Here we can address our Opinions from the State of the Union Address.
Printable View
Here we can address our Opinions from the State of the Union Address.
I feel that the President of the United States has a Plan to get Baghdad Secure. Now he stated that Iraq's Government must play a Big Role. And a Bigger one in time. he also mentioned the Oil Law and other things on the Agenda that Baghdad needs to be SECURE NOW for all these things to happen.
Just like my freind has said along. "If you have a Million Dinars, you will be a millioniar. Have patients it could be until 06/07, it all has to do with the Security. Get Baghdad Secure, then who knows". :bow:
Yes, the security of Baghdad plays a huge role in the Iraqi economy. I thought the president made this very clear. I thought the pres made a great speech tonight and it definently looks like the democrats are going to give Bush's new war strategy a chance. Lets all just hope it works.:beer:
I agree with you there Neno. my son has said it alalong. Many good things CAN happen here. The iraqis nee to secure the capital in order to get the confidence of the people back . They also NEED to RV the Dinar.
They have too, He made it clear to the Union that they kinda hold the key to this future of Iraq with their willingness to fund it. Kinda put them to work right out the Gate, wouldn't you say. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by dinartank
Indeed, Myself I am really not a huge fan of president Bush, but for once he souded kinda eloquent to me and he was not reading a telepromter. I was very impressed and it looked like the dems stood up and clapped for alot of his points. Lets just all pray that he gets it done! :ro_emote:Quote:
Originally Posted by neno
SOTU=== YAWN...........jmo
Quote:
Originally Posted by neno
All I can say is that I was never more proud or impressed with the President.
I think his speech was great. I especially liked the part about the heath care plan he spoke about. This will help alot of people. We need to remember the ones that are in harms way also.
I loved the speech but found it hard to watch with Nancy Pelosi sitting right behind him....
I heard today that the President didn't get into it all. But that there is alot more to this. Exspecially for the Middle Class to Benifit from it as a Family of 4 with upto $60,000.00 a year income. But also would hurt those that make more with a Good Health Ins. Plan too. There is alot more to come for this. Will be listening.Quote:
Originally Posted by merrygoround
Pelosi would know bipatisan if it bite her in the a$$
Like This.Quote:
Originally Posted by lndmn_01
In Address, Bush Insists U.S. Must Not Fail in Iraq
Stephen Crowley/The New York Times
"Congress has changed," President Bush said, acknowledging the new Democratic majority, "but our responsibilities have not."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/24/wa..._r=1&th&emc=th
By DAVID E. SANGER and JIM RUTENBERG
Published: January 24, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 23 — President Bush tried to resuscitate his ailing presidency Tuesday night, using his State of the Union address to present a modest agenda of energy and health care proposals while warning an increasingly assertive Congress against undercutting his new Iraq strategy.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Graphic
Giving the President a Hand
Graphic
State of the Union: Highlights Past
Related
Text: Democratic Response of Senator Jim Webb to the President’s State of the Union Address (January 23, 2007)
Text and Audio (January 23, 2007)
The State of the Union
Go to Complete Coverage »
It was a speech that reflected Mr. Bush’s difficult circumstances. It was limited in ambition and political punch at home, with no proposals to rival his call two years ago to remake Social Security, no mention of rebuilding New Orleans and no allusions to limiting stem cell research or banning gay marriage.
And when it came to his plan to send additional troops to Iraq, he was forced to plead with the Democrats who now control Congress — and with a growing number of Republican critics — to “give it a chance to work.”
In an admission that the United States now finds itself trapped in the cross-fire of a sectarian conflict, Mr. Bush said, “This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we are in.” While he insisted that America could not afford to fail, he also warned the Iraqi government that “our commitment is not open-ended.”
His freshest initiative was setting a goal of reducing projected gasoline consumption 20 percent over the next 10 years. This hit a theme tailored to his appeal for bipartisanship in a city where the balance of power has shifted markedly against Mr. Bush since the last State of the Union address. Although he did not propose any measures to deal with emissions from power plants and factories, the main sources of greenhouse gases, he spoke of “the serious challenge of global climate change.”
The other main element of his domestic agenda, a package of proposals intended to improve access to health insurance, had drawn intense opposition from Democrats long before Mr. Bush walked to the well of the House chamber on Tuesday night, a scene he could not have relished but handled graciously. Behind him sat a Democratic House speaker, Representative Nancy Pelosi, sitting alongside Vice President Dick Cheney. In front of him was an audience of Democrats growing increasingly comfortable with their new power, including quite a few who are jockeying to take his job and reverse the policies he has put in place.
Mr. Bush gamely ticked off other goals he would like to achieve before leaving office in three days short of two years. They included overhauling immigration laws, taking steps toward a balanced budget, dealing with the long-term financial condition of Social Security and Medicare, and imposing tighter standards on schools.
Yet the proposals were overwhelmed by the Iraq debate.
“Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq,” Mr. Bush said, “because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far-reaching.”
While Mr. Bush has traditionally used these speeches to present a hopeful vision of Iraq’s future, he could not do so on Tuesday night. His own nominee to take over the command of United States forces in Iraq, Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, told the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier in the day that “the situation in Iraq is dire.”
Mr. Bush started his speech 12 hours before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was to begin working on a bipartisan resolution in opposition to his plan to send additional troops to Iraq. Despite his proposal of a bipartisan council to advise him on the battle against Islamic extremism, Democrats immediately assailed him, and members of his own party continued to show signs of edging away.
In the Democratic response to his address, Senator Jim Webb of Virginia, whose son is a marine serving in Iraq, said that Mr. Bush “took us into this war recklessly,” and that the United States was now “held hostage to the predictable and predicted disarray that followed.” Mr. Webb called for “a formula that will in short order allow our combat forces to leave Iraq,” and said that if Mr. Bush did not change course in Iraq and in his economic policies, “we will be showing him the way.”
Mr. Bush got a polite reception, but one far more muted than in previous appearances. He waited until the end of his nearly 50-minute speech to deliver the assessment that typically opens these addresses, that “the state of our union is strong.” For a man who finds himself struggling to maintain public and political support, Mr. Bush delivered the speech in a confident tone, with easy and relaxed smiles.
Seeking new ground for consensus, Mr. Bush reached back to a theme that marked the first days of his presidency, when he would regularly appeal for bipartisanship. “Our citizens don’t much care which side of the aisle we sit on, as long as we are willing to cross that aisle when there is work to be done,” he said.
But the power dynamic on Tuesday night was completely different. In the six years in which Republicans controlled one or both houses of Congress, Democrats said they saw little of that bipartisan instinct at work, and despite vows to behave differently, they have not shown much in return.
In fact, Mr. Bush’s argument on Tuesday night for embracing his Iraq plan amounted to a reverse of the argument that he made from the same podium four years ago, when he contended that dealing with Saddam Hussein would help the United States bring other rogue states to heel. This time, Mr. Bush spoke of a “nightmare scenario,” of an Iraq “overrun by extremists on all sides.” He said the violence in the country would turn contagious, spread beyond Iraq’s borders and inflame the entire Middle East.
And he appealed to Democrats to remember the votes many of them cast in 2002 to authorize the invasion, throwing some responsibility their way in the process.
“We went into this largely united, in our assumptions and in our convictions,” he said, recalling the days when his approval ratings were sky-high. “And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure.”
Mr. Bush was careful in describing what many in his administration believe could be a coming confrontation with Iran. While he vowed that the world would never allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, he made no threats, saying he was relying on diplomacy to deal with both Iran and North Korea, the two countries that, five years ago, he declared in a State of the Union address made up an “axis of evil” with Mr. Hussein’s Iraq.
But the effect of Iraq extends to the domestic front. Even his allies say the war threatens the prospects of the new initiatives he described.
“Iraq casts a huge shadow over anything in the domestic policy arena that the president talks about,” said Glen Bolger, a Republican pollster. “The situation makes it very difficult for the president to get Americans to pay attention to what he’s saying on issues like energy and health care.”
Dan Bartlett, the White House counselor, argued otherwise. “If you talk about the issues the public cares about, and you put forward innovative, bold ideas,” Mr. Bartlett said, “the American people, regardless of what the polls say that day, will say, ‘This is worth study, this is worth engaging the Democratic Congress on.’ ”
Ms. Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Senate majority leader, said in a joint statement that Mr. Bush’s goals on energy were “commendable” but suggested that they would seek to achieve them through different policies.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, speaking on ABC News, said Mr. Bush would find “a receptive audience” for his energy and health care goals, though she later said she found the early details of his health care plan “really troubling.” The Republican minority leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said the two parties should find innovative ways to tackle the issues.
Mr. Bush’s aides and allies argue that he could exert some leverage by accusing Democrats of intransigence and “do-nothingness” should they flatly shoot down his proposals, as they were starting to do even before his speech.
“The real question is not whether he can make it work; he’s extended his hand several times now,” said Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona. “The real question is how much do the Democrats want to cooperate with him.”
But the Democrats have been in control only a few weeks, and polls indicate that for now the public is more likely to side with them in a fight. And it is not clear that Mr. Bush’s new proposals would do anything to reverse the political balance of power.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikki
You ought to be a Dem for sure... :noserious
Well, Bush spelled out in his opening to downplay most of the pundits anticipated hard pressed issues to be addressed by saying more will be then handled next week... dashing many wanting to hear their favourite tune.
I think his speech was balanced and composed to meet the new majority by the Dems and to touch base about his core plea with the nation, remember, he still has two more years to lead the Administration and fortunately, lame as he may be... you all better wish he has some musclesleft in that holster to surprise and counteract any silly moves by Iran....if you will!
I particularly like the Silver Medal award to that Sergeant facing enemy fire.... he did what a brave soldier is trained to do to defend commitment and freedom with a cause... YOUR cause to be able to move about without fear someday and always and someone lessfortunate had to take that role... remember them for many Americans are sent out to protect the world!
I'd like to see Hillary come through and even Obama too...but I'll still prefer to have John McCain lead for the current situation facing the world by the Muslim fundamentalists.
I met up my other young retired friend from Wyoming at a reunion party during this January holiday and we both toasted and look forward to John's win... but his health is sadly the factor for concern....
Whatever the outcome, it is a charming change to see Nancy Pelosi seated next to Dick Cheney!!!:thumbsup:
YB. - cheers to the American dream & gift for freedom...:beer:
The speech was okay. He never promises anything, he just puts his proposals out there. But, I don't think the health plan he proposes will work cause a lot of middle class people have enough to bear financially. What about the poor people? I heard something about how we should pay a tax on the health benefits we get from our employer but I couldn't get more info on this. Maybe, they could come up with something better. Glad Rolclub is back. Miss you all. Where is Adster? Anybody know? Nidya