... We’re trying to build a case that the president needs to change course.”

that’s not called “building a case,” Sonny; that’s called outright blackmail.

Their outfit:  MoveCongress.org There’s a lovely interview with Lynn Woolsey *spit* bleating Sheehanesquely.

Note the look on ThankYouNancy’s face.

I wonder if Murtha’s uncomfortable with her hand up there… *shudder* working his mouth. 

My friend Major Marc (now a Lt. Colonel) who was key in implementing the Urban Warfare project at Ft. Lewis told me right after September Eleventh and before Iraq that this was the stuff he was going to be watching for...........

Oops, I’m sorry. Did they neglect to mention that the kid was MUSLIM!!!?

A former Arabic translator for the Army in Iraq pleaded guilty today to illegally possessing secret documents detailing the 82nd Airborne Division’s mission against insurgents.

Among the documents was a report with precise information about U.S. weaponry and targets.

The translator, who goes by the name Noureddine Malki, also pleaded guilty in 2005 to using an alias while becoming a U.S. citizen. Authorities say his true identity is unknown.

The United Nations has welcomed US plans to grant up to 7,000 Iraqi refugees asylum over the next year.

Antonio Guterres, who heads the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), described the policy plans as “a very good step in the right direction”.

Snow fell on Nepal’s capital, Kathmandu, for the first time in 63 years on Wednesday, stirring excitement and curiosity among residents and their children.

“I have never seen it snow in Kathmandu in all my life,” said 45-year-old housewife Manju Shrestha, playing in the snow with her young children.

DOH!

Stoo

“I’m not afraid to say it. Dessert has a well-known liberal agenda,” Colbert said in a statement. ”What I hope to do with this ice cream is bring some balance back to the freezer case.”

Dem silly corporate hippycrites!

( sure makes the case for allowing them nukes, no?)

Al Franken announced Wednesday that he will run for the Senate in 2008, making it clear that the comedian and author of “Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot” wants to be taken seriously as a political figure.

Back in college one of the guys in our group of friends was nicknamed “Scud.” (He always got shot down.) He was the kind of guy that opened his mouth and a lengthy dissertation of faux-reasoning and rambling nonsense just spewed forth.  We deemed his line of thinking as “Scud Logic.” Scud’s a nice guy, but never try to bring up subject matter with any air of contention about it around him.  Not even the weather.

So I see this USA Today editorial head line over at Yahoo! news with the title of Claims about Iranian arms carry familiar lack of proof and decide to read it.  About the third paragraph down picture it as an audio book read by Scud.

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) believes it is his right as a Muslim to be sworn into Congress with the Quran. But apparently, the freshman lawmaker doesn’t believe it’s Rep. Tom Tancredo’s (R-Colo.) right to smoke a cigar in his congressional office.

Ellison’s office called the Capitol Hill Police on Tancredo last Wednesday night as Tancredo was in his office smoking a cigar. The lawmakers have neighboring offices on the first floor of the Longworth House Office Building.

LGF

On Thursday morning, in a special session being held at the Stanford University Law School campus a critical First Amendment case is being argued before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.  The case deals squarely with the issue of whether Christians have a right to use neutral language in the workplace to talk about same-sex marriage and other issues at the forefront of national debate.

Attorneys Scott Lively and Richard D. Ackerman will be arguing the case before the Ninth Circuit on behalf of an African-American Christian woman who was threatened with termination at her job with the City of Oakland.  The City of Oakland claims that references to the “natural family, marriage and family values” constitute hate speech which is scary to city workers.  The Ninth Circuit panel of judges includes two women and one man.

Back in February of 2005, United States District Judge Vaughn Walker ruled the city of Oakland had a right to bar two employees from posting a Good News Employee Association flier promoting traditional family values on an office bulletin board.  According to the lawsuit, gay and lesbian city workers had already been using the city’s e-mail, bulletin board, and written communications systems for promoting their views to other workers, including the plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs, Regina Rederford and Robin Christy posted the flier in response to an e-mail to city employees announcing formation of a gay and lesbian employee association. The two responded with a promotion of their own—the start of an informal group that respects “the natural family, marriage and family values.”
But supervisors Robert Bobb, then city manager, and Joyce Hicks, then deputy director of the Community and Economic Development Agency, ordered removal of the flier, stating it contained “statements of a homophobic nature” and promoted “sexual-orientation-based harassment,” even though it made no absolutely no mention of homosexuality.
A July 2003 lawsuit by Rederford and Christy claimed the city’s anti-discrimination policy “promotes homosexuality” and “openly denounces Christian values.”

U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker dismissed the case in February 2005, ruling the two women did not have their First Amendment rights violated and that federal anti-discrimination protections afforded to gender, race, and religion did not apply to the women plaintiffs.

CRIMINAL ALIENS?

Yeah .. you heard me right. Though it will take me time to get my tongue trained .. I’ve decided to join the politically correct crowd when it comes to referring to the invasion force from South of the border. The politically correct left wants to call them “undocumented workers” or “immigrants.”

I’m part of the politically correct right ... so the “undocumented” thing doesn’t work for me. I was “undocumented” right up until the time I got my hideous Social Security number from the Imperial Federal Government.

They’re also not “immigrants.” Immigration is a legal procedure. The “immigrant” title is given to those who follow this procedure. The Mexican invasion force has decided not to follow the law. They come across the border illegally. They get jobs illegally. They remain here illegally. That’s why we’ve been calling them illegal aliens up to this point. But when you think about it, what do we call people who violate our laws? What do you call people who engage in a pattern of continuing illegal behavior? Why, we call them criminals!

The gall of these people waving signs saying “I am not a criminal!” Why hell yes you are! You broke the law coming here. You’re breaking the law staying here. You break the law by working here. You break the law .. .you’re a criminal!

So ... to the extent to which I can remember .. from now on the Hispanic invasion force shall be known as and referred to as “criminal aliens” on the show and in my writings.