January 23, 2007

"And so, in my State of the—my State of the Union—or state—my speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation—"

Did you watch the State of the Union?

What did you think?

I just caught the chimp lying within the first few sentences and kind of tuned out.

Again, lots of words with no substance.

Remember when he said we would go to Mars? How about the program to force welfare receipients who wanted to get married to get marriage counseling (presumably Christian)? Any other goofy and meaningless proposals from past addresses that you recall?

This year it was calling for citizens of the U.S. to reduce gasoline consumption by 20%. How? Who knows? Another meaningless sop to try to bolster his environmental cred. Same with paying lip service to "climate change".

What struck you about Bush's speech? (if you could make it through to the end.)

By the way, I thought Jim Webb did a great job on the Democratic response. (Transcript here.)
I want to share with all of you a picture that I have carried with me for more than 50 years. This is my father, when he was a young Air Force captain, flying cargo planes during the Berlin Airlift. He sent us the picture from Germany, as we waited for him, back here at home. When I was a small boy, I used to take the picture to bed with me every night, because for more than three years my father was deployed, unable to live with us full-time, serving overseas or in bases where there was no family housing. I still keep it, to remind me of the sacrifices that my mother and others had to make, over and over again, as my father gladly served our country. I was proud to follow in his footsteps, serving as a Marine in Vietnam. My brother did as well, serving as a Marine helicopter pilot. My son has joined the tradition, now serving as an infantry Marine in Iraq.

Like so many other Americans, today and throughout our history, we serve and have served, not for political reasons, but because we love our country. On the political issues -- those matters of war and peace, and in some cases of life and death -- we trusted the judgment of our national leaders. We hoped that they would be right, that they would measure with accuracy the value of our lives against the enormity of the national interest that might call upon us to go into harm's way.

We owed them our loyalty, as Americans, and we gave it. But they owed us sound judgment, clear thinking, concern for our welfare, a guarantee that the threat to our country was equal to the price we might be called upon to pay in defending it.

The President took us into this war recklessly. He disregarded warnings from the national security adviser during the first Gulf War, the chief of staff of the army, two former commanding generals of the Central Command, whose jurisdiction includes Iraq, the director of operations on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many, many others with great integrity and long experience in national security affairs. We are now, as a nation, held Hostage to the predictable -- and predicted -- disarray that has followed.

The war's costs to our nation have been staggering.

Financially.

The damage to our reputation around the world.

The lost opportunities to defeat the forces of international terrorism.

And especially the precious blood of our citizens who have stepped forward to serve.

The majority of the nation no longer supports the way this war is being fought; nor does the majority of our military. We need a new direction. Not one step back from the war against international terrorism. Not a precipitous withdrawal that ignores the possibility of further chaos. But an immediate shift toward strong regionally based diplomacy, a policy that takes our soldiers off the streets of Iraq's cities, and a formula that will in short order allow our combat forces to leave Iraq.



Note: The title of this post is an actual quote from ... well, who else? Chimpy McFlightsuit, our "bold" leader.

17 Comments:

At 1/24/2007 12:23 AM, Blogger Huck Finn said...

TID, since Google doesn't have a translator from Bush to English, can you help me understand this health care thing?

This is what he said: "First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income on payroll tax -- or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income. With this reform, more than 100 million men, women, and children who are now covered by employer-provided insurance will benefit from lower tax bills. At the same time, this reform will level the playing field for those who do not get health insurance through their job. For Americans who now purchase health insurance on their own, this proposal would mean a substantial tax savings -- $4,500 for a family of four making $60,000 a year." What's the change?

Seems like I've heard Dems complain that this is a tax hike, although it sounds like a tax cut. Is it that the $15,000 & $7,500 figures are actually reductions from the current law, which would start taxes earlier?

 
At 1/24/2007 2:39 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Huck,
Excellent question, and one which would take some research to answer. But odds are good, based on past phoney initiatives from Bush, that this is another pig in a poke, dressed up to look appealing at first glance, but really not much help at all to those who are insured.

And of course, helping out people who are ALREADY insured does nothing to help the crisis of the millions of folks who can't afford insurance at all or who are denied coverage by the "we will not take any risk" policies of insurance companies, which of course, goes against the very premise insurance is based upon.

By the way, there IS a political stock market. It's run at the University of Iowa school of business. The Iowa Electronic markets so far only has two markets for the 2008 elections, vote share by party, and winner take all, or popular vote winner by party.

I would imagine that some site is running the sort of market based deal based on individual candidates though. I'll do a little looking and if I find anything I'll let you know.

 
At 1/24/2007 6:22 AM, Blogger QuadCityImages said...

Going to Mars has been about the lone issue where I've agreed with Bush.

We just need to get that exploration feeling back in the American psyche. Its what made us what we are as a country.

Fortunately it at least seems as though private folks are taking over the pioneering.

 
At 1/24/2007 7:37 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

As "cool" as going to Mars may seem, I'm afraid Bush has broke the bank many times over and for decades to come. There's far too many pressing problems right in our own backyard to be carving out a few tens of billions of dollars for a aerospace full-employment project.

Of course, space projects are just another thing that we'll have to do without due to the trillion spent on Iraq.

I'm not sure people actually realize just how financially tapped out the country is, and it's not going to get better as the bills come due either.

The fact is, Bush has been spending literally hundreds of millions of dollars a week for about 4 solid years and cut taxes at the same time.

Any school child could tell you that can only result in accelerating the debt load and precarious state of the economy. At the very least, it's designed to literally break the government so that corporations will then say they have to take over.

 
At 1/24/2007 7:42 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

As "cool" as going to Mars may seem, I'm afraid Bush has broke the bank many times over and for decades to come. There's far too many pressing problems right in our own backyard to be carving out a few tens of billions of dollars for a aerospace full-employment project.

Of course, space projects are just another thing that we'll have to do without due to the trillion spent on Iraq.

I'm not sure people actually realize just how financially tapped out the country is, and it's not going to get better as the bills come due either.

The fact is, Bush has been spending literally hundreds of millions of dollars a week for about 4 solid years and cut taxes at the same time.

Any school child could tell you that can only result in accelerating the debt load and precarious state of the economy. At the very least, it's designed to literally break the government so that corporations will then say they have to take over traditional government services and get their hands on more of the public treasury.

Again, I'm not sure many people realize the scope of what's happened under this regime. And by the time the bills come due, they're going to not know what hit them.

The things we take for granted from the government now will become luxuries and things of the past soon enough.

That is, unles the Dems are able to raise taxes in order to try to pay down Bush's reckless debt.

But Bush and the right wing media have convinced a lot of dodos that they should get everything from the government but not pay for it. That's helpful.

 
At 1/24/2007 9:09 AM, Anonymous PROUSA said...

George Bush is President of the United States and you ought to show him the respect that he is due. What kind of facist, anti-American wack-job are you anyway?

Last night President Bush was cool, calm and collected. He inspired confidence and worked hard to help the American people better understand the high stakes in the Middle East.

The stories about the man who saved the guy, the lady who started her own business and the soldier that won the Bronze Star all worked to put a more human face on America and the War.

While some want to "cut and run," Bush's address makes that harder, not easier, to achieve.

Saying one is going to vote against reinforcing our troops, and denying our military men and women the supplies they need to win the War is easier to say than to do. Let's wait and see what these politicians actually do, not what they say, when the time finally comes.

If anyone around these parts is a monkey's a** --- it is you!

 
At 1/24/2007 9:47 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

George the Lesser is an arrogant, incurious, lying incompetent who will go down in history as one of the worst leaders this country has ever had to endure.

You can swallow everything he puts down your thoat if you choose, but you must be in deep denial.

George Bush deserves respect from no one, and almost no one respects him. Other than rubes like you (how much did you send to the Nigerian heiress?) and those he allowed to loot the treasury with no-bid, cost-plus contracts in Iraq and all the other cronies he's allowed to write their own laws in order to make their third hundred million.

The miserable failure can't even find a college that will agree to be the site of his library. HA! If THAT isn't two words that don't go together, BUSH and LIBRARY!

The country can't be rid of the criminal boob fast enough, and it will take generations to recover from the damage he's done.

The only shame is that he won't see the inside of a jail cell.

 
At 1/24/2007 10:15 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Hey, I'm sorry. When Bush is pissing all over you and telling you it's raining, and you believe it, of course you'll be sore when someone tells you that you're soaked in piss.

You like those pleasing little tales Bush told you, eh?

I think he left out the one about the soldier who went back to Iraq for his third year long deployment. His wife gave birth to a beautiful baby girl while he was there.

It's a pity his eyes were blown out and he will never see her. FOR NOTHING!

Bush invaded Iraq for the hell of it. It was a "pre-emptive" war, but what did it pre-empt?

NOTHING. There was nothing to "pre-empt". And thousands of families are grieving and torn apart and hundreds of thousands of utterly innocent people are dead, maimed, and crippled for life. FOR WHAT?

Don't tell me Bush deserves my respect.

Mulitiply that story of the G.I. times a few thousand and maybe the stupid hand-picked anecdotes that you swallow so readily won't seem so great.

Wake up if you're capable. It's not being a patriot to swallow everything a lying semi-delusional president tells you and not bother finding out the truth. Being a lemming isn't being a patriot.

 
At 1/24/2007 11:28 AM, Anonymous yinn said...

Huck Finn's piece of transcript made me laugh. At our house we played a drinking game to get through the speech, based on six words we selected. One of them was "taxes"--we had to skip a few sips or risk being put under the table!

What was even more hilarious was Bush's proposal to balance the federal budget. Ooh, and how about his disapproval of earmarks all of a sudden?

Sen. Webb said what needed to be said. Glad he was the one who gave the response.

 
At 1/24/2007 7:10 PM, Blogger nicodemus said...

A few years ago Bush was talking about the hydrogen-powered car. Are they ready for market yet? I want one.

Let's remember, the State of the Union is required by the Constitution, but the Constitution does not require a televised speech. Sometimes I think the president should opt out and simply write the State of the Union down as a written report and have it hand delivered to Congress- that is how it was done in the old days!! Sometimes that would be for the best. A smart advisor would have told Bush to do this.

I remember when Clinton gave his State of the Union to Congress as they presided over his impeachment. That was the last time there was talk of opting out of the tv speech. Boy that night was tense. People expected Clinton to come in with his knees knocking, but it didn't happen.

 
At 1/25/2007 7:41 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Love him or hate him, Clinton was nothing if not tough and resiliant and able to handle tough situations.

All of his SOTU speeches were given under tough circumstances.

He had to compete with the O.J. civil verdict one year, speak extemporaneously after the wrong speech was loaded into the teleprompter and did so flawlessly another year, one was given less than a week after the Lewinski scandal broke, another just after a huge defeat in the midterm elections and another just after the government shut down, yet all were good speeches.

Huck's question about the details of Bush's supposed health care initiative made me feel that without a doubt, Bush rarely understands or would be able to begin to explain, what he says during most speeches.

Can anyone even IMAGINE what would happen if Bush got up to the podium to give a major address and the wrong speech was in the teleprompter?

He'd probably read whatever was there no matter what it was or stop everything and wait until it was fixed. And of course, who ever was responsible would be fired immediately.

When Paul Begala appologized to Clinton for the teleprompter snafu, Clinton wasn't even angry. When asked what he thought when he saw that the wrong speech was in the teleprompter, Clinton just said he thought the Lord must be giving him a test, and proceeded to speak for the first 9 minutes without any text.

As to eliminating the televised speech, I wouldn't be sad to see it go. It's such a bizarre little political side show with all the obligatory applause and standing up and sitting down and everyone reporting on who scowled and who stood and who didn't.... nonsense.

 
At 1/26/2007 2:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, of course, George Bush is the reason for every problem that the US faces...however, how about the news flash...

THE SENATE REJECTS THE HOUSE MINIMUM WAGE BILL WITHOUT SMALL BUSINESS TAX-BREAKS!

that is the Democrat-led Senate that appreciates that business is not all bad and will be affected by wage increases, of any nature.

 
At 1/26/2007 5:01 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Wow. Apparently you've been laboring under the delusion that Democrats are anti-business. No wonder your pleased. I'm sure you'll be just as supportive of other common-sense Democratic measures.

They'll be a welcome and sane alternative to allowing business to literally control the entire legislative process.

 
At 1/26/2007 5:02 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Wow. Apparently you've been laboring under the delusion that Democrats are anti-business. No wonder your pleased. I'm sure you'll be just as supportive of other common-sense Democratic measures.

They'll be a welcome and sane alternative to allowing big business to completely control the entire legislative process from top to bottom. Expect to see some sanity and return to balance between business needs and the needs of the millions who work paycheck to paycheck.

 
At 1/28/2007 7:20 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of course the Dem's are not anti-business, they appreciate that they need business (and the 'rich' (whatever they think that is) to fund everything that they do.

It's not that they are anti-business, it's just that they do not understand the concept of 'risk-reward' and a persons right to make a profit.

 
At 1/29/2007 9:49 AM, Anonymous Uncle Ben said...

How is the "Jacobs" position on the minimum wage increase (upset about impact on business) any different than the "Bush" position (upset about impact on business)

Sounds like Chimpy McFlightsuit and Dopey McHelmethead are on the same page!

 
At 1/29/2007 12:15 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

If you believe that, you're truly an ignorant person.

Something tells me you've made a profit. Or maybe not, and instead of owning up to your failure, you now blame Democrats.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home