RATE THE SPEECH.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
A

Achtung Bubba

Refugee
Joined
Jun 7, 2000
Messages
1,513
Location
One Nation. Under God.
BUSH'S STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS:

Foreign Policy Agenda:
A+ - flawless; hope we follow through

Domestic Agenda:
B - nothing offensive, but little as envigorating as Reagan; might be good to set up Democrats as partisans, but will have to wait and see

Government Agenda:
I - incomplete for not mentioning judge appointments; could be, again, setting up the Dems as obstructionists

Delivery:
A - favoring his strength of brevity and cystaline simplicity (surprisingly short!)

Overall:
A - good, great if Bush follows through
 
I thought it was an excellent speech, I really think he's coming along as a speaker, He came through with a nice delivery, relaxed, but very serious.

His plans for the war.. were, as I have supported all along, excellent, and straight from the decisive minds of he, with the brilliant advising from Rumsfeld, powell, rice et al..

I also thought he did a good job switching the focus. .. or maybe just including as as high a priority.. the economy.. He went into what he wanted, but no details, which was good, there's no need.. Americans can't understand it anyways, But the key is he's gonna be spreading out around what he wants to do and how he wants to do it, and I think he'll get the people to believe.

L. Unplugged
 
I thought it was a good speech, even though I disagreed with the majority of its contents. It was well written and basically said what people wanted/needed to hear at this time.

I was concerned at some of the comments about foreign policy as they seemed to be aimed at preparing people for further US intervention overseas by highlighting the 'dangers' of Iraq, Iran, North Korea. I notice he mentioned that Saddam Hussein has used poison gas against his own citizens. No mention of the fact that the US was supplying him with military and financial aid during the 1980s when this murder of about 45,000 people took place. No mention either of the estimated 500,000 people killed by US and UK led sanctions and continued bombing of Iraq.

Oh, and while he's making comments about having freed women in Afghanistan from oppression, can we please note that Saudi Arabia has one of the most oppressive regimes against women in the world and is still the recipient of millions of dollars of US aid. So if the president would put a little pressure on them to stop treating their women as second class citizens, that'd be nice.

Claiming to admire a leader who took power in a military coup might raise eyebrows somewhere around the world.

No mention of the situation in the Middle East. It would have been interesting to hear some of Bush's (or his administration's)thoughts on that.

On his comments about energy/conservation, I hope that "making America less dependent on foreign oil" doesn't mean obtaining oil from Alaska as this undermines any comments he made about conservation.


Positive things...

I liked his comments about education, with programs such as Head Start it might be a long time before we see results but they are worth investing in. A Patients Bill of Rights is a good idea if properly implemented.

I'm not sure if it was highlighted in the speech, but the promise of aid to Afghanistan is very positive.

I think the main strength of the speech was that it was what people wanted to hear. Obviously the last year has presented a lot of challenges which the US hasn't had to face before, and I think people were looking to the President to articulate that. I think people were looking for some sort of reassurance, maybe even comfort?

So overall, good speech in terms of giving people reassurance, leadership and hope. Just some concerns about the implications of his comments regarding foreign policy.
 
I thought it was a great SPEECH. The last few months have transformed Bush into a very "presidential" President. I even think he is doing the best that he can.

But it was just a speech. What will really be delivered? What would we be thinking about the first year of this Presidency if 9/11 had not happend? Tragic as it may sound, 9/11 was the best thing to happen to this President.

I rate the speech an A.

Regarding job performance,
I rate the January-9/11/01 period a C.
I rate 9/11/01-1/29/02 an A-.

I remain very partisan with a huge distrust for both Pres. Bush and his VP, Dick Cheney, especially in light of the Enron scandal.

(sigh) Some things never change!
 
I forgot to record it, so I guess I'll just read a transcript and watch the highlights on the news tonight.
 
I was a little distracted by all the applause and the hootin' and hollerin' by the suits.

But otherwise I thought it was good.

------------------
Work like you don't need to
Love like you've never been hurt
Dance like no one is watching
 
I didn't watch it. Quite frankly, speeches like that hold little appeal for me. I'll wait to see actions.
 
The State of the Union is just a propaganda speech. It is never about the actual state of the union and has the same amount of truth as a campaign speech: none. Heck, even Clinton was guilty of this. Nice promises that will never go through.

My only issue with his foreign policy is the whole secretive element of it. It seems good from what we've been told, but I don't trust him.

His domestic agenda is horrible. Not only did he use the terrorist scare to erode away what little privacy we had, but he's used the scare to paint all dissenters as "terrorist sympathizers." He tries to run this country like a dictator, his tax plan was fiscally irresponsible, and he has no solid approach to fixing this recession, outside of tax cuts. When businesses are paying nearly no taxes anyway, from over twenty years of successive tax cuts and other corporate welfare, how can you cut them further? Next, we'll be giving them handouts.

As as for judge obstructionism, lest we forget, the Republican Congress during Clinton's term allowed hundreds of vacancies and held up his judge appointments for years, with most of them still being unfilled when he left office. As much as I dislike partisan politics, I hope the Democrats are just as obstructionist as the Republicans were during Clinton. Dubya deserves it.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
 
didn't watch it and won't. i quit watching any network news shortly after 9/11. i have to say, that 9/11 and the subsequent "war on terrorism" has been one huge propaganda machine. any one who voiced a hint of opposition or dared to question dub and his cohorts were made to applogize to to people. which is about the most un-american notion i can dream of. i agree that these tragedies are the best thing that could happen to bush. all of the nation's attention is diverted from who his bedfellows are and his blantant attempt to buy approval with tax dollars. and they called clinton the teflon president?
 
Did anyone see Tim Russert on MSN after the speech? Someone told me that he said George Bush told him that U2 is his favorite music after country. Just wondering if this was true.
smile.gif
 
Originally posted by Lemonite:
Oh Goodie.. I'm glad you're fed up too with the tiring liberal bias in the popular press.. That's great to hear! I applaud you.

L. Unplugged
Click to expand...


Actually, since 9/11, the media has taken a decidedly conservative turn. It seems that on every news show, there is talk of rooting out the "evil", and criticizing those who would dare to question the actions of the US in this situation. Rather than using reason and logic, they have managed to use people's emotions to convince people that we must search far and wide for the terror and destroy any who have anti-US sentiment. That type of propaganda borders on that of a military-centered state. Funny how we also hear arguments for an increase in defense funding to "protect our way of life".

I'm incredibly worried about his anti-Iran and anti-North Korea statements. No, those two nations have not always agreed with us. But both of them, especially Iran, have made recent strides towards diplomacy with us. Iranian president Khatami has said in the past that he envisions a future where Iran and the US are allies. Well, thanks to the "axis of evil", that won't be happening any time soon.

Mr. President, please make sure you don't cause more damage than you prevent.



------------------
Change is the only constant
 
Originally posted by Foxxern:
Actually, since 9/11, the media has taken a decidedly conservative turn. It seems that on every news show, there is talk of rooting out the "evil", and criticizing those who would dare to question the actions of the US in this situation. Rather than using reason and logic, they have managed to use people's emotions to convince people that we must search far and wide for the terror and destroy any who have anti-US sentiment. That type of propaganda borders on that of a military-centered state. Funny how we also hear arguments for an increase in defense funding to "protect our way of life".
Click to expand...

I see you use quote-marks when you refer to "evil". So, does that mean that evil doesn't exist, or that merely regimes like Iraq don't qualify?

Also, there's a big difference between "anti-US sentiment" and an concerted effort to murder Americans. That point should be obvious; it sickens me that it isn't.

Finally, given the precision and deliberateness of the US government and military so far, I don't see any absence of reason or logic.
 
Originally posted by Achtung Bubba:
I see you use quote-marks when you refer to "evil". So, does that mean that evil doesn't exist, or that merely regimes like Iraq don't qualify?
Click to expand...

Evil exists, but we have to be careful in identifying it. I see it possibly in governments such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia. I don't see it in Iran or North Korea, two nations that have made little if any specific mentions of threat towards the US.


Also, there's a big difference between "anti-US sentiment" and an concerted effort to murder Americans. That point should be obvious; it sickens me that it isn't.
Click to expand...

Is it obvious? Were any of the terrorists from Iran or North Korea? No? Then why were those countries singled out? Based on what is known, most of the men had origins in Saudi Arabia. And even so, to label an entire nation full of "evil" is just the pot calling the kettle black. If we really want to show that we are civilized and committed to truth and justice, we should be naming terrorist organizations as our enemies, not the ordinary people of specific countries. The terrorist groups are not bound by any political borders, and we have to be careful not to act as though they only exist in certain countries. Many of them had previously made permanent residencies in countries such as Germany, England, and even the US.


Finally, given the precision and deliberateness of the US government and military so far, I don't see any absence of reason or logic.
Click to expand...

Precision? Tell that to the more than 5,000 Afghan civilians who have been killed in the bombing raids. That more than surpasses the total killed on September 11. I think that it is important to destroy the buildings that al-Qaeda is using but I hardly see the point of destroying homes, schools, and shops of the people of the nation. And yet I hardly ever hear anyone complaining that it is unfair to the people of Afghanistan.

Don't get me wrong. I think we need to have a military effort to get to the roots of terrorist groups and bring the leaders of these groups to trial. But what's a kid to think when his shopkeeper father is killed in a bombing raid, even though he had nothing to do with the attacks on the US? Is he supposed to believe that the US is his ally and that the war on terrorism is a good thing? We have to be careful not to make new enemies while eliminating our old ones. Otherwise, we are fighting a futile, neverending war.



------------------
Change is the only constant
 
Originally posted by Foxxern:
Don't get me wrong. I think we need to have a military effort to get to the roots of terrorist groups and bring the leaders of these groups to trial. But what's a kid to think when his shopkeeper father is killed in a bombing raid, even though he had nothing to do with the attacks on the US? Is he supposed to believe that the US is his ally and that the war on terrorism is a good thing? We have to be careful not to make new enemies while eliminating our old ones. Otherwise, we are fighting a futile, neverending war.
Click to expand...

This is an awesome comment, I really really hear ya Foxxern. I think this really gets the point across. And I totally agree with your comments on the slant the Media has taken since 9/11. I think the Media will do whatever will keep them in favor with the common viewer, and I think this is the slant that will keep them in favor with the tide of the nation at the moment.

Foxxern, your perspective on all of this is rare and refreshing. Thanks for adding to the dialogue.
 
Originally posted by hotasahandbag:
didn't watch it and won't. i quit watching any network news shortly after 9/11.
Click to expand...

Oh Goodie.. I'm glad you're fed up too with the tiring liberal bias in the popular press.. That's great to hear! I applaud you.

L. Unplugged


[This message has been edited by Lemonite (edited 01-30-2002).]
 
Originally posted by Foxxern:
Then why were those countries singled out? Based on what is known, most of the men had origins in Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...

Well I wonder why the US hasn't attacked Saudi Arabia. Do you think it has anything to do with the fact that the current rulers in that country aren't exactly opposed to US-owned oil companies operating in their country? Maybe it's because they place billions of dollars in bank accounts in Western countries. Interesting.

I wonder why the US is talking about an attack on Somalia. Well, they have oil reserves, as does the area of Ethiopia bordering Somalia. Interesting.
 
Originally posted by FizzingWhizzbees:
Well I wonder why the US hasn't attacked Saudi Arabia. Do you think it has anything to do with the fact that the current rulers in that country aren't exactly opposed to US-owned oil companies operating in their country? Maybe it's because they place billions of dollars in bank accounts in Western countries. Interesting.
Click to expand...

It also might be because Saudi Arabia allows our military to operate on their soil and keep tabs on Iraq.

But you're right--our current relationship with Saudi Arabia is not a good one. We help keep their corrupt dictatorship afloat while though the ordinary citizens and the terrorists despise them. The ordinary citizens despise the Saudi monarchy because they run a repressive theocracy, while the terrorists despise the Saudi monarchy because they're infidels for allowing US troops on their soil.
 
Originally posted by melon:
The State of the Union is just a propaganda speech. It is never about the actual state of the union and has the same amount of truth as a campaign speech: none.

His domestic agenda is horrible. He tries to run this country like a dictator, his tax plan was fiscally irresponsible, and he has no solid approach to fixing this recession, outside of tax cuts. When businesses are paying nearly no taxes anyway, from over twenty years of successive tax cuts and other corporate welfare, how can you cut them further? Next, we'll be giving them handouts.

Melon
Click to expand...

Just a few seperate thoughts... SEPERATE

I'm not so sure that the people view it as just a 'Politics as Usual Speech'... Say ... in the way the people are thinking of Dick G.'s response.... It was more of an American Speech.

I consistently read you compare 'handing out tax cuts' as something resembling the actions of a monkey or walking phallus, but seriously, we're in a recession (A Very very small one, where actually we're on the way out of it.. YEs I'll make the claim now.. The RECESSION IS OVER.. it's on the upswing).. I don't know why Liberals are so against tax cuts, they've always worked, but they never seem to see it..
One thing is certain in a recession..You Don't Raise TAxes.. which is what the liberals want to do.....You also don't just hand out more unemployment checks.. Where does that leave you at the end of the day?

Bush Got it Right.. JOBS.

And no.. Handouts are what Ya'll are all about (Liberals).. I'm surprised you would ever even venture to use that word.

The Last thing the Liberals want is to work this economy out, They Want you to THINK they do.. But, A thriving economy.. at least under a republican watch.. Is about as appealing to the liberals as .. well, I'll get in trouble if I make some sort of joke here.. But you get the idea...

Bush a DICTATOR???? That just doesn't fly with the people now.. People see BUsh Wanting to work together with the Liberals.. He's incorporated many of the liberal ideas into his agenda.. He goes out of his way to embrace Daschle and Dick G. After their speeches, He Embraces Ted Kennedy while they work together on issues.... I'm sorry.. wait .. no I'm not, that statement is not going to carry weight with the People.. It doesn't.. Because It just doesn't appear that way.. and In politics, APpearance is REality.

You cite the increased spending in the Montage 'Why increase spending while decreasing income?'.. And it does make logical sense, but you have to look at the long term picture, Yes, there will be deficits (Though I've referenced the Ten Year SURPLUS many times in this forum), there will be a debt to pay off, (But it's a two prong attack.. and It's not the end of the world to be in debt.. The economy gets rolling.. there's more money to pay off the debt) And to add on the increased military spending.. How can you shit on an increase in military spending, where a large large amount of that money is going to Homeland Defense?

And Here's a reason why you can't.. The reason for this is that If THere were to be another Attack on America.. The Economy would fall into a huuuuge tumble and there would be no way out for a long long time.

Sooo, In raising the bar of the military, BUsh is Actually Helping the Economy.

Just wait and see, The economy is already taking a turn for the better.. Come election time.. THe liberals will not have that huge weapon they are depending on.. (A bad economy) to fire at the Republicans.

L. Unplugged

[This message has been edited by Lemonite (edited 01-31-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Lemonite (edited 01-31-2002).]
 
I could NOT believe some of the things he was saying.

Case in point, the Phillippines. Terrorists are there and we are there fighting them. Now Bush has the fantastic
rolleyes.gif
and *ORIGINAL* idea! Train the Philippinos to fight for themselves. HEEEELLLLOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! Remember Ronald Reagan?! Maybe oh I dunno, THE SCHOOL OF AMERICAS!!!???
mad.gif
Ohhh, wait maybe it will be more like the time we trained the Afghanis to fight the Soviets with *OUR* tactics. Beep beep back the truck up, those are the same people FIGHTING US NOW!!

This training thing may seem to be a good idea, but it DOES NOT work! I cannot believe Rumsfeld wants to do this! Did they skip over the 80s and early 90s (when SOMEONE'S dad was President) in their history books?
mad.gif
If we carry this out it will be asking for people to attack us in the future.

------------------
It's the puppets that pull the strings.

*You're very kind. Most people laugh when they see my googly eye.*

+Hilarryous. Oh, it will catch on+
 
history will teach us nothing that we don't want to learn

------------------
Salome
Shake it, shake it, shake it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Phantom Dreamer
  • Locked
Justin Trudeau Neoliberal
Replies
0
Views
762
Phantom Dreamer
Phantom Dreamer
Irvine511
surrogacy
Replies
1
Views
810
anitram
anitram
digitize
  • Locked
  • Poll
Rate The Song: I Will Follow
Replies
21
Views
2K
nielsgov
nielsgov
LemonMelon
Desert Island X: Master List and Discussion Thread
3 4 5
Replies
133
Views
9K
cobl04
cobl04
M
90's Nostalgia: What are your Top 20 Albums of the 1990's?
2 3 4
Replies
119
Views
6K
iron yuppie
iron yuppie

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom