Bill Hobbs says that on the only part of the speech that really matters, the war, President Bush “absolutely nailed the big issues at stake.” In that part of the speech, Bush said, And whatever……

Hehehehe! Moderate speech! Moderate hawkish president! Left of center view! I guess it’s save to assume Esmay is a right wing extremist

Personally, I think the president looked very defensive this time. And the speech was carefully built to contain many undisputed passages, the bipartisan clapping and standing ovations giving the audience the fraudulent impression that the support for Bush’s ideas is much higher than it actually is. Yeah, maybe he has spoken with many of them in an attempt to raise support for his ideas, but everybody he spoke with will have noticed that the guy simply doesn’t listen. So, bipartisan backing for Bush that goes beyond that fool Lieberman is a pipedream and won’t happen. It’s much more likely the Dems will succeed in pulling more concerned republicans to their side.

However, actually, I paid much more attention to Dubya’s body language and the reaction of the audience than to the text. Hell, it doesn’t matter what Bush says, experience tells us that he won’t live up to those sunny promises. There’s a gap wider than the Grand Canyon between his rhetoric and accomplishments today. Just check the past SOTUs and you’ll be horrified at the flight from reality.

Just one point made my alarm bells ring:
“A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer Civilian Reserve Corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them. It would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.”

Wtf is he talking about? Civilians? He doesn’t mean the peace corps, no? The US has the national guard, the volunteer army, and contractors like Halliburton and Blackwater. Everybody who meets the qualifications can serve if he/she wants to. What exactly is the idea behind this new force and why is it needed? Other listeners got the creeps and had spontanoeus nightmares of ‘brown shirts’. Just overheated fantasy, I hope…

Obviously, this is a strategy of such geopolitical genius that mere mortals like myself cannot comprehend it.

(Yes, I realize that Amtrak is more or less broken, but it is fixable. I don’t want to debate the merits of that here because this is a state of the uniion thread.)

The disconnect between the President’s words and the actions of his administration (“we are absolutely winning”, “warrantless wiretaps are imperative”, “we do not torture”, etc) make anything he says about bi-partisanship or any other topic questionable. However, amongst the American people and among many members of Congress there IS more dialog and consensus-building going on now, and for many of these individuals there is good reason to believe that they are sincere.

I read the coverage of the SOTU, but I didn’t really pay it much attention; the President can act on foreign policy and issue vetos, but Congress has no reason to let him set policy, and it’s therefore the words of House members and Senators that are of more interest these days.

Comedy Tonight
from A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum

Something familiar,
Something peculiar,
Something for everyone:
A comedy tonight!

Something appealing,
Something appalling,
Something for everyone:
A comedy tonight!

Nothing with kings, nothing with crowns;
Bring on the lovers, liars and clowns!

But tonight, I’m damned proud I had the foresight to take my young daughter to see Jim Webb in one of his earliest camapign appearances. I hope it’s a memory for her that continues to grow in significance.