State o' the Union

[Penn]

Question I watched the entire address by Pres. Bush, and not once did I see the camera(s) focus on Sen. Ted Kennedy.

Sens. Leiberman, Clinton, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Kerry, those faces I recognized, but not Kennedy's.


Was he in attendance last night? Did anybody else see him?

 

[Bruzilla]

The only time I saw his face on Fox was when they ran some of his speech last week before the address started.

BTW... I heard on Hannity's radio show that the speech that Pilosi released to the press yesterday afternoon was very anti-election, pull-out now, get the troops out, etc., aka very Kennedy-esqe, and there was quite a bit of speculation that she was going to have to change it as a result of the shift in public opinion since the election. The pols who were on didn't think she would change it because she had already released the script to the press, but I was watching her last night, and she was a very smooth talker until she got to the Iraq/election issue, then her voice seemed to stammer a bit and it was really obvious that she was reading from the prompter. To me it looked like she had rehearsed the heck out of all of the speech except that part. It was so bad you could see her eyes moving left to right, which is rare for a pol at that level, but ti was only during that part. I guess I'll have to check the press release speech and the transcript and see if she changed her tune.

 

[huntr1]

The other items you mention can happen just about anywhere and we have little control over them. But here on our soil it is a different story. So you're saying that on Sep.10, 2001 you were telling everyone that clinton must be taking action since we haven't been attacked here again since the earlier WTC bombing? Only time will tell if our actions today will help us in the future. Hopefully they are helping.

I never said they happened IN the USA, just TO the USA.

However, if appropriate actions had been taken after these attacks (i.e. NOT bombing an asprin factory, but bombing the actual locations of the terrorists like Bush is doing), there is a good chance that the attacks would have stopped prior to 9/11.

 

[SmallTown]

I never said they happened IN the USA, just TO the USA.

However, if appropriate actions had been taken after these attacks (i.e. NOT bombing an asprin factory, but bombing the actual locations of the terrorists like Bush is doing), there is a good chance that the attacks would have stopped prior to 9/11.

We've hit our share of non-military targets in this current effort as well.

Of course people like to claim the attacks happening in iraq are just "war acts" and not terrorism. But we are being hit by thugs from surrounding countries, not iraqi soldiers. So to say that attacks have ended since 9/11 is not accurate, just different types of attacks.

 

[Sparx]

Good point. But the fact remains that after 9-11 the Democrats spent a good amount of time hoping for more attacks so they could go, "See? This is George Bush's fault!" And now that 4 years have passed and we're still waiting for Armageddon, they're still at it, only now they're practically fabricating attacks to support their psychosis. Talk about desperate.

And booing the President when he was talking about Social Security! Booing during a State of the Union address!!!! For years and years, ever since I can remember, the Democrats have #####ed and moaned about SS with all these fear tactics about how the money will run out by x date. Now Bush wants to revamp it and suddenly SS is just peachy.

Who votes for these freaks?

I,m confused about why Social Security is OK today too. But the way bush wants to try to fix it (so he say's) by putting it in the hands of wall street is insane. Face it, the stock market is a gamble. S.S. was designed as retirement and disability insurance not a fund for the money changers to fiddle with. Compare it to the Railroad retirement plan that that does the same thing but is not in the hands of the Feds. It's secure and well funded.

 

[sleuth]

putting it in the hands of wall street is insane. Face it, the stock market is a gamble. S.S. was designed as retirement and disability insurance not a fund for the money changers to fiddle with.

BUT! it's a gamble that is voluntary.
If you don't want to take the risk, then you can still use the old system.
However, if you do take the risk, you'll be rewarded for it.

It's no different than the Thrift Savings Plans or a 401k. The only thing different is that it's automatically deducted from your paycheck, unlike the TSP or the 401k where you have to choose how much you want deducted.

The TSP offers 5 different funds in which you can volunteer your money. When times are lean, you stick with the G Fund, which is much like a savings account. It's going to earn you low interest rates, but always be in the positive. When times are a little better, you might put it into a riskier fund, where the interest rates are higher.

All Bush is doing is giving the people another version of the 401k. He's giving them the ability to "own" their own retirement, if they choose to. And giving Americans a choice isn't a bad thing. THAT's a good thing.

 

[ylexot]

Face it, the stock market is a gamble.

I disagree with that. On average, something like an S&P fund will average something like 7% growth each year (I forget the actual numbers). Yes, there will be times where it loses value, but there are also times when it far exceedes that 7% getting into the 20%s (thus an average of ~7%). The private sector is far better at managing money than the government is. I'd rather not put anything into SS and invest it all myself. As you can guess, I'm all for the private accounts.

 

[ylexot]

All Bush is doing is giving the people another version of the 401k. He's giving them the ability to "own" their own retirement, if they choose to. And giving Americans a choice isn't a bad thing. THAT's a good thing.

Of course, there is a negative side to that...idiots will choose not to and then complain when they have little to show for it when they retire.

 

[Hello6]

While we're wavin our flags

This probably has been posted before but I just got it and liked it so if you don't like it. Could be an urban legend with the John Glenn thing to but I still like it.


Things that make you think a little........
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during January....

In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.

That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq.

When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following ..

FDR...led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman...finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never attacked us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.


John F. Kennedy. ..started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never
attacked us.

Johnson...turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.

Clinton...went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never attacked us.

He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on
multiple occasions.

In the years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has.....liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51-day operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chapaquiddick.

It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!

Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB! The Military morale is high!

The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize
the facts.
Wait, there's more.......................

JOHN GLENN ON THE SENATE FLOOR
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:13
Some people still don't understand why military personnel do what they do for a living. This exchange between Senators John Glenn and Senator Howard Metzenbaum is worth reading. Not only is it a pretty impressive
impromptu speech, but it's also a good example of one man's explanation of why men and women in the armed services do what they do for a living.

This IS a typical, though sad, example of what some who have never served think of the military.

Senator Metzenbaum to Senator Glenn: "How can you run
for Senate when you've never held a real job?"

Senator Glenn: "I served 23 years in the United States
Marine Corps. I served through two wars. I flew 149 missions. My plane
was hit by anti-aircraft fire on 12 different occasions. I
was in the space program.

It wasn't my checkbook, Howard; it was my life on the line. It was not a nine-to-five job, where I took time off to take the daily cash receipts to the bank. I ask you to go with me ... as I went the other day... to a veteran's
hospital and look those men - with their mangled bodies -in the eye, and tell THEM they didn't hold a job! You go with me to the Space Program at NASA and go, as I have gone,to the widows and Orphans of Ed White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee... and you look those kids in the eye and
tell them that their DADS didn't hold a job.

You go with me on Memorial Day and you stand in Arlington National Cemetery, where I have more friends buried than I'd like to remember, and you watch those waving flags.

You stand there, and you think about this nation, and you tell ME that those people didn't have a job? I'll tell you,
Howard Metzenbaum; you should be on your knees every day of your life
thanking God that there were some men - SOME MEN - who held REAL jobs. And they required a dedication to a purpose -and a love of country and a dedication to duty - that was more important than life itself. And their self-sacrifice is what made this country possible.

I HAVE held a job, Howard! What about you?"

For those who don't remember - During W.W.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an attorney representing the Communist Party in the USA.
Now he's a Senator!

I'm too lazy to SNOPES it so if it is a lie, it's a pretty one.

 

[FromTexas]

I,m confused about why Social Security is OK today too. But the way bush wants to try to fix it (so he say's) by putting it in the hands of wall street is insane. Face it, the stock market is a gamble. S.S. was designed as retirement and disability insurance not a fund for the money changers to fiddle with. Compare it to the Railroad retirement plan that that does the same thing but is not in the hands of the Feds. It's secure and well funded.

1) He doesn't want it put it stocks. He wants it restricted to U.S. Treasuries and other AAA bonds. Maybe if you stop listening to the required liberal mantra, you would know that. U.S treasuries, other government bonds, and insured AAA bonds are the safest investments out there. Its the same thing the banks have the major chunk of your savings dollars in.

2) Outside that, you know nothing about the stock market. The stock market is not a gamble if you follow the basic rules. If you don't invest all in one company, don't invest in magazine stocks (stocks that are hot because their all over the news as a fad), invest for the long term, don't time the market, and sit back and gain over a lifetime -- there are not problems. Your lack of education on this matter is very apparent. Take any large time period for investment into retirement putting an even amount in any gage of the market over that period of time and you will always come out ahead of fixed income type investments.

3) Social Security is not secure. How is it a guaranteed benefit (still being touted this way by the Dems) when you are talking about it being at 72% of what it should be paying out in 2042?!??

4) The "privatization" still leaves social security, but it just enhances it by allowing people to expand on that with safe, secure, long term investments which are bound by rules which do not allow anybody to borrow against it, take it in lump sum, etc... to protect it as income protection over the life of retirement.

 

[likitysplit]

This probably has been posted before but I just got it and liked it so if you don't like it. Could be an urban legend with the John Glenn thing to but I still like it.


Things that make you think a little........
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during January....

In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.

That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq.

When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following ..

FDR...led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman...finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never attacked us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.


John F. Kennedy. ..started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never
attacked us.

Johnson...turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.

Clinton...went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never attacked us.

He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on
multiple occasions.

In the years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has.....liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51-day operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chapaquiddick.

It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!

Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB! The Military morale is high!

The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize
the facts.
Wait, there's more.......................

JOHN GLENN ON THE SENATE FLOOR
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:13
Some people still don't understand why military personnel do what they do for a living. This exchange between Senators John Glenn and Senator Howard Metzenbaum is worth reading. Not only is it a pretty impressive
impromptu speech, but it's also a good example of one man's explanation of why men and women in the armed services do what they do for a living.

This IS a typical, though sad, example of what some who have never served think of the military.

Senator Metzenbaum to Senator Glenn: "How can you run
for Senate when you've never held a real job?"

Senator Glenn: "I served 23 years in the United States
Marine Corps. I served through two wars. I flew 149 missions. My plane
was hit by anti-aircraft fire on 12 different occasions. I
was in the space program.

It wasn't my checkbook, Howard; it was my life on the line. It was not a nine-to-five job, where I took time off to take the daily cash receipts to the bank. I ask you to go with me ... as I went the other day... to a veteran's
hospital and look those men - with their mangled bodies -in the eye, and tell THEM they didn't hold a job! You go with me to the Space Program at NASA and go, as I have gone,to the widows and Orphans of Ed White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee... and you look those kids in the eye and
tell them that their DADS didn't hold a job.

You go with me on Memorial Day and you stand in Arlington National Cemetery, where I have more friends buried than I'd like to remember, and you watch those waving flags.

You stand there, and you think about this nation, and you tell ME that those people didn't have a job? I'll tell you,
Howard Metzenbaum; you should be on your knees every day of your life
thanking God that there were some men - SOME MEN - who held REAL jobs. And they required a dedication to a purpose -and a love of country and a dedication to duty - that was more important than life itself. And their self-sacrifice is what made this country possible.

I HAVE held a job, Howard! What about you?"

For those who don't remember - During W.W.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an attorney representing the Communist Party in the USA.
Now he's a Senator!

I'm too lazy to SNOPES it so if it is a lie, it's a pretty one.

This is truly deserving of an award. Wow...........if you are a democrat and read this and are not convinced Bush is doing a great job.............go to your closet, take out the .38 revolver, load it.......then nibble on the barrel while you're squeezing the trigger. We will all be better off.........

Well said sir......

 

[Larry Gude]

I know!

Let's have a SS/medicaire thread!