And he was one of them high-fallutin' phisysist types. All in all, a good speech by the President. I'm curious to see what happens with the AIDS initiative and the alt-energy research funding once congress starts putting the funding bills together. It's pointless to debate the Iraq issue until Powell speaks to the U.N. on the 5th.
I'm confused here. I'm hearing complaints that while his words sound good you should judge Bush by his actions. He says nice thing about healthcare and the environment but that dosn't matter because his actions are what is important. But when it comes to the <i>war</i>, it's his words that are important not his actions (because there hasn't been any action yet - just talk). You guys have crucified him based on actions he hasn't taken yet. So which is it? Words or actions? Or do we get to pick and choose based on what supports our world view? Also, take Clinton for example. His words about respecting women and his official stance on women's rights were what was important but not his actions as his actions clearly did not reflect what he said (he didn't respect his wife or the promises that he made to her nor did he respect his lovers as he consistantly hurt their feelings by lying about their relationships). So, with Democrats as long as their stance is correct (i.e. Byrd talks about being against racism but belonged to the KKK) their actions are not important. With Republicans, however, words are meaningless even if their actions back them up.
Here is an action for you. Bush did not consult the UN, NATO, the American public, etc. before declaring his intention of an Iraqi regime change back in the spring of 2002.
the clinton administration was using the phrase, "regime change" back a while ago....did they consult those entities? just checking...
Great speech by Bush. I am impressed that he has stuck to his party's roots (since Reagan that is) on the economy. I like the faith based initiative, even if it isn't a huge program. He's put health care reform on the table, so the Democrats can get to work on something they have wanted to reform for a while. I think there will be a compromise, the Republicans will get their limits on the lawyers, and the Democrats will get their big increases on health spending. His position on Iraq is clear. If the Dems have a serious objection they better come up with one. (None of this "let's wait for the UN" crap).
What did Biden say? I saw the beginning of the Dem response and when the only objection to Bush's position was "that he should work with Congress and the UN" I thought it was very lame and weak. Anyone else think Bush made his speech extra long so we would ignore the Dems? I couldn't sit there another hour, I had to do something.
Has he taken OBL out? All accounts are that he's still alive. I didn't say Bush hasn't done more than Clinton, I'll admit he has. Of course, Clinton didn't have a 9/11/01 to deal with either.
Debateable whether he's alive or not. Let's assume he is. What exactly should the military be doing that they currently are not?
It's not too debateable since there have been tapes of him that have referenced the Indonesia bombings, even though he could've died since then. I'm not making a judgment as to whether or not OBL is dead or not, I was just saying that he's not (of course, I'd love for him to be dead or captured). So, I'm not advocating anything else being done. They've seem to hit a wall on finding OBL, but they have done a good job in limiting Al-Qaeda's infrastructure. I got sick and tired of people saying Clinton didn't do anything to take him out when 1.) he gave Bush a plan to deal with Al-Qaeda that he ignored (I'm not saying that Bush ignoring this had anything to do with OBL's ability to pull 9/11/01 off) and 2.) Bush wasn't doing anything proactive to take OBL out before 9/11/01, as far as we know. If you want to argue that Bush was doing something behind the scenes (which I'm sure there were covert missions or something of the sort to take them down), you can't say that Clinton didn't do the same thing.
On top of that, perhaps if Junior had sent American troops in to find him in Tora Bora, rather than Afghani Warlord Troops, we would now be certain Osama was dead....because we would have killed him instead of allowing him to escape! Come to think of it, perhaps if Ronald Reagan hadn't given Saddam Hussein chemical and biological weapons during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, we wouldn't be preparing to attack Iraq right now, now would we! Oops, my bad on the 2nd one...of course we would be preparing to attack Iraq...there's oil in them there hills!!!
