Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
« January 2004 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
foolishness
gloating
jerk fellation
LEGO
politics
schadenfreude
sports
Stinktown
work
We Three Jerks
Wednesday, 21 January 2004
SOTU
Ken Shepherd blogged the State Of The Union almost line-by-line, as did Stephen Green.

My thoughts:
Aside from the pure Clintonism, like money for drug testing in schools, it was pretty good. I liked the emphasis on the Iraq and terrorism, and especially this line linking the Iraq war to Libya's WMD surrender:

For diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible. And no one can now doubt the word of America.
And he had an excellent response to all those ninnies who think the greatest nation on Earth should let a bunch of European socialists decide its foreign policy, first listing our REAL allies:
Some critics have said our duties in Iraq must be internationalized. This particular criticism is hard to explain to our partners in Britain, Australia, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, Italy, Spain, Poland, Denmark, Hungary, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Romania, the Netherlands. . . . Norway, El Salvador and the 17 other countries that have committed troops to Iraq.
and then raising a big middle finger to Jacques Chirac, Gerhard Schroeder, John Kerry, and the rest of the traitors:
There is a difference, however, between leading a coalition of many nations and submitting to the objections of a few. America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country.
Full text here.

Marc

Posted by thynkhard at 11:00 AM EST
Updated: Wednesday, 21 January 2004 11:26 AM EST
Post Comment | View Comments (1) | Permalink

Wednesday, 21 January 2004 - 12:57 PM EST

Name: Tony

I'm back baby. I'll be catching up on all the blog posts I've missed and maybe blog myself once I get back from lunch. As far as the State of the Union, I thought it was a pretty good speech. His Iraq message was strong, the Libya passage was some of the most logical speech writing I've heard in a while (it didn't just weave together catch phrases, it the language of this section proved something: that the war on terror is working, and not just in Iraq). I'd prefer he not talk about steroids or money for high school drug testing, and I'm wondering if, whoeever the nominee is, will call him on lowering taxes while spending at the same time. Bush seems satisfied with slowing growth, rather than cutting spending, are you?

View Latest Entries