Official State of the Union Thread
 

The state of the union address is on NOW, so open up a streaming player and tune in to one of these servers:

http://205.188.234.68:8018
http://205.188.234.36:8018

Line by line commentary in #tfp, go here to join in.

Post comments here.

[edit] the address is over.
Did anyone else notice he forgot to mention the space initiative?[/edit]

Three main points:

1) It was funny as all hell watching Ted Kennedy shake his head in disbelief at everything Bush said. He will catch hell for it, but it was worth it.
2) The spontaneous applause when Bush said the Patriot Act expired in a year.
3) Bush's claim to cut the deficit in half while simultaneously decreasing taxes and granting new funding to every initiative under the sun.

ok, so what's w/ his marriage comments? bit of a drama queen about the judges enforcing & overturning laws as is their job... and revise the constitution?!?!?!? jesus.

I was disappointed when the moon or mars mission wasn't mentioned, and I was wondering how long it'd take him to get to OUR state of the union, since he spent ample time on the rest of the world.

I found it interesting that while france is separating church and state to an an extreme, bush creates an executive initiative opening billions of dollars up to religious charities...

I couldn't watch. Seeing that primate sully our halls of gov't pisses me off to the point of apoplexy. Anyone know where there's a transcript? I can read it, but I can't stand looking at chimpboy mocking half the country.

I find it so funny that some people demand a constitutional amendment for hetro only marriage. Outlaw divorce and you might have an argument for marriage's sancity but not with a divorce rate of 50% and Married by America on Fox.

I really think things have gotten out of control when the President has to shout down "spontaneous" applause to continue speaking. I'm not sure if the fault lies with the writers for putting in too many "applaud here" lines, the President, for being a halting speaker and thus allowing his pauses to encourage applause, or the audience, for being a little too fond of the sounds of hands hitting each other.

STEROIDS?? STEROIDS??
What the f*^k do steroids have to do with the state of the union????
The note from the little girl was real cute.

mr b

I also like how he transitioned from al Quada to Iraq to al Quada to libya to al Quada to Iraq to 9/11 so seemlessly that it seemed that this is why we went to war with Iraq. he is still trying to sell this war to the american people.....
AHHHHHHH!!!!!!

mr b

I was wondering why people were applauding some of the things he said at all... completely pointless.

The house is either full of asskissers (on both sides) or ...
nah, theyre all asskissers, let the man talk and then take a stand on the issue.

Reminds me almost of George Carlin - The Pussification of the Western Male

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/atrios/chimpgonewild.jpg
And it's real...

I had a number of concerns/disagreements with President Bush's State of the Union, but it was three words which have played an important part of his past two SotU's that were missing, that gave me pause. Osama Bin Ladin.

Wow, mml...good point...

otherwise, seriously, i was very disappointed with the SOTU. Just sounded like catchphrase after catchphrase, almost like wrestling... i was expecting him to say something like, "That's the bottom line, Cause my Daddy Said So"


and something is just WRONG about bush speaking about "Jobs for the 21st century" and education...ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRG

O.K. I realize that it is pathetic, but I have just watched the SotU for the second time. Now, as much a I dissagree with President Bush, his SotU address's have been fairly good. This one was an extreme dissapointment. There was no real vision. It seemed reactionary to me, rather than ispriational. If I am wrong, please let me know what I missed. What, in this speech, inspired you, or made you more likely to support George Bush in 2004?

Seriously, if i were a bush supporter, i would definitely be aggravated. You are right, he was reactionary, especially to specific attacks by edwards and dean and to his own policies. Also, the way the entire speech rambled from one to another and WTF is a steroids diatribe doing in there? is that really a national problem?

And yeah, his other SOTU addresses have had a definite..something. This one seemed to ramble on and on without saying anything at all.

Then again, his first had the "Axis of Evil" second had the "16 words...." maybe he was just playing it safe...

Maybe things are just funnier at 430 in the morning, but...

:lol: :lol: :lol:

haha that screencap is hilarious.

One thing I don't get, if anyone cares to explain this (and take the 'applause' signals into account):

the hell? ... first off, why would you applaud for "The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule?" "Woohoo more terrorism!?!" I don't get that at all. Also, they first applaud the fact that (parts of) the Patriot Act will expire, then they applaud for tehe renewal of it. Hm. I guess you shouldn't try to read much into it, but it's odd nonetheless.

The steroids part was pretty random, I'm not sure where that came from.

The entire speech can be summed up this way.

“Trite rhetoric! Clap your hands, Everybody!”

I heard that the idea was for Bush to appear above the fray, well, he failed in that. His speech was reactionary, he was defending against the democratic contenders. That can only mean good things for us. The best thing he could have done to protect his position is to ignore the attacks by democrats. To pretend he is better than them. I am soooooo glad he couldn't manage to do that.

Speech teachers all around the nation are shaking their heads.

This part really boils me

We went from "Saddam has WMD" To "Saddam has WMD programs" to "Saddam has WMD Related Programs" And now we are the whole way down to "Saddam has WMD Related Program Activities"
What the fuck is that, Post-it notes with bomb drawings?
How much farther down can he go while the American Public still believes what he is saying was justification for the war?

Also, Kay and his team has no final report, did not find any weapons and has pulled out of Iraq because of their lack of any evidence.
Mr. Bush you are under Oath, don't lie.

It sounds funnier when you spell it all out, Superbelt:

"weapons of mass destruction-related program activities"

Now which BJ University scholar came up with that phrase?

The dems applauded the first part, the reps the second. I thought that was pretty funny.

I enjoyed most of it, sans a few short things glossed over, the steroids part, and the sanctity of marriage portion. I thought his talk on Iraq, minus the related program activities talk (I'll admit that part didn't sound very good), was quite compelling, and a smart move politically. Reactionary was a good thing here.

My favorite two parts were the applause for the patriot act provisions expiration, and the naming of our allies.

...wow, there sure are a lot of Bush lovers here at the TFP. I thought the SOU was great. From the sounds of it, you all probably had the same expression on your face as that b*tch Hillary (that was the funniest part IMO)

What that amounts to is that he still had ongoing WMD programs, no smoking gun, but the programs were there. If you don't know that puts Saddam in material breach of 1441.

The best part was watching Teddy Kennedy shake his head in disgust about a bill he helped write.

I'm glad you socialists didn't like it, if you did I'd be worried :)

Heheh. I was sitting near the president of our college's College Republicans chapter, and she made sure to mention that each time he was shown.

I was proud to see my President lay it on the line the way he did.
It was the first shot over the bow - and a no-nonsense one - of Campaign 2004 for those of us who support his good work.

I feel more secure and more prosperous with this man in office. I also see what he is doing as being the best and most realistic plan for a better life for everyone - including those who don't understand why that's the case.

http://www.americanprogress.org/site...RJ8OVF&b=22982

Ok this is absolutely partisan. It's a Liberal group. They post up the Presidents whole SOTU, and then add links, embedded to the document, to refute the things Bush is saying. I think it is an excellent analysis.

Most of those didn't refute anything but just mentioned something perceived as bad about it.

The president said
And their 'refute' is..

I scanned all the links in the above and saw nothing but people talking about difficulties in afganistan.

Try "We are rising to meet them"

"deployed across the world"

"prescription drug coverage under medicare"

"state of our Union is confident and strong."

Not everything they use to refute are their own opinion pieces.

I can't wait for the fun when Muslim organizations start asking for their money under Bush's Faith-Based Initiative.

WMD program related activities....

I have a car,a car can carry a lot of stuff from groceries to WMD. If I have a car does that mean I am in WMD related activities ? If I run a garage does that mean I could be helping in WMD program related activities ?

Anything can be an activity related to a program for WMD.

What about Wiccians or Satanists ? Can they get money from faith-based inititatives ? If I accept the argument that athiests have faith in a lack of a god, does that mean my athiest group can get money from faith-based inititatives ?

http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_partnerships/fbci/

Next...

Words and actions are two different things Ustwo.

More recently...

Taken from last nights SOTU.

Why? Do you honestly believe that the US government and/or the Republicans and GWB hate Muslims?

I have no doubt in GWB's sincerity to give money to those worthy programs who already do so much good with few resources. Many of these programs (whether Jewish, Muslim, Christian, or whatever) should be held up as models for public and private organizations alike. They certainly should not be shunned because they wear their religious affiliations on their sleeves.

"President George W. Bush created the Center for Faith Based Initiatives at USAID by executive order on December 12, 2002 in order to work to level the playing field so that faith-based and community-based groups could compete for funding on a level playing field with other organizations."

From that statement, I take that faith-based and community-based are one and the same. I say this because of the phrase "could compete for funding on a level playing field with other organizations." That phrase means that other, non-religious organizations already get funding and to even the field faith-based should get parity. If other organizations, which must be community-based to do the same work that faith-based is going to do, then the only new place money is going is faith-baseds since community-based is already getting money.

I wonder why they add the phrase community-based when that statement is just meant to deflect the phrase faith-based.

Abstinence
 

"To encourage right choices, we must be willing to confront the dangers young people face even when they are difficult to talk about. Each year, about 3 million teenagers contract sexually transmitted diseases that can harm them, or kill them, or prevent them from ever becoming parents. In my budget, I propose a grassroots campaign to help inform families about these medical risks. We will double federal funding for abstinence programs, so schools can teach this fact of life: Abstinence for young people is the only certain way to avoid sexually transmitted diseases. Decisions children make now can affect their health and character for the rest of their lives. All of us parents, schools, government must work together to counter the negative influence of the culture, and to send the right messages to our children."

I think this is a horrible, HORRIBLE decision because abstinence education in schools is equlivant to ignorance education. It amounts to sex is evil and you shouldn't learn about it, just don't do it till you are married. If he truly cared about the three million teens who get STDs then, he should provide funding for sexual education not "just don't do it" education. Abstinence education also leads to teens playing games like "oral and anal are not sex so I can't get preggers or an STD." This kind of ignorance is one of the worst things that can be taught in schools.

There are only a few things that I disagree with in the SOTU speech. The part pertaining to abstinance is asinine. While it might be a solution to the problem it is in no way a workable solutioin. The speech was probably more partisan than it could have been but, it is an election year. He might as well preach to the choir because none of the Democrats are going to say anything other than the party line regardless of agreement or disagreement with what was said. Perhaps the steroid example was ill chosen but the point was not. The point being that professional athletes are, like it or not, role models that many look up to. He was merely saying it would really be cool if they set a good example rather than that that many of them portray on a daily basis. As Art said - he is my president and will get my full support. That doesn't mean I have to agree with him on some of his personal views.

PS - While many of you have mentioned Teddy's scowl did you catch the shit eating grin that popped out on Hillary's face when she realized she was on camera?