GWBush's State of the Union

I think he has some very good scriptwriters, who suit his agenda.

msolga, Do you think it's more fiction than reality? c.i.

I think he said the necessary things to meet his desired ends. A PR exercise, little new there. A very cynical exercise.

First shot in his 2004 campaign. I listened and watched - it was boiler plate, with almost no specifics. And I woder if AIDS in Africa would have come up if they didn't think they'd have a viable VP candidate in Frist.

You ask a lot of questions there. I don't think we'll see much in the way of changes in Medicare the next while, and I think privatization of Social Security is a terrible idea. Although a small, voluntary contribution to the market might not be so terrible. I've never heard anything on how this would be administered, or how it would work. I don't think it matters what Colin Powell says - I feel very cynical about this whole thing, and feel they need to make Bush a hero to get the next election. And I also believe this war is going to cost far more than we'll ever know, just in the bribing and buying of "willing coalition."

Among the things I liked - his positive reference to the aluminum tubes, which the Atomic Energy inspector had debunked. My husband explained that the speech was written well in advance, and to change anything would have thrown Bush off course.

Isn't it frightening to think that speechwriters tailor what they write for the speaker, and this was all they thought Bush could handle?

Thought of something else I liked - he mentioned a program and budget for mentoring junior high students of prisoners (!). Since there's no way of vouching for the accuracy of all the figures he threw out - this seemed to work out to about $400 a kid. What was that all about?

mama, You hit on what I thought was missing from his whole speech. No specifics, but a whole lot of good sounding stuff to throw off the nieve listeners. He had to bait the majority of listeners, before he got down to his main issue, Saddam. He scares the be-jesus out of me - even more so, because I know I'm in the minority. The majority of Americans still will support his war with Iraq if he can get UN approval. For what? Just because this administration keeps repeating that Saddam is a threat to Americans doesn't make it true. What happened to everybody's brain? His tax benefit to exempt dividends only favors the rich - mostly people with incomes of $300,000 or more, and the rest of us, representing 95 percent of us, gets the scraps. Most of us that own stocks that pay dividends are in our 401k's and 403b's, and it's all taxable upon withdrawal. No exemptions like the rich will benefit. Why can't people see through these smoke and mirrors? It's really frustrating. c.i.

Scares me, too, CI. And yet........... the market went down even further, and this was after his big economic speech. And I haven't seen a poll. Now, we were told to expect an upward blip after his speech - a naturally occurring event. Now it's the Friday after his Tuesday speech - and nada. Ordinarily, when you see nothing, it's because they don't want the negatives showing.

I am beginning to believe that there might be a huge disconnect out there between the media and the public. Blitzer - on CNN - ran an informal poll about approval of Bush's job. It came back - on air, as 87% disapproval. But the next time they showed it, it was something like 47%.

But when you listen to the conservatives and staunch republicans, it's all gung-ho. Did you ever get VNN's reference to the Lewis lapham article in Harpers, comparing what's hapening to the Pelaponnesian Wars? http://www.harpers.org/online/the_road_to_babylon/?pg=1

GWBush and company has not connected the charge to war with the fickle stock market. Investors already lost billions of dollars, and GWBush has his eye on Iraq - only. I'm wondering when will the American people tire of his myopia? His economic stimulus package is being challenged not only by democrats, but by many republicans. This guy doesn't understand anything about economics. He begins by planning a ten year tax reduction plan when it's impossible to forecast our economy that far ahead. Now that our ecoomy is really slowing down to barely above deflation, he wants to make all his tax cuts permanent, and effective this year. This guy is dangerous. He's playing with fire that'll last way beyond his four years in the white house, and the American people are going to pay dearly. He wants to spend all that money for drug benefits at at cost of 300 billion for ten years, 15 billion to HIV/AIDS, and a tax cut to boot. Something is definitely wrong with this picture. Why can't people see? c.i.

This appeared on the Op-Ed page of the NYT this morning. It is a report by the senior analyst during the Iran-Iraq war, who was later a professor at the Army College (those are for credentials).

The op-ed is a report on the supposed bombing of his own people (the Kurds) during the Iraq-Iran war at Halabja, and refutes all that stuff put out by Bush by someone who was not only there and analyzing, but also by official reports. The probability that it was the Iranians who did this rests partly upon the gas used, position of bodies, condition of bodies, etc.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/31/opinion/31PELL.html

Isn't this whole thing, and I mean whole - beginning to take on the proportions of the big lie? The Bushites not only don't care that they're lying; they're betting on the public being dumb enough to swallow it. I see where Hans Blix's report also refutes what Bush claimed in his state of the union address.

And where are the polls showing the great reception of his speech?

mama, I saw your link on the other political forum discussing Iraq. I also want to THANK YOU here. It's great to see how Bushie cannot be trusted, but those die-hard war mongers are going to ignore that anyway. Just watch! c.i.

Here's your SOTU useless information and trivia:

President Bush designated Attorney General John Ashcroft to stay away from his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, making him the successor to lead the government should catastrophe have struck at the Capitol. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, hospitalized for a back condition, was also absent. (The absence of a Cabinet secretary maintained a long-standing tradition that one member not attend the presidential address to Congress.)

In a move related to post-September 11 worst-case scenarios, 800 gas masks were kept ready in case of a chemical or bioterrorism attack during the speech, officials said. Police took no chances before Bush's arrival, sealing off roads around the Capitol building while every room was checked by bomb-sniffing dogs. Journalists covering the speech were shown a short police video on how to use the masks in case of a gas or chemical attack. A House of Representatives press gallery official said 800 masks were stocked in the corridors around the chamber before Bush spoke. "It is extremely important that you do not panic," said an expert in the video presentation.

All levels of the Capitol were filled with uniformed and undercover security. All traffic was kept away from a three-block radius around the Capitol. Other key parts of Washington were designated no-fly zones, police officials said.

Ashcroft stayed in an undisclosed location as the rest of the Cabinet, top military aides and three Supreme Court justices gathered for the State of the Union address.

Labor Secretary Elaine Chao and Housing Secretary Mel Martinez don't have to worry about being designated the "missing Cabinet member" at such speeches. Both are naturalized citizens, barred by the Constitution from serving as president.

2003 STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS: COMPLETE TRANSCRIPT OF PRESIDENT BUSH'S SPEECH TO CONGRESS AND THE NATION

C I
the son of the gun( two term resident) is worse than the father( one term resident).
As a well informed, wide travelled person you know better than me as I wish to expose hypocracy and uphold Democracy.

Bernanke told the congressional committee today that we may be headed into a "recession." It's as if he's being careful not to upset Bush by saying that word. Bush will never use that word no matter how bad our economy worsens.

Bush says we don't torture, so nobody in government uses that word.

A bunch of wussies.

C I
I ahave a humble request.

What happens in your country after 2000.
How will you rejuvenate/ revive/ and make a friendly one?
I cannot address other one-sided intellectual but you are a person with whom i Can get some clarifications.