YEAH! the last ever BUSH state of the union speech!

[Bill]

The last time we'll have to listen to a pack of lies from this incompetent buffoon in a SOTU!

That's worth a celebration!

[Little Red Dog]

Actually, there's some debate as to whether anyone will actually be listening. His last one didn't even pull the ratings of American Idol, Lost, or 24.

It's almost as though.... no one believes what he's saying!

:lmao2:

[disrupter]

And i won't watch anymore than i have watched any of his other bullshit.

Life is to short to waste it on this.

If someone, properly elected who i had an iota of respect for i might make myself watch, as a member of this nation.

I treat GWB the way he treated his military duty during the Vietnam war, i walk away from it, & at least i am not committing a serious crime doing so.

[mwillman]

Talk about a boring useless president.

His SotU was about as usefull as a head cold.

[kres24GT]

I didn't even watch it this time. All the other ones have jsut pissed me off so bad, didn't subject myself to it.

[Smurf-Herder]

So much for being informed. Feel free to make up whatever you want then.

[Dale escondido]

You got to give him credit, after 7 years he sounds like even he believes his own crap.

[Smurf-Herder]

You got to give him credit, after 7 years he sounds like even he believes his own crap.


Well, I think his signing an executive order today, prohibiting funding of all earmarks not individually read and brought to debate on the floor for a vote, before voting on a spending bill, all by itself is a major change.

[bairdi]

Well, I think his signing an executive order today, prohibiting funding of all earmarks not individually read and brought to debate on the floor for a vote, before voting on a spending bill, all by itself is a major change.
If he had done that 7 years ago when the Repugs had control of the Congress I would have had at least some small level of respect for the man. He's a day late and a dollar short on this one so that now it sure has the rotting smell of politics as usual.

[Smurf-Herder]

If he had done that 7 years ago when the Repugs had control of the Congress I would have had at least some small level of respect for the man. He's a day late and a dollar short on this one so that now it sure has the rotting smell of politics as usual.

How is it politics as usual, when he's making Congress do what no President has ever forced them to do before - having to defend all their pork-spending on a case-by-case basis?

[mwillman]

Giving him credit for that is total bullshit.

The democrats have done more to stop earmarks then any republican has ever done.

By the way his executive order has no power over congress so its just him playing games to claim credit for something he never did to begin with.

Presidents dont make law they just sign it in or veto it. Bush has abused the use of executive orders.

[Frankg]

The last time we'll have to listen to a pack of lies from this incompetent buffoon in a SOTU!

That's worth a celebration!

What lies would those be Bill ??

uuooops , I forgot , our "open-minded" administrator has me on ignore since I don't share his political beliefs

Must be one of the basic priciples that liberalism (or liberaltariunism ) was built on

any other of you liberaltarians care to answer ?

[Smurf-Herder]

Giving him credit for that is total bullshit.

The democrats have done more to stop earmarks then any republican has ever done.

By the way his executive order has no power over congress so its just him playing games to claim credit for something he never did to begin with.

Presidents dont make law they just sign it in or veto it. Bush has abused the use of executive orders.

You missed what the Democrats did when they got in:

Taking a Step Backward on Earmarks
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/JohnBoehner/2007/06/08/taking_a_step_backward_on_earmarks

"After repeatedly promising the “most honest” and “most open” Congress in history, Democratic leaders have moved to make the earmark process entirely secret.

It started in January when the House quickly adopted rules that have prevented lawmakers from challenging an earmark as long as the bill to which it's attached contains a list of earmarks – even if the list is inaccurate and doesn't list the earmark at issue. The rules were supposed to ensure all earmarks receive appropriate scrutiny and opportunity for debate but have instead made it nearly impossible to challenge wasteful spending. In fact, in February the majority used this loophole to certify a massive spending bill as “earmark free,” despite the fact that it contained hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarks.

Now a new directive by the Democratic chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., will keep spending bills “earmark free” initially but allow Democrats to air-drop all earmarks into conference reports without any scrutiny. As The Associated Press reported, “Rather than including specific pet projects, grants and contracts in legislation as it is being written,” the order will “keep the bills free of such earmarks until it is too late for critics to effectively challenge them.”


And, an Executive Order has power over the agencies that do the actual funding to the earmarks. An earmark may be attached to a bill - but in principle, it's not legally binding unless it was reviewed, debated on and voted on as an ammendment to a bill; in which case it wouldn't be an unreviewed earmark.

[Moby]

Well, I think his signing an executive order today, prohibiting funding of all earmarks not individually read and brought to debate on the floor for a vote, before voting on a spending bill, all by itself is a major change.
And it only took him 7 years of fucking you and the rest of the American people for him to do it. If it was anything more then a political game then why didn't he do this years go when earmarks were still at Clinton era levels?

I'm glad that he's going to stop earmarks. I just wish he hadn't been playing the partisan bullshit for so long.

Now the problem is that few things will get through the Senate. We've had more filibusters then at any time in history so earmarks were the only way to get Republicans to do their job.

Now we will have more stagnation.

[Smurf-Herder]

And it only took him 7 years of fucking you and the rest of the American people for him to do it. If it was anything more then a political game then why didn't he do this years go when earmarks were still at Clinton era levels?

I'm glad that he's going to stop earmarks. I just wish he hadn't been playing the partisan bullshit for so long.

Now the problem is that few things will get through the Senate. We've had more filibusters then at any time in history so earmarks were the only way to get Republicans to do their job.

Now we will have more stagnation.

So Democrats taking it to a new level of secrecy means nothing to you?

BTW, how many filibusters was that? I'm curious how it does add up with those in the past.

[Moby]

So Democrats taking it to a new level of secrecy means nothing to you?

BTW, how many filibusters was that? I'm curious how it does add up with those in the past.
I think I read that it was 63.

I think earmarks are terrible. What I think is even more terrible that the people complaining about them today were the people that were ignoring them when "The Party" was doing them.

If you've voted for Bush, Cheney, Delay, Fritz or any of the big republican ear markers then you have no right to complain today.

I voted against earmarks in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006. I feel that I have a right to bitch about them now. Anyone that voted for them 2 or 3 times needs to either admit they were wrong or hold their peace.

[Dale escondido]

Politicians are artists at projecting an image of action.
This is another illusion and slight of hand by a very intelligent or ignorant man.
It just depends if your looking from the right or left.

[Smurf-Herder]

I think I read that it was 63.

I think earmarks are terrible. What I think is even more terrible that the people complaining about them today were the people that were ignoring them when "The Party" was doing them.

If you've voted for Bush, Cheney, Delay, Fritz or any of the big republican ear markers then you have no right to complain today.

I voted against earmarks in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006. I feel that I have a right to bitch about them now. Anyone that voted for them 2 or 3 times needs to either admit they were wrong or hold their peace.

Which party was responsible for those filibusters?

[Moby]

Which party was responsible for those filibusters?
Tell me you're joking.

[Smurf-Herder]

This is going off track.

I thought somebody would actually have something to say about the things discussed in the speech. But it's just a waste.

Everything is a lie ... everything is a conspiracy ...

[Moby]

This is going off track.

I thought somebody would actually have something to say about the things discussed in the speech. But it's just a waste.

Everything is a lie ... everything is a conspiracy ...
I've never said everything was a lie.

Even you pointed out how he's playing political games and working party politics.

To me that's been the problem of the past 8 to 10 years. Our leaders abandoned what was good for the nation and focused on what was good for "The Party".

Bush hasn't said any thing that couldn't be found in a PNAC or AEI white paper. Since I've read many of those there's no need to listen to him. The PNAC and The AEI have been wrong on just about everything.

[mwillman]

I dont care what Bush says.
He is the worst president in more then a 100 years.

I will begin listening to the president again when that fool is out of office.

[Dale escondido]

Bush has done amazing things for Mexico, China India and Brazil.
Hes on course in 50-100 years to resolved the middle east and their interest.
You got to think outside the box.
He was a globalist when governor and continued as president and was elected twice.
And now we dont approve of him? DAH!!