|
|
| Author |
Message |
mcnally
|
|
the State of the Union
| 
Feb 1 06:55 UTC 2006 |
On 01/31/06 President George W. Bush gave his fifth "State of the Union"
address. Let's discuss it here.
|
| 107 responses total. |
tsty
|
|
response 1 of 107:
|
Feb 1 07:09 UTC 2006 |
agreed - the address was given.
i think i t is a consolidation speech. nothing BigBraveBold included
but lots of smaller 'we need tog et this going - again - and get it done'
the way we should have a few years ago.
what impressed me was the focus on fundamentals to americian exceptionalism.
intoruducing india and china into that mix is the alert.
|
sj2
|
|
response 2 of 107:
|
Feb 1 07:35 UTC 2006 |
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sotu.energy/
---snip---
"The best way to break this addiction is through technology," he said,
adding that technological advances will help achieve a "great goal: to
replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by
2025."
That would represent only a fraction of the total oil imported by the
United States annually, however. Government statistics show that about
80 percent of U.S. oil imports come from outside the Middle East,
according to The Associated Press.
---snip---
I am sure the best brains at the White House put this speech together!!
|
gull
|
|
response 3 of 107:
|
Feb 1 09:14 UTC 2006 |
A few thoughts:
- The foreign policy part of the speech was forceful, but contained
nothing we haven't heard before. It was his stock speech, essentially
making these points: (1) Stay the course. (2) Criticism aids the
terrorists. (3) I must be allowed to eavesdrop on whoever I want
without oversight or restrictions, or the terrorists will get you.
I think the basic theme of the Republican campaign for the midterm
elections will be "Only Republicans can keep you safe from the
terrorists!"
- The health care proposal was badly oversold in the pre-speech PR
campaign. There's nothing new about health savings accounts. They're
a good deal for young and healthy people with money to save, but the
young and healthy people with disposable income aren't the problem.
- The ethanol initiative is interesting, and a good attempt at
distancing himself from oil companies, which aren't popular right now.
It didn't escape my notice that his energy proposals were, once again,
all on the supply side, though. I guess conservation is still
un-American.
|
bru
|
|
response 4 of 107:
|
Feb 1 12:06 UTC 2006 |
well, technology is coming that will reduce our dependence to some
extent. I heard about a new process that coats LCD and produces a
bright white light.
He said what he meant to say, basically, stay the course, go democracy
go!
|
keesan
|
|
response 5 of 107:
|
Feb 1 13:34 UTC 2006 |
What fraction of US energy is used for lighting?
|
johnnie
|
|
response 6 of 107:
|
Feb 1 14:41 UTC 2006 |
Text of the speech is here: http://tinyurl.com/ahvcl
From the speech:
"Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious
abuses of medical research: human cloning in all its forms; creating or
implanting embryos for experiments; creating human-animal hybrids; and
buying, selling or patenting human embryos."
Human-animal hybrids?? Is this really a problem? Are mad scientists
creating freakish elephant-men and penguin-women?
I can't decide which part of the speech was most laughable: the "we have
clear plan for victory in Iraq" line, "we're on track to cut the deficit
by half by 2009 as long as we get more tax cuts", his call for more
funding for energy independence (as if...), or his decrying the sorry
state of science in America. I guess I'd have to vote for his call to
put aside partisan politics.
Another tidbit: Cindy Sheehan was in the audience for the speech, but
she was hauled away in handcuffs for wearing an anti-war t-shirt.
|
richard
|
|
response 7 of 107:
|
Feb 1 15:27 UTC 2006 |
re #2 The ethanol bit was ridiculous. Ethanol can't replace gas. We need
to go towards vehicles that don't run on any type of fuel. Ethanol is a
big deal in the midwest where they grow the ingredients, thats why
politicians are always for it. You'll always hear politicians talking up
ethanol in an election year, such as this one is, even when privately
they'd probably admit it isnt any practical solution for reducing our
reliance upon oil.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 8 of 107:
|
Feb 1 15:31 UTC 2006 |
Re: Cindy Sheehan. This smells like a set up to me. Woolsey apparently
knew about the shirt Sheehan was going to be wearing, but is now saying
she didn't know it was against the law to wear it in the House. Even
though police told Sheehan it was illegal.
|