The time now is 11/22/08 - 05:00
Log in: Username: Password:
Search forums for:
  
Calculator Running Log Uploads Smilies Calendar
FAQ Search    Articles Register Log in

State of the Union...


www.runningforums.com Forum Index -> On-Topic

Post new topic   Reply to topic
TOsteve
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 1468
Location: Out for a run
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/02/05 - 09:19    Post subject: State of the Union...
So, what do think are the most pressing challenges facing the world's most powerful ecconomy today? If you could slip a couple of sentences or paragraph's into the teleprompter tonight what might they say....

Just curious.
sonnylax
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/02/05 - 11:02    Post subject:
Radio host Neal Boortz had some good ones. I completely agree about govt. spending and reforming SS:

Quote:
During my first administration federal spending rose faster on an annual basis than in any year since World War II. With these record spending increases there is no reason why federal spending can't be cut this year by two percent; with another two percent to follow next year.

Your representatives in Washington should not spend one dollar that they can't honestly tell you, face to face, that they need for their spending program more than you need it for you own personal spending needs.

We in Washington need to recognize that the wealth of America belongs to the people who earned it, not to government.

I read about one Iraqi man whose father was imprisoned and then murdered by Saddam Hussein 14 years ago. Since his father's disappearance this man and his two brothers all got married, but out of respect for their father, none of them had a wedding party. This past Sunday, after the vote in Iraq, they all had their wedding party. There's a Senator in this chamber tonight who needs to tell this man and his brothers that we shouldn't over hype the election.

Our current tax system punishes achievement and rewards lethargy. It doesn't take a great mental capacity to see that there's something wrong with this system. It needs changing. Either work with me for reform, or shut up and step aside.

How can we claim that the people of America are free when they lack something so basic as school choice. The teachers unions and the education establishment need to set their selfish interests aside for the betterment of our children.

Democrats have said that I need to forget about privatizing Social Security. They say it will not happen. Democrats have used Social Security to frighten our senior citizens in every election for the past 50 years. Year after year it's the same thing. Vote for Republicans and they'll take your Social Security away, yet Social Security remains. Democrats know that if you own your own account they can no longer threaten you with its loss. Fighting Social Security reform is all about protecting Democrats long-standing scare tactics.
Wicked Flea
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 365
Location: Hair of the Dog
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/02/05 - 11:10    Post subject:
Another take on what Bush should discuss during State of the Union address.. sorry more than a couple of sentences.
Most of these were issues in 2004 and still are.

CLAIM: "If we failed to act in Iraq the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day."

STATUS: "The 1991 Persian Gulf War and subsequent U.N. inspections destroyed Iraq's illicit weapons capability and, for the most part, Saddam Hussein did not try to rebuild it, according to an extensive report by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq," Charles Duelfer. [Washington Post, 10/7/04]

STATUS: The hunt for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in Iraq has come to an end nearly two years after President Bush ordered U.S. troops to disarm Saddam Hussein. A senior intelligence official said Duelfer's findings will stand as the Iraq Survey Group's final conclusions and will be published this spring. [Washington Post, 1/12/05]

CLAIM: "America is committed to keep dangerous weapons from dangerous regimes."

STATUS: Under Bush's watch, North Korea's nuclear arsenal is thought to have quadrupled. Charles Pritchard, formerly Colin Powell's top official dealing with North Korea, has warned for months that "the White House lacks an effective strategy to dissuade North Korea from building up its nuclear arms." And, according to Pritchard, the situation has deteriorated because "the administration has neither offered much of a carrot nor wielded a stick." [New York Times, 5/7/04]

STATUS: According to a recent Harvard University report titled "Securing the Bomb: An Agenda for Action," "less fissile materials were secured in the two years after Sept. 11 than in the two years before." [Harvard Report, 5/04]

CLAIM: "The American economy is growing stronger."

STATUS: Job growth over the last 18 months has fallen short of administration predictions by 1,703,000—more than one-third fewer jobs than the president's Council of Economic Advisers said would be created even without the tax cuts. [EPI, 1/05]

STATUS: The most recent data from the Census Bureau show that the average income for middle-class households has dropped by $1,525 since its peak in 2000. [American Progress, 10/29/04]

CLAIM: "The tax relief you passed is working."

STATUS: The tax cuts have drained resources from domestic programs utilized by middle-class families. The Bush tax cuts for the richest 1 percent of Americans this year alone will cost $148 billion. "That is twice as much as the government will spend on job training, $6.2 billion; college Pell grants, $12 billion; public housing, $6.3 billion; low-income rental subsidies, $19 billion; child care, $4.8 billion; insurance for low-income children, $5.2 billion; low-income energy assistance, $1.8 billion; meals for shut-ins, $180 million; and welfare, $16.9 billion." [UFE, 4/7/04; Detroit News, 9/29/04]

STATUS: Between June 2003 and December 2004, the economy produced 3.1 million fewer jobs than the administration predicted would result after the last round of tax cuts. [Jobwatch.org, 1/7/05]

CLAIM: "We are providing more funding for our schools."

STATUS: "The bipartisan National Governors Association voted unanimously in 2003 to name No Child Left Behind an 'unfunded mandate,' which means the federal government isn't supplying the money needed to make the law work." [Bloomberg, 1/12/05]

STATUS: For 2005, the administration has requested $9.4 billion less for No Child Left Behind than the bill supposedly ensures. Title I, the program to help poor kids, is underfunded by $7.2 billion, leaving nearly 5 million kids without academic help. [Star-Telegram, 2/26/04]

PROMISE: "I will increase support for community colleges."

STATUS: Last year, the Bush administration proposed cutting the largest direct aid initiative to community colleges, the Perkins program for technical and vocational training, from $1.3 billion to about $1 billion. Congress had to step in to save the funding. [Cincinnati Enquirer, 1/26/04]

PROMISE: "Millions of Americans will be able to save money tax-free for their medical expenses in a health savings account."

STATUS: "Approximately 440,000 Americans signed up for health savings accounts between December 2003 and September 2005.... [A] study released by the Commonwealth Fund concludes that people who used high-deductible insurance plans were more likely than those with traditional medical coverage to have difficulty paying their medical bills." [Fox News, 1/27/05]

STATUS: HSAs will likely drive up the annual deductibles paid by workers. Because of their adverse effects on employer-based coverage, HSAs could swell the ranks of the uninsured. [USA Today, 5/25/04; CBPP, 5/10/04]

PROMISE: "I will defend the sanctity of marriage."

STATUS: Efforts to pass a constitutional amendment that would effectively ban same-sex marriage failed in July. [CNN, 7/16/04]

PROMISE: "I will double the federal funding for abstinence programs."

STATUS: Bush more or less made good on this promise, requesting $270 million for abstinence-only programs in 2005. Studies have showed the well-funded programs "teach adolescents false and misleading information about reproductive health" and fail to increase abstinence. [Waxman Report, 12/2/04; WP, 12/2/04; Advocates for Youth, 9/27/04]

PROPOSAL: "I propose series of measurements called Jobs for the 21st Century."

This initiative included increasing Pell grants…

STATUS: For three straight years, Bush has proposed freezing or cutting Pell grants. [Ed Workforce, 2/2/04]

STATUS: A spending bill the White House helped push through Congress last November allows the U.S. Department of Education to proceed with a new eligibility formula that will remove an estimated 90,000 qualified students from eligibility for Pell Grants. [St. Petersburg Times, 12/24/04]

…And Community-Based Job Training Grants

STATUS: Bush's 2005 budget proposed cutting job training and vocational education by 10 percent – that's $656 million – from what Congress pledged to those programs in 2002. [Workforce Alliance, 4/5/04]

STATUS: Two federal banking agencies headed by Bush appointees are trying to change laws that would cripple the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), a civil rights law prohibiting discrimination by banks against low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. [AP, 10/21/04]

PROPOSAL: "Pass legislation to modernize our electricity system, promote conservation, and make America less dependent on foreign energy sources."

STATUS: The energy bill proposed by President Bush would allow power companies "to set up multiple subsidiaries and blur their financial reports, leading to market manipulation similar to that seen during the California energy crisis." [Sierra Club]

STATUS: The president's bill allows "automakers to sell more gas guzzlers by failing to raise fuel economy standards" and "fails to increase our use of clean, renewable energy by excluding a Renewable Energy Standard (RES) that would ensure that more of our electricity comes from clean, renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power." [Sierra Club]

STATUS: President Bush's primary plan to reduce foreign energy dependence, drilling the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, would not reduce the price of oil and would produce only 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil (the United States consumes about 7 billion barrels each year). [Sierra Club]

PROPOSAL: "Reform in immigration laws and a new temporary worker program."

STATUS: President Bush blocked the Dream Act, which had bipartisan support and would have enabled 65,000 high school graduates who are undocumented immigrants to become citizens if they completed college, and allowed them to pay the in-state rate for tuition at public colleges and universities. [Washington Post, 7/21/04]

PROPOSAL: "New funding to continue our aggressive, community based strategy to reduce demand for illegal drugs."

STATUS: In his FY04 budget, the president proposed cutting funding for the Safe and Drug Free Schools program by $25 million. The 2005 budget proposes freezing funding for the program. [House Committee on Education and Workforce, 2/2/04]

PROPOSAL: "Grassroots campaign to help inform families about medical risks of STD's."

STATUS: Abstinence-only programs lavishly funded by the president have undermined this goal, increasing unsafe sex and encouraging hostility to contraception. [Advocates for Youth, 9/27/04]
copteacher
Adjunct
Reply with quote
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 07:14    Post subject: Reviews of the State of the Union
Man that moment when W mentioned the family of the Marine Sgt and then the Iraqi woman hugged the mother was very moving. I was full of tears seeing that moment.

That moment spoke volumes.

Overall not a bad speech. He has had better SofU speeches but as far as impact this one made a huge impression on me.

Like him or not, no one can deny that moment with the Iraqi woman and soliders mom was not moving.
sonnylax
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 09:26    Post subject:
Booing during the SOU address?!?!

It is amazing how low the left will go.

Sigh.
genie
Master of Prissface
Reply with quote
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 16194
Location: Finding serenity one day at a time
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 10:53    Post subject:
sonnylax wrote:
Booing during the SOU address?!?!

It is amazing how low the left will go.

Sigh.


Just wait, they haven't checked in here yet to rip him to shreds. Wink
I only caught part of it but Po Po is right, that moment with the Iraqi woman was incredibly moving and very symbolic, despite the left's attempts at making people think they don't want us over there.

I agree, he's had better speeches but this got the message across.
Gogirlgo
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 11:15    Post subject:
sonnylax wrote:

It is amazing how low the left will go.

Sigh.


Really, I think you're better than this.
TOsteve
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 1468
Location: Out for a run
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 14:11    Post subject:
My thoughts on the speech…

Just another media spectacle. These televised public addresses are really no more or no less than a well orchestrated media circus designed to distract the public from the fact that their government isn’t really representing their best interests. Am I saying anything revolutionary here? Unfortunately not.

What is the current state of the union in most western democracies? The average work week is getting longer, wage increases in the middle class are barely keeping up with inflation, consumable resources are being depleted at a faster and faster rate, crime rates are constantly increasing in urban centers and the cost of education is making it more and more out of reach to the common person. I don’t have time to find sources for everything I’ve just mentioned but if I can find the time I will quote some articles. These are major social problems that are not improving and have not been improving for a long time.

Can you blame the Republican party – not really. Can you blame the Democratic party – not really. We’ve all let our governments veer further and further away from representing the needs of the people they represent while we are busy watching reruns of Giligan’s Island and being convinced on the commercial breaks that we’d be happy if we drove a German sports car and lived in an impeccably decorated 5000 sq.ft home.

We need to become a society less influenced by booing Democrats and carefully staged displays of affection and start being more influenced by the realities of the unsustainable social order that we are all living in and voting for.

My thoughts after the speech – a waste of time. Then I turned off the TV.
robp
Pyromaniac
Reply with quote
Joined: 26 Jul 2002
Posts: 16242
Location: Waiting in line at the beer store...
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 14:39    Post subject:
TOsteve wrote:
My thoughts on the speech…

Just another media spectacle. These televised public addresses are really no more or no less than a well orchestrated media circus designed to distract the public from the fact that their government isn’t really representing their best interests. Am I saying anything revolutionary here? Unfortunately not.

What is the current state of the union in most western democracies? The average work week is getting longer, wage increases in the middle class are barely keeping up with inflation, consumable resources are being depleted at a faster and faster rate, crime rates are constantly increasing in urban centers and the cost of education is making it more and more out of reach to the common person. I don’t have time to find sources for everything I’ve just mentioned but if I can find the time I will quote some articles. These are major social problems that are not improving and have not been improving for a long time.

Can you blame the Republican party – not really. Can you blame the Democratic party – not really. We’ve all let our governments veer further and further away from representing the needs of the people they represent while we are busy watching reruns of Giligan’s Island and being convinced on the commercial breaks that we’d be happy if we drove a German sports car and lived in an impeccably decorated 5000 sq.ft home.

We need to become a society less influenced by booing Democrats and carefully staged displays of affection and start being more influenced by the realities of the unsustainable social order that we are all living in and voting for.

My thoughts after the speech – a waste of time. Then I turned off the TV.


Personally Steve, I think a lot of what you just spouted is a bunch of crap, especially in the paragraph that I bolded. But we are both entitled to our opinion, eh? Of course, I wouldn't watch Gilligan if it was the last thing on tv, I could care less about German sports cars and have no desire to own a 5000 sq. ft. home. That being said, I must be a social outcast.

I thought the SoU Address did what it was supposed to do. It outlined the president's agenda for the next four years without going into extreme detail on how he was going to accomplish it. The address is not the time or place for detailed explanations. He summed up where the nation is now and where he would like to take it in terms that most American's can comprehend.
sonnylax
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 15:10    Post subject:
Gogirlgo wrote:


Really, I think you're better than this.


Honestly, I though the left was better then that. Really.
TOsteve
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 1468
Location: Out for a run
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 16:33    Post subject:
robp wrote:

Personally Steve, I think a lot of what you just spouted is a bunch of crap,


I hope you didn't take anything I said personally, it certainly wasn't intended that way.

robp wrote:

especially in the paragraph that I bolded. But we are both entitled to our opinion, eh?


Are you saying that it isn't possible that there is any validity to any of those statements? I can only guess that is why you are accusing me of "spouting... a bunch of crap".

robp wrote:

Of course, I wouldn't watch Gilligan if it was the last thing on tv, I could care less about German sports cars and have no desire to own a 5000 sq. ft. home. That being said, I must be a social outcast.


I think you realize that the point I was making was broader than that.

robp wrote:

I thought the SoU Address did what it was supposed to do. It outlined the president's agenda for the next four years without going into extreme detail on how he was going to accomplish it. The address is not the time or place for detailed explanations. He summed up where the nation is now and where he would like to take it in terms that most American's can comprehend.


I thought the State of the Union was when the President addresses congress to outline what issues currently facing the nation he deems to be of highest priority? And I thought he addressed congress every year - not just at the beginning of each term? I could be wrong as its not my country's constitution.

Nuances aside, I think where we disagree is that I believe government has gotten away from representing the needs of the majority. And I also believe, quite firmly, that they use the media to manipulate public opinion and control the minds of the voting masses. The only way that they get away with this is that, for the most part, we let them.

When I'm not at work I will try to find time to post some articles about some of the stuff you bolded (if you're interested).
robp
Pyromaniac
Reply with quote
Joined: 26 Jul 2002
Posts: 16242
Location: Waiting in line at the beer store...
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 17:04    Post subject:
TOsteve wrote:


I thought the State of the Union was when the President addresses congress to outline what issues currently facing the nation he deems to be of highest priority? And I thought he addressed congress every year - not just at the beginning of each term? I could be wrong as its not my country's constitution.

Nuances aside, I think where we disagree is that I believe government has gotten away from representing the needs of the majority. And I also believe, quite firmly, that they use the media to manipulate public opinion and control the minds of the voting masses. The only way that they get away with this is that, for the most part, we let them.

When I'm not at work I will try to find time to post some articles about some of the stuff you bolded (if you're interested).


Nothing personal taken and no need to post articles backing your statements as I could probably waste time also finding links to debunk them.

The media is the most powerful tool in the chest to get the word out to the public. It is the public's responsibility to decipher the written and spoken word as presented by the media. It's obvious to me that just because your favorite news source says something, that it ain't necessarily so.

And I agree with you that government seems to be leaning away from representing the majority. The squeaky wheel gets the oil syndrome - a loud minority often gets more attention than a non-vocal majority.
RexRacer
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 17 Aug 2004
Posts: 814
Location: A pancake house of ineffable crappiness
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/03/05 - 17:29    Post subject:
Personally Steve, I think a lot of what you just spouted is "dead-on balls accurate", especially in the paragraph that robp bolded.

This is fun! Very Happy
Wicked Flea
Member
Reply with quote
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 365
Location: Hair of the Dog
| Back to top
PostPosted: 02/04/05 - 13:31    Post subject:
sonnylax wrote:


Honestly, I though the left was better then that. Really.


Seems the right is not much better...

From the offices of Sen. Harry Reid:

1999: Republicans Booed Clinton's Entrance. Many Republican lawmakers gave him a cool, though not impolite, reception. There were a smattering of boos when Clinton first entered the House chamber, but they were quickly drowned out by applause. Some Republicans barely applauded, or refused at all to clap. House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) and U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) were conspicuously silent. [Boston Herald, 1/20/99]

1998: Republicans Booed Clinton's Medicare Proposal Clinton's health-care initiatives, chiefly in the form of a medical bill of rights, found support on both sides, especially his attack on managed-care health-care plans. ... Clinton's proposal to expand Medicare to allow Americans as young as 55 to buy into the system drew shouts of "no" and some boos from Republicans during his speech. [Chicago Tribune, 1/28/98]

1997: Republican's Booed Clinton's Opposition to the Balanced Budget Amendment The Republican response was far warmer than perhaps any of Clinton's previous four State of the Union speeches. Time after time, Republicans jumped to their feet to join Democrats in applauding the president. Only once did they unmistakably and collectively show their disapproval--when Clinton spoke disparagingly of a GOP-sponsored constitutional amendment to balance the budget. Many Republicans hissed and some booed. [LA Times, 2/5/97]

1995: Republicans Booed Clinton and Walked Out During Speech The upheaval wrought by the Republican election landslide was visible throughout the president's State of the Union address - from the moment Speaker Newt Gingrich took the gavel to the striking silence that often greeted Clinton from the GOP. At one point, Republicans even booed. About 20 of them left as Clinton went on and on for an hour and 20 minutes. [AP, 1/24/95]
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic All times are GMT - 4 Hours

www.runningforums.com Forum Index -> On-Topic

Page 1 of 1

Related topics: