My comment was, and I stand by this, that the address was bad. I don't really want to be the President, but woulnd't mind a short-lived coup (6-9 months) in which I could put things and people into place, where smart, ethical people are in power, making decisions for the nation. Too many smart (and some not-so smart) people are in power, and some of those are unethical. There is corruption in the government and there is corruption in the UN.
Essentially, I would prefer a bloodless housecleaning, and only a few changes in the law. Placing smart, ethical people in power alone would propell this fine nation of ours into a successful millenium. I would only want to make changes and would not be intersted in fame. I'd step down and leave as peacefully as I would like to enter. Change. Change is what is needed, but my post today on the address was:
the address wasn't good. It had errors, logical and others. paragraph 3: will not have the next generations shoulder the costs ... without raising taxes ... through free enterprise ... flush out the earmarked monies (interesting that it was mentioned after the change of congress and senate). There are others, but I'll stop there. I will ammend my comment on Webb's address retort.
Webb's designation as the spokesperson for the democrats was interesting, perhaps wise, but I didn't like his address either. I rank it 50-50 or 40-60 regarding applicability, reasoability and credibility. Highlights were middle class economy, job loss and disparity between highest official (CEO) and lower workers. The simplistic analogy, however oversimplified is good. A typical worker would have to work a year to earn what a (growing to be typical) CEO earns in a day.
So far Bush's surge plan, coming years later than many close people suggested, has had little chance to show efficacy. Statistics lean toward "ineffective". Webb's statement mentions a "way" but give as much detail as a government-released classified paper (large blacked out areas).
I thought today on the amount we are spending daily in Iraq. How about we just put up bounties on enemies. $1 billion for Osama, with required body to verify DNA, etc. That is one day's cost of the war. I think that is the right price for people to turn in neighbors and enemies, high profile persons. It would save America lives, time, and ultimately money.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Addressing the address
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Oh YEAH, well if I were President, I'd take the wrong things and make them right. Then I'd give everyone chocolate.
So long as we're offering up child-like oversimplifications and birthday wishes.
It was completely apparent your political affiliation when you 1. voted for Kerry, 2. didn't watch the State of the Union, couldn't find the time, but 3. WERE front and center when the Democratic rebutle came on. Puh-lease.
So do you think we should pull out of the region right now? Just leave? If not, then why not? If we're staying, does that mean that Bush was right and Iraq is a critical piece of the war on terror? If not, what's it's value to us? Why didn't the Dems cut funding instead of just saying "we DISagree!" Like that's a fuckin' surprise. What a waste of paper to write it down.
I didn't see the speech because I favor reading, as I tend to miss things just watching and listening. The applause distracts as well.
I watched the rebutle, if you could call it that, because I finished my work (job hunting and other) and didn't expect anything after that. I hoped really to switch over to Cartoon Network at watch Futurama reruns. I listened to Webb for that reason only.
I read more speeches than I listen to them. Generally people have speeches written for them, and certainly this would be the case with a state of the union address.
I didn't think it was crafted well. Last year's was much better (read my blog on it). This one had no "correct" or "well done" hallmarks on it. Bush approved of the speech, but he didn't write it. The fact that I heard the banter of Webb, who I didn't know existed until last night, is not meaningful.
It was thankfully shorter than the President's speech, but with longer pauses that were conpletely pointless. Webb had no ovations or crowd, just a camera. It failed in many respects too.
I don't favor politics. I don't have affiliation with either party. If given the choice, I'd rather not have to select a line in the polls for the primaries. This also marks me R or D who then send me fluff and materials to ensure that I vote their way. Blech!
I used to listen to Reagan speeches, while I could before I accepted the fine sleep that came over me. The newspaper didn't put his speech in print, so where was I to read it?
The internet makes speeches available hours/minutes after a speech is given. I read Chavez finding it interesting and self-serving. One speech was well-crafted, I didn't hear how it was delivered. I don't trust Chavez and by reading it, that doesn't make me a supporter as you assume my listening to Webb does.
I voted, again in my blog, for Kerry. He wasn't the best person, but I know that it was Kerry or someone who had no chance. I know that I didn't want Bush. The nation having only two parties and each as dirty as the other is the problem.
You often point to the fact that I go in the middle ... don't favor sides and am elusive when asked direct questions. You then read my entry and call me democrat.
Clearly, you don't know me politically or don't take note of your own observations.
I stand by my statement that I if Hillary is running, I will vote for the Republican ... save that it isn't Satanor Jessie Jackson.
I think I'll review your rebutle in MDH format:
I read what you wrote and found several errors, logic flaws, circular logic, prejudicial judgement, polarized contradictions, miopic views, selective idealisms and secular-progressive assertions.
If I'd have written it, it would have been written correctly. If I ran your blog, I'd hire people who wrote interesting things and researched their points and never made spelling or grammatical errors. See, THEN it would be better. This is the great idea I thought of: Doing it better.
As you can see, this is all pointless babble that's really easy to spew if you don't say anything specific.
How about the LOCAL government? I'd do THAT better, too! Why? Because this BETTER stuff works! I'm going to apply BETTER to everything. I can't believe those FOOLS never thought of doing it BETTER!
Post a Comment