The OAO State of the Union address thread

[BUTT 0]

It's only a few minutes away.

 

Bold prediction: Bush says that the state of our union is strong.

[2GOLD 0]

That's tonight?

Thank god for cable.

[NYU 0]

I'm worried this thread is going to get too much traffic and shut the board down as a result.

[Dr. Tom 0]

Heh. Of all the people who moved up to the rail for a photo op with the President, Brit Hume points it out only when a black woman does it. RAYCIZM~!!!!1!!!11!!!

[EricMM 0]

He just fucking called for an end to the ANWR debate.

 

Bastard. Never.

[BUTT 0]

He just won't stop saying "nucular".

 

I bet President Bush is the kind of guy who says "I could care less" and confuses a slash with a backslash.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I got to say, this is worth the price of admission. My favorite part was the part about how we don't go into a country and force our way of democracy on them. What a great comedian this man is.

 

 

The current stuff is some real high-grade "They hate us for our freedom" bullshit. Terrorists setting off carbombs because they're so jealous of this democracy, not that the largest deployment of US troops in the middle east ever is sitting RIGHT THERE.

 

Also, remember folks, 9/11 happened because Osama was mad that we can drive SUVs and eat at Burger King.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

I got to say, this is worth the price of admission. My favorite part was the part about how we don't go into a country and force our way of democracy on them. What a great comedian this man is.

Well, he did tack "any more" to the end of that statement.

[Dr. Tom 0]

How classless for the Democrats to moan and groan while the President was talking about Social Security. If they disagree with his projections and plans regarding the program, that's fine. But there's a time and place for that disagreement, and it's certainly NOT during the State of the Union address. Fucking assholes.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

Well, Brit Hume mentioned on Fox that Clinton got boo's from Republicans during 1 of his SOTU's.

[NoCalMike 0]

Tom, both sides moan and groan when they disagree strongly. This isn't something new.

[Dr. Tom 0]

Well, Brit Hume mentioned on Fox that Clinton got boo's from Republicans during 1 of his SOTU's.

And that was tactless and inappropriate, too.

[Dr. Tom 0]

Tom, both sides moan and groan when they disagree strongly. This isn't something new.

I can only remember it happening twice.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

They're probably doing enough clapping.

 

I wish the Left Wing was on :'(

[Guest sek69]

Pretty much every SOTU I ever remember seeing had the opposing party moan and groan when they hear something they didn't like.

 

Considering the state of political discourse these days I think both sides behaved well.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

How classless for the Democrats to moan and groan while the President was talking about Social Security. If they disagree with his projections and plans regarding the program, that's fine. But there's a time and place for that disagreement, and it's certainly NOT during the State of the Union address. Fucking assholes.

I put it in the same category as the constant applause.

 

Either they allow the constant clappin and groaning or (what I'd prefer) just let the man talk.

[NoCalMike 0]

I nodded off about halfway through for about 7 minutes....did I just miss any mention of him, or did Osama Bin Laden's name NO-SHOW the SOTU?

[BUTT 0]

It sure did. However, he did mention al Qaeda twice, so I guess that's close enough.

 

http://www.gazette.com/display.php?id=1305684&secid=1

[NoCalMike 0]

For the love of gawd, Tyler, will you just bring Tyler M. back.

[Guest MikeSC]

The current stuff is some real high-grade "They hate us for our freedom" bullshit. Terrorists setting off carbombs because they're so jealous of this democracy, not that the largest deployment of US troops in the middle east ever is sitting RIGHT THERE.

Umm, did you miss Zarqawi's comments recently?

 

If so, here ya go. A rough sentiment:

 

“We have declared a fierce war on this evil principle of democracy and those who follow this wrong ideology,” said the speaker, who identified himself as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, head of the al-Qaida affiliate in Iraq. “Anyone who tries to help set up this system is part of it.”

 

"Candidates in elections are seeking to become demi-gods, while those who vote for them are infidels," it said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6855496/

 

Yup, they don't hate freedom and democracy AT ALL.

Also, remember folks, 9/11 happened because Osama was mad that we can drive SUVs and eat at Burger King.

And sentiments like this are why nobody trusts the left-wing with anything more important than sweeping up the Senate floor.

-=Mike

[Guest Loss]

"Because marriage is a sacred institution and the foundation of society, it should not be redefined by activist judges. For the good of families, children and society, I support a constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage. (Cheers, applause.)

 

Because a society is measured by how it treats the weak and vulnerable, we must strive to build a culture of life."

 

Irony.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

"Because marriage is a sacred institution and the foundation of society, it should not be redefined by activist judges. For the good of families, children and society, I support a constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage. (Cheers, applause.)

 

Because a society is measured by how it treats the weak and vulnerable, we must strive to build a culture of life."

 

Irony.

He's referring to the unborn, which in his defense, is a group that he's trying to defend. If that's not weak and vulnerable, I don't know what is.

[Guest Loss]

I'd also classify the War On Gays as a war on the vulnerable, but whatever. That will be interpreted as me comparing the two, and I'm not trying to do that.

 

It's fascinating to me that Bush is trying so hard to position himself as a liberator while at the same time pushing for a Constitutional amendment to disallow rights to a disadvantaged minority in his home country. It's hypocritical.

[Guest adam_bomb]

Iran? Syria? What about North Korea, who are much dangerous in terms of nuclear power. Bush will not go after them because he knows Korea will have the ability to come back at him, this is not a personal crusade against terror, its a personal ideology to get in the history books involving an issue Bush does not understand.

 

As for abortion and gay marriage, how about concentrating on important issues rather than letting religion dictate policy . No wonder America is seen as a joke by the rest of the world in terms of domestic policy.

[NoCalMike 0]

Is it a coincidence that Bush avoided the term "WMD" and instead said "weapons of mass murder" ?

 

Also, Bush kind of skidded over any mention of climate change, and/or global warming, even though in the last couple of weeks there has been many summits and meetings in Europe where everyone besides Bush seems to be taking the issue quite seriously.

 

Bush did mention getting off of foreign oil, but now after the war, is Iraqi oil even considered "foreign" anymore? And he didn't add much in the way of looking for alternative resources of energy besides using the same tag-line. While instead eluded to wanting to drill in Alaska instead.

[NoCalMike 0]

Also, Bush had to get in his shots about Gays and a "culture of life" in order to give the evangelicals some red meat as Karl Rove has been getting email boxes full of letters stating that if Bush didn't mention the constitutional amendment and pro-life tidbits, they wouldn't help him on Social Security.

 

It wasn't suprising either, I mean when Bush brought all that stuff up, it just seemed like petty pandering, and seemed rather out of place, and broke up the rythym of the rest of the speech.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Islamic terrorists promote a culture of death...we are against them, and one of our main differences is the purported culture of life. Of course, killing the unborn hurts that cause a bit.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

And sentiments like this are why nobody trusts the left-wing with anything more important than sweeping up the Senate floor.

        -=Mike

And jingoistic statements like "They hate us for our freedom" are why the right-wing should never be trusted with anything more important than coming up with a catchy slogan or a rhyming chant.

[Guest MikeSC]

And sentiments like this are why nobody trusts the left-wing with anything more important than sweeping up the Senate floor.

        -=Mike

And jingoistic statements like "They hate us for our freedom" are why the right-wing should never be trusted with anything more important than coming up with a catchy slogan or a rhyming chant.

Of course, I have direct quotes from Zarqawi to back up my assertions.

 

You have what, exactly?

-=Mike

[MrRant 0]

I'd also classify the War On Gays as a war on the vulnerable, but whatever. That will be interpreted as me comparing the two, and I'm not trying to do that.

 

It's fascinating to me that Bush is trying so hard to position himself as a liberator while at the same time pushing for a Constitutional amendment to disallow rights to a disadvantaged minority in his home country. It's hypocritical.

I'd consider an unborn child to be far more vulnerable then your ass.

 

Take your crying elsewhere and stop polluting threads with your "Woe is me, I'm gay" bullshit.