Comments on: Bush Delivers His Final State of the Union Address

By: Jules Crittenden » Lame Duck Is What?

Jules Crittenden » Lame Duck Is What? — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 03:52:40 +0000

[...] George Bush Delivers His Final State of the Union Address, Jan. 28, 2008: Once again, the president of the United States didn’t get the memo. Someone forgot to tell that guy he’s a lame duck and a failure. [...]

By: Emily Carlson

Emily Carlson — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 00:52:42 +0000

It was a modest speech filled with modest proposals. Last night, President Bush gave his final State of the Union address, an address much different than his past seven. Gone were the references to Iran as the "axis of evil" and our social security system as "headed towards bancruptcy." Instead of strong words, Bush put forward modest proposals. The already approved $150 billion economic stimulus plan, $300 million in education funding for poor students, and continued support of the war in Iraq topped Bush's agenda. Modest clapping and standing ovations scattered his 53 minute speech, but alas... Bush was not the center of attention at his own State of the Union speech. With only a year left in his presidency, the nation has already turned to a new generation of politicans who are running for his seat. CNN seemed to be more interested in which senator was snubbing another senator than talking about President Bush's speech. A picture of Senator Barak Obama turning his back on Senator Hillary Clinton shaking Senator Ted Kennedy's hand was blown up and shown again and again. 'Was he doing this on purpose? Is he mad at Hillary?' seemed to be more important than anything the President was saying. Senator McCain wasn't even in attendance last night, instead choosing to squeeze in some last minute campaigning before Florida's primary today. With Americans already swept up in the excitement of Super Tuesday and the race to see who the Democrat and Republican front runner will be, President Bush is pushed in the background. His State of the Union was more of a snapshot of his past seven years as President while he struggles to shape what his legacy will be. Meanwhile, the rest of the politicans in the House chambers, and well as the rest of the nation wonders... who the next leader of the free world will be. More info on the State of the Union: http://emily-carlson.com http://emilycarlson.org http://emilycarlson.info http://emilyacarlson.wordpress.com/ http://www.zimbio.com/Emily+Carlson+Journalist http://www.zimbio.com/Emily+Carlson's+All+Things+Political

By: Dean Rader

Dean Rader — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:39:37 +0000

Interestingly, I also talk about how the president addresses congress rather than Americans in my post yesterday on The Weekly Rader. As a professor of writing and a media critic, I was eager to "read" his speech as though it were a student paper. For me, I found the text lacked an original thesis and any specific details to support the rather vague assertions it tries to make. You can see the grade I assign the speech here: http://weeklyrader.blogspot.com/2008/01/grading-state-of-union.html

By: JO

JO — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:25:00 +0000

Get real.

This country runs on consumer confidence, which has so clearly been shown in the last few weeks. A few negative economic numbers were released, the presidential candidates jumped on them so they could cry “crisis” in order to get attention, news outlets cried “crisis” to boost their ratings, those led to a crisis of consumer confidence, which hurt the markets and caused an actual economic crisis.

It showed poor judgment and lack of responsibility for the presidential candidates to hype the negative news and cry “crisis”. Unfortunately, the news media did the usual and made a crisis where there wasn’t one. I’m not ignoring the housing problem, but the downturn in the markets and consumer confidence dropped precipitously due to the media, not due to the 2 negative numbers that were released.

As our corporate laws and markets have evolved into the current “public” form the role of consumer confidence in the economy has gained power to the point where it rules the economy. The president can no longer speak honestly during a State of the Union address or we’ll have a worldwide crash the following day. Instead, he is limited to challenging Congress while being as optimistic about the future as possible.

That’s reality.

By: Curly Smith

Curly Smith — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:45:40 +0000

“He alluded to a “decline” in the housing market, forgetting to mention that for the first time in memory, housing values dropped.”

You must not have a good memory if you can’t recall the aftermath of the S&L fiasco, or the plummeting housing values in Houston and Denver when the price of oil collapsed. Yeah, they were “isolated markets” but the “sub-prime problem” is concentrated in certain markets as well.

By: Jonathan Reed Winkler

Jonathan Reed Winkler — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:28:32 +0000

Rick Moran’s wrong about the Adams reference. First, November 1797 saw _serious_ problems with France that would break out into war the next year, and everyone knew it. Britain was a problem but not _the_ problem. Second, the British posts in the U.S. had been evacuated after the 1794 treaty with Britain (Jay’s Treaty) and Anthony Wayne’s demonstration of force against the Indians in northwest Ohio. Jay’s Treaty was why things were vastly better with the British, despite impressment and trade interference. Third, Adams was facing an internal struggle within his own party from Alexander Hamilton’s proteges, including Thomas Pickering, who believed that Adams was a fool for pushing diplomacy as much as naval preparation in the face of the French threat. But because he needed the Federalists in Congress to support his efforts, he couldn’t act against Pickering or the others until later.

All of this means that there is, in fact, no direct line to the Carter address, and this is a false analogy.

By: googlebagsta

googlebagsta — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:25:02 +0000

wasn’t at every I know friends pirates I still years later. I noticed to our from damage I thought

By: Linda Fraleigh

Linda Fraleigh — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:23:46 +0000

Sometimes the most interesting things surround the main story. I noticed Clinton shaking Kennedy’s hand, while Obama turned his back to her. Will he treat heads of states he does not agree with in the same manner if he is the President?
Sorry to see such a childish response. I am currently an independent from Ohio looking for someone to vote for. I will be voting in the primary.