The President's Address

I actually skipped it but read some reports on cnn.com. Anyway, sounds like now is the time where we realize we can’t do this all by ourselves and now have to beg for UN help.

Personally I would be pissed off and a little offended. Sure the USA didn’t take anyone’s opinions into account when we decided to bulldoze into Iraq, but now it’s the world’s duty to help us clean up our mess?

I should probably state my bias, Bush disgusts me, so he could say something that is completely reasonable and my first reaction would be to look at him like he’s a moron.

just as an interesting tidbit, the 87 billion he asks for is roughly $300 per US citizen (2000 census)

Shit. And I already cashed my check, too.

What’s that “whooshing” sound?

Oh, just the sound of a falling approval rating…

300$ a person? That’s pretty funny. I would happily donate 300$ to a number of different causes… Iraq is probably not one of them. I would like Bush to stop committing me to so many arguably stupid things.

The cnn coverage mentioned how one person stated the rich would probably forego their tax cuts to help out with the big win. Way to go!!

Looks like the “Sheriff” is trying to round up a “Posse” after the fact. Yeehaw!

I found it interesting that the President only mentioned the need for one more multinational division. It appears that even if the UN does approve the US resolution, the President is committed to the enterprise being an overwhelmingly American presence. The boys aren’t coming home soon, and even the burdens we want to share, like peacekeeping, will still be almost entirely on our shoulders.

We will have over 100k troops there for another six months at least.

Is it too much to ask that somewhere in the first 10 minutes of a speech they something, anything, new? Come on, was anyone who hasn’t been paying some attention to what’s going on in Iraq even watching that speech? I think it’s ok to lose some of the more ignorant one’s if the President would just say something, anything, new. My eyes glazed over when I realized he was in pitchman mode again rather than statesman. Has he ever been in statesman mode?

Aside from Bush’s lack of speaking style… what is wrong with speechwriters today?

Kudos that he’s dropped “evil-doers” from rotation.

Some quotes and my response -

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas… I do not think the American taxpayer should be alone in support of this war and will work to ensure we have partners in this effort.

Why shouldn’t the US taxpayer carry the weight of this war alone? We started it and defied international opinion? Why should European tax payers cover our actions?

Sen. Ted Kennedy, D- Mass… It’s not enough to go to the United Nations with a resolution. We must go with the right resolution, and it’s not clear that this administration is ready to swallow its pride and do that. Words don’t matter. We need deeds.

This statement captures a lot of what I’ve felt about Iraq since the getgo, hell, even the whole war on terrorism starting back in Afghanistan. While I would agree with Pres Bush that we’ve needed to take action, I always feel like our actions are misguided and half thought out. It’s time we start acting smart about all of this instead of handling it like a Texas shoot-out.

Sen. John Kyl, R-Arizona… The question is, do we dare risk failure in this war on terrorism? There isn’t anything more threatening to American citizens than the terrorists, and it’s going to take what it takes, whatever that number is. Defeat is not an option here. Pulling out is not an option.

This goes to what Kennedy was saying. Defeat is definitely not an acceptable option but the part starting with the take what it takes bit is where is starts getting dangerous. We can’t afford to lose, therefore we especially can’t go into situations half-cocked because we trap ourselves into an ugly set of circumstances. I believe Iraq will be a real lesson in this.

Sen. Bob Graham, D-Florida… (The 87$ billion) is more than the federal government will spend on education this year, twice as much as the federal government will spend on our roads, bridges, highways and public transit systems. The president is clearly making a judgment that it is more important for us to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan than it is to deal with the very serious problems that we have in the United States.

Kind of a bleeding heart argument here that somewhat sidesteps the real issue. But it hits one important point. It seems like this Presidency is unable to do two things at once. Either it focuses on the international agenda or the domestic one, but not both. Now I know this is something difficult to balance, but the current presidency seems to have had more trouble than most.

Oh well. Interesting stuff I guess.

Nice to hear someone admit that. :)

I have supported the war effort and have attempted to support a president I did not vote for. I never have liked Bush so much as tolerate him and have respect for the office. Clinton’s smiling, hand shaking, drawl (I did vote for that one) made that kinda hard to do.

All that said, I am tiring of Bush’s excuses and/or non-communication. He does not want to update date us on any sort of regular basis. And as is blatatantly obvious, the whole WMD thing has been given a pretty fair amount of time to be ferreted out. No real update or taking of blame or hey we’re still looking.

Also, luckily, the economy is cyclical and seems to be creeping back because he has all but ignored it.

This weekend sucked ass, so some of my crankiness and whining can be blamed on that, but I imagine a few here would agree that Bush is not doing a stellar job. :wink:

See, people are always talking about how it’s conservatives, right wingers, and libertarians that aren’t inclusive enough…Why not broaden that to say “I wish the government, period, would stop using my funds to finance so many personal interests”. Then I could close my eyes and wish social security away, and you could close your eyes and wish national defense away. It’d be great.

The cnn coverage mentioned how one person stated the rich would probably forego their tax cuts to help out with the big win. Way to go!!

Wait, you’re concerned about rich people’s tax cuts? I’m confused.

Describing the occupation of Iraq as “national defense” is stretching things a bit. We haven’t found a single fucking thing that could have been used to threaten the US.

Maybe “strategic offense”, as the Saudi friendship on oil wasn’t working out.

Nice to know somebody recognizes this also. Perhaps if more politicians ignored the economy, it would rebound even faster.