NEWS: State Of The Union 2006

Smokey,

I'm not asking anything. My comment(s) were based solely on his own assertions. Nothing more, nothing less.

While I realize the supposed need for Patriot Act II is not limited to "the calls placed by two supposed hijackers", I also have to query his assertion of such need based upon the reference. Again, from his words alone.

Thanks.

[edit to add]
Smokey,

I noticed your clarification.



[edit on 1/31/2006 by 12m8keall2c]

It's been an absolutely excellent speech so far

Can he give one speech where he doesn't encourage the discrimination of a large segment of his country, just once.

Of all the problems in the world today and in our country the definition of marriage is not high on the list. But of course he brings it up.

Originally posted by nativeokie
Can he give one speech where he doesn't encourage the discrimination of a large segment of his country, just once.

Of all the problems in the world today and in our country the definition of marriage is not high on the list. But of course he brings it up.

He needs to play that card for the 2006 elections. Don't doubt that we'll be hearing more about it soon.

Originally posted by nativeokie
Can he give one speech where he doesn't encourage the discrimination of a large segment of his country, just once.

Of all the problems in the world today and in our country the definition of marriage is not high on the list. But of course he brings it up.

To answer your question... No he can't.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
It's been an absolutely excellent speech so far

D,

I wouldn't debate/argue otherwise, he has hit upon most any topic of concern that could be debated, criticized or possibly come to the forefront of attention/review.

Actually, now I have a better understanding of where those in attendance get their physique from. ^ V^V

Weak speech. Heavy on pointless information and references, nothing much new. Bad idea scalding congress.

Just generally weak, let's see what tomorrow brings.

Originally posted by Flinx
He needs to play that card for the 2006 elections. Don't doubt that we'll be hearing more about it soon.

2006 election? why?

21:16: We must take Bin Laden seriously

Bush, takes 4 seconds to bring Bin Laden front and center, who writes the script for this crap. Rember what Bush said 13 Mar 2002 "I don't know where he is. You know I just don't spend that much time on him. Kelly, to be honest with you.~~ I don't know where he is. I--I'll repeat what I said.
I truly am not concerned about him."

Then of couse the rest of his babble.

Talking heads, start your engines! Let the spin begin!

Originally posted by namehere

Originally posted by Flinx
He needs to play that card for the 2006 elections. Don't doubt that we'll be hearing more about it soon.

2006 election? why?

Because it's a very divisive issue that they think will get the Republican base out to vote. Just like in 2004.

Foxnews is certainly spinning the lower expectations. Fred Barnes is saying to remember these are what they are....

When was the last great state of the union address? Was there ever a great groundbreaking speech by a president?

Wasn't Regan noted for great speeches?

It was just a minute ago on CNN, he even impresed me whit what he said,
A totaly new George Bush but is it just a bunch of talk?
I just wonder if it's because he is not seen very well.
A artist( a very good liar) or is this it he has changed his mind on some of the things?

And here we have the apparently scripted Democratic "response".

If you are watching this , it seems rather obvious. If not scripted, it's definitely dynamically rehearsed. IMO, even more transparent than the STOTU speech.

Nerdling? Others?

[edit: rahter to rather]


[edit on 1/31/2006 by 12m8keall2c]

What jumped out at me was when he said that 1 million americans have HIV/Aids and half of them were African American. Considering they are only 12 to14% of the population.....That just seems extremely dis-proprortionate.

Now i'm wondering how accurate that statement is.

Wupy

This was posted before in the correct area PST here's the link: politics.abovetopsecret.com...

It is clear that the Democrats are focusing on the "real issues" that people care about. Prescription drug costs, jobs, the economy, energy, social security. Giving the troops more body armour.

"It's not about partisanship or political spin, it is about protecting the rights given to us by our creators"

Originally posted by Flinx

Because it's a very divisive issue that they think will get the Republican base out to vote. Just like in 2004.

too bad people need president speeches to vote congressmen, instead of merit of each...

Originally posted by Nerdling
Weak speech. Heavy on pointless information and references, nothing much new. Bad idea scalding congress.

Just generally weak, let's see what tomorrow brings.

Agreed. But the only thing that will come from tomroorow will be hackneyed analysis that will either completely distract from any point trying to be made.....or, ironically enough, reinforce it. Essentially....current media analysis will only negate itself to leave the viewer with their own, prior opinion. I could write more, but I would have to spend more time with the trite that was just expressed....and I'm not ready to do that at this point...I'm waiting for Jon Stewart..

I thought the Democratic response was pretty good. Not a big surprise on that one though.

The governor did a good job of outlining state bi-partisan successes.

We need a congress that works together regardless of who is in power.

For some fun check into this link at MSNBC. Tucker Carlson and Joe Scarborough are blogging live and well, some of the comments are very interesting to read. Joe is pretty heated up and Tucker is surprisingly critical. Much better than listening to Rudy G. spin away on all the networks.

MSNBC Live Blogging

[edit on 1/31/2006 by nativeokie]