VeeshanVault

Bush just said that the US and coalition forces have arrested over 3000 suspected terrorists and stopped several hundred potential attacks on US/Westen targets.

I know it's a focus and all, but damn, does that scare anyone as much as me that we're doing this now, and not before 9/11? And how about the almost daily terrorist activities of rabid palestinians? I mean, I can sympathize with them, the determination of people to form a nation should be respected and all, but their means are just screwing themselves.... Why aren't we helping to stop that situation? Because not enough Americans are dying? Hell, we only established Isreal so the jews could go somewhere after WWII, because no one wanted em.

Scary stuff....

/rant off

ya those damn jews.


I think cartoon network is airing a Johnny Bravo marathon. I think maybe that's more your speed.

I think Pubin's view of the situation is as one-sided as the original poster's.

how so?


I was noting the antisematic ending to the post and then insulting the poster. I was not taking a side.

His reasons for Iraq are convincing, at least to me. The faith based initiatives is troubling, as is his rhetoric about Iran. I think he was dead on about North Korea's blackmailing, but I wonder how that will affect negotiations. What angers me the most is the Republicans clapping every fiftten seconds (and for that matter, when Clinton was in office the Democrats clapping every fifteen). I look forward to hearing the reactions soon.


Edit- One thing I noticed which I got a huge laugh out of was Laura Bush. Did anyone else notice how she was strategically placed between a woman in uniform and a black man? Since she had much camera focus, gave a good image for Bush on how he likes women and minorities so much he stuck his wife by them. Just an observation.

It wasn't my intention to come across as anti sematic (sp?).. Just cynical of what started that whole situation in the first place, and our role in it.

Gotta love the Democratic response.

"Our plan will do the same as Bush's, but his sucks. Bush's plan is for middle, low income...but our plan is for middle and low income, the ones who need it the most"

blah blah blah, I will talk this way and you idiots will believe me, blah blah blah

I provide no proof to anything I am saying, blah blah blah

Pahreyia wrote:And how about the almost daily terrorist activities of rabid palestinians?

I'm always amused that the media is able to potray palestine as terrorists. If Israel wasn't occupying palestine land that definition could hold. While palestine is being occupied they are resisting oppressors.

Pahreyia wrote:Hell, we only established Isreal so the jews could go somewhere after WWII, because no one wanted em.

Dumbass.

The roots of the modern jewish population in Israel and the zionist movement to establish a jewish state there go back a lot further than the aftermath of WW2.

Modern Israel wouldn't exist were it not for WW2 however, so he isn't too far off, and it was mostly pity combined with a lot of lobbying that formed it.

I liked the first half of the speech when he talked about alternative energy and less reliance on foreign oil, then he lapsed back into the old boring rhetoric and misinformation about Iran and Iraq and I fell asleep along with Teddy Kennedy.

kyoukan type-R wrote:The roots of the modern jewish population in Israel and the zionist movement to establish a jewish state there go back a lot further than the aftermath of WW2.

Modern Israel wouldn't exist were it not for WW2 however, so he isn't too far off, and it was mostly pity combined with a lot of lobbying that formed it.

I liked the first half of the speech when he talked about alternative energy and less reliance on foreign oil, then he lapsed back into the old boring rhetoric and misinformation about Iran and Iraq and I fell asleep along with Teddy Kennedy.

Were you drunk too?

Aye. I loved the stuff about alternate energy. I was actually shocked, considering his ties to oil.

What was funny, was listening to the democratic response guy, Locke, say how we need to look for alternate sources of energy and use american technology and not shun these ideas away. LOL. It's like he didn't even listen to the address at all.

Wow. Listening to Ed Kennedy is like listening to Dana Carvey to the grumpy old man skit form SNL

flubbidy flubbidy floo

I don't know how it's going to get it through to some people's heads but, the radicals of the Palestinian people will do anything to cause disruption in the creation of their own state. They do it because they, as an established nation, will be forced to co-exist w/ Israel. They would rather die (and take innocents with them) than follow that line.

The palestinians in any sort of power do not want co-existence. It's disgusting that people forget what brought such a hard line stance from the Israelis. People really don't like jewish people though, so I guess it makes it easier to swallow.

The democratic house leader just gave the most compelling reasons to think twice before attacking Iraq. Bloodlust is strong I guess, however.

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:What was funny, was listening to the democratic response guy, Locke, say how we need to look for alternate sources of energy and use american technology and not shun these ideas away. LOL. It's like he didn't even listen to the address at all.

I guess I really have to tell you that these speeches are written in advance

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Aye. I loved the stuff about alternate energy. I was actually shocked, considering his ties to oil.

What was funny, was listening to the democratic response guy, Locke, say how we need to look for alternate sources of energy and use american technology and not shun these ideas away. LOL. It's like he didn't even listen to the address at all.

They probably wrote that worthless speech a week ago.

kyoukan type-R wrote:

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:What was funny, was listening to the democratic response guy, Locke, say how we need to look for alternate sources of energy and use american technology and not shun these ideas away. LOL. It's like he didn't even listen to the address at all.

I guess I really have to tell you that these speeches are written in advance

Well, I am honest enough to profess ignorance when I recognize it. I did not know this. It's too bad, because it really makes them look stupid.

What I laughed most at was the fact that whenever there was a standing ovation, the democrats sat.

I think if a politician were to go on an America First platform they'd prolly do real well. I am not saying this to be bigoted or racist in any way. I just think that if we were to spend a little less money on other countries for a few years, all that money would do a world of good back home.

Did I hear him say $50 Billion going to Africa to fight aids? Can't we fight it at home and keep that money here? Granted the population of infected people in Africa is staggering but all our money is going to do is make them more comfortable before they die. Sad thought but true. Keep the money here, find a cure and then go help Africa.

Whereas you make a good point Bubba, it would work if drugs werent already shipped over there. You see, allowing a partial treatment to exist would cause the virus to mutate, fucking as all over, for lack for a better term. Another thing, that all these dumb politicians dont realize is that AIDS meds require a fridge, c'mon. Think.

Pahreyia wrote:...we only established Isreal so the jews could go somewhere after WWII, because no one wanted em.

Wow. I hope you're never planning a career in showbiz.

Both of the speeches were pretty weak, in my opinion.

Bush surprised a lot of people with his references to alternate forms of energy -- though it remains to be seen how seriously he plans to follow up that rhetoric. Also, he continued to show just how little he understands about economics. Massive tax cuts, combined with increased defense spending and war funding = increased deficit and weaker economy. Bush seems to think his tax cuts will stimulate the economy through savings -- a line of thinking that, time and again, has proven erroneous (note: Reagan, Bush Sr.).

On the other hand, Sen. Locke gave the right speech for the wrong occasion. His focus on domestic, economic issues will prove important once Bush fucks our economy beyond belief in the months to come. But for now, he needs to address foreign policy and national security -- issues that the majority of Americans find important. Americans want to hear about these things, and the Democrats' lackluster stance toward them has crippled the party's popularity.

Chidoro, it doesn't matter. You can say the Palestinians forced the Israelis into the "take no prisoners" mindset that they BOTH are in, but it doesn't solve a damned thing. There will be no peace between them until one side is wiped out or they are both given reasons not to fight. Claiming either one of them is totally in the right or wrong is semantic bullshit.

Bubba Grizz wrote:Did I hear him say $50 Billion going to Africa to fight aids?

Hmm- I guess that means there's large amounts of oil in Africa, huh?

I was up all night in a computer lab trying to cram logic gates down the throat of a bass akwards Altera chip.

I missed whole damn thing. =(

I enjoyed the speech and was a bit surprised by it. GW has come a long way in terms of personality and confidence in public...

February 5 is coming fast and I hope we aren't let down by the case laid out by Powell.

Does anyone have a transcript of the state of the union address, or someplace where I could download it in audio/video format? I only got to hear bitts and pieces of it tonight.

It sounded pretty good up untill the point where he started dissing human cloning. If only he'd take his head out of his ass long enough to realise that human cloning can save so many lives.

That the Democrats chose some no-name Governer from Washington to deliver their national platform response was very telling.

It's hard for me to watch George speak. I think he's going to mess up at any momment and I'm always nervis for him. I think he said exactly what the majority of America wanted to hear. He touched on a little bit of everything. I can hear his speech writers at a roundtable discussion now. "OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS of people think hes just about oil, put something in there about alternetive energy" or "The polls show 42% think George has no compassion, throw in something about AIDs in Africa".

Only time will tell. I have no faith in that man or anything he says.

I think it is funny that the historically ignorant think the US established Israel.

I think it is even more funny that people attack the concept and have no clue what they would have done.

I think it is even more funny how white people killing white people is supposed to bother anyone.

I thought the first half of the speech sounded pretty liberal with all the alternative energy and healthcare stuff. I like the idea of more tax cuts but I can't believe that he still intends to increase the budget again. Even 4% is too much. They need to cut some of the fat, not increase.

$15 billion dollars to Africa over five years is what he said for the AIDs program. It is a nice thought but I am heartless. We have our own problems here at home and $15bill would go a long way here. I would like even more tax cuts. Or maybe a prescription drug plan for the elderly. Anything useful for Americans.

The last half of his speech was mostly expected. I wasn't really sure what his point on Iran was and was surprised he brought them up at all. I thought he misspoke at first. Can someone fill me in on his point here? I have been impressed with Iran's attempts at reform of the political system. It will be at least a generation though before the old clerics are out of power.

He also seemed pretty vague on the "Protecting life" stance. Partial birth abortions are pretty bad and should be outlawed. Banning them though is like letting the Jehovas get their shoe in the door before you can slam it in their face. I am afraid that he might try and ban stem cell research as well. We need that research.

Overall I watched and I wasn't that impressed. I didn't watch the Democratic response afterwards although I heard Ol' Teddy had a note to the media before the prez had even left the hall. Much as I dislike the Republicans and Democrats, the democrats are really screwing the pooch and turning this country into a one party system. That really scares me.

Vote Libertarian!

Deward

I am afraid that he might try and ban stem cell research as well. We need that research.

I am afraid of this as well.

This is why religion is supposed to be seperate from government. Their make believe faith is clouding their judgement on a crucial, life saving, issue.

that is one of the dangers of voting Republican Mid. The Christian Coalition has such a substantial amount of power within the Republican party that at some point you have to cater to them if you want to get on the national political stage with an (R) behind your name.

There is a very active element in that party that really is working at various levels to, as an end result, create something that is effectively state sponsored religion, in the form of some American Protestant flavor of Christianity. That is my opinion anyway.

Democratic party has nasty splinter groups in their core as well.

Yup, I was wrong. It was $15 Billion and not $50 Billion. I saw it on CNN this morning. Sorry about that.

This isn't the first time he has spoken about alternetive energy btw. He has talked about it before even when running for Office.

With regards to the hydrogen tech check out Iceland. I watched a show on them 1-2 years ago and they were fairly far along in converting to hydrogen fuel cells.

$15 billion dollars to Africa over five years is what he said for the AIDs program. It is a nice thought but I am heartless. We have our own problems here at home and $15bill would go a long way here.

We would just use the 15 billion to build 16 new F-22 Raptors. I'd rather see the money go anywhere but into even more military.

I consider myself fairly liberal and I thought it was a decent speech. If half of what he said is acted on then he will have my vote in the next election.

The economy is a complex thing. Republicans and democrats have both fucked it up in the past. Sure lots of tax cuts and more govt spending looks bad. But there are many more sides to this story. Traditionally, democrats have done better with the economy but have been a clusterfuck in war time situations. Vice versa for the Repubs.

I personally would like to see a third party emerge again one day. Its happened in the past and has done a great deal of good. There are many ways to look at any situation.

Fairweather Pure wrote:It's hard for me to watch George speak. I think he's going to mess up at any momment and I'm always nervis for him...

Dubya makes my red, white, and blue nervis HUGE too!

Watching Bush does make me nervous he will mess up, but it is very nice watching someone who oozes true sincerity and charisma. When I watched Clinton, you could tell every thing he said was bullshit. He always came across like a car salesman to me.

Deward wrote:I wasn't really sure what his point on Iran was and was surprised he brought them up at all. I thought he misspoke at first. Can someone fill me in on his point here? I have been impressed with Iran's attempts at reform of the political system. It will be at least a generation though before the old clerics are out of power.

Georgie Boy has this little problem with villifying other nations long before he plans to make strategic enemies out of them. If I'm not mistaken, Iran was included in his original "Axis of Evil" list. Exactly why he'd talk shit about a country he does not plan to go to war with, I have no idea. It's not as if he's making any inroads into the Iranian political world by calling the entire country "evil."

His intent was to try to assure Iranian citizens that the U.S. is not some sort of "Great Satan" power -- instead, that it is a liberating force in the region. Such talk is entirely pointless; Iran does not have a free press. Bush's message will probably be played only selectively (if at all) to the common citizens of Iran. And what does get air time will be spun by the Iranian government to make it look as though George was bashing the entire country. In essence, all that the anti-Iran rhetoric will accomplish is further angering a nation with which we have been on uneasy terms.

This made me laugh today:

Millie wrote:On the other hand, Sen. Locke gave ...

Gov. Locke


I agree with you about doling out labels like 'evil' to other nations. Reminds me of a quote I heard on NPR: "The problem with evil is that you can't negotiate with it. You must kill evil."

He's leaving himself with very few options by reducing the very complex world political arena to a black-and-white morality issue. This type of rhetoric intensifies an already volatile situation.

Wait I see a quote for the quotation book in the making here.

Evil is a non-negotiable problem?....hmm no....

How could you phrase it so it sounds Mark Twain-ish.......

Bomb Canada.

This sucks. Every time I make a rather random unassociated-with-anything comment the thread always shuts up.