state_of_the_union mo anybody else here watch it? what did you think? 030128 ... screwing for virginity i watched the first half or so. all he said was that he wants to make things better. i know that sound brawd (sp?), but then again so was he. 030129 ... birdmad i got tired after the first 20 minutes of watching him get that shit-eating insipid smile across his face everytime he finished paragraph of his speech. was he happy that he had gotten such a rise out of that vast hall of lapdogs, or was he just satisfied that he got through it and the only part of the language he still audibly butchered was his constant misspeaking of the word "nuclear" 030129 ... sweetheart of the song tra bong The State of the Union Drinking Game The general rules of this game are no different from any other drinking game. A drink is either a shot or a good gulp from a beer (or cider). Different events call for different numbers of drinks and all you do is watch the speech and play along. If all goes well, you'll be unconscious by the time they show the other party's response. Every time he says.... Tax cut - 1 drink Stimulus - 1 Terror/Terrorism/ “Terrah” - 1 Iraq or Saddam Hussein - 1 regime or regime change - 1 Disarm/disarmament - 1 Weapons of mass destruction - 1 “Biological, chemical and nuclear (“nukular”) weapons” - 2 North Korea - 1 Axis of Evil - finish your drink “evil doers” - 2 United Nations - 1 (UN) Security Council - 1 Hans Blix (or Mr. Blix) - 2 Weapons Inspectors - 1 Al Qaeda - 1 Taliban - 2 “liberation of women of Afghanistan” (however it’s phrased) - 2 Affirmative action - 3 Racial preferences - 1 University of Michigan - 1 Martin Luther King, Jr. (however he mentions him) - 2 (bonus +1 if he uses MLK to defend his affirmative action position) Homeland or Homeland Security - 1 Tom Ridge - 1 Trent Lott - 3 Nukular - 1 "prescription drugs" - 1 medicare - 1 seniors or senior citizens - 1 welfare - 1 any reference to faith based initiatives - 2 **Any word of 5 syllables or more - 2 (bonus +1 if he stumbles through it) "Don't mess with Texas!" - Finish your drink, hit yourself over the head with the bottle, do a jig Every time.... he introduces a special guest - 1 he praises a Democrat by name - 2 he refers to a European leader positively - 1 he refers to a European leader negatively - 3 he defends his economic plan by describing the “average family” - 2 they show the First Lady - 1 they show the First Lady NOT SMILING - 2 they show an announced Democratic presidential candidate - 1 he gets a standing ovation from HALF of Congress - 2 they show a Supreme Court justice who looks asleep - 3 he uses a Bushism (i.e. says something that's not really a word, other than “nucular”) - 2 he tells a joke causing the audience to laugh nervously - 2 they show someone you don't recognize and the caption tells you who he/she is - 1 If the speech is under an hour Finish your drink and have another beer DEMOCRATIC RESPONSE BONUS GAME "unilateral" - 1 some reference to a tax cut for the wealthy - 1 some reference to the patient's bill of rights - 1 From http://www.marcmelzer.net/sotudg/ 030129 ... Mahayana ok Bush .. listen up- cuz you did one of my biggest pet peeves. AIDS is [[[not]]] a virus- got that!? lil lesson for ya ... What is HIV? The Human Immunodeficiency Virus is a virus that attacks and deteriorates the body's immune system. The immune system is the body's natural defense against infections such as the common cold. HIV is the virus that causes AIDS. What is AIDS? AIDS stands for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. By name, we can understand a lot about the disease. It is Acquired, meaning that it must be transmitted from an outside source. It affects the Immune system, and causes a Deficiency . This means that it causes the body's natural defense to be worn down. And it is a Syndrome, which simply means that it is a general name for a number of common symptoms. [[[AIDS is not a virus in itself.]]] It is simply a name for the later stages of HIV. so if ya really want to do something about the AIDS epidemic and for the people in African and elsewhere, educate yourself first ... incorrect usage of terminology is a huge signifier that you not only have not done your own research but that you aren't using common sense as well... [i wonder if bush even knows what HIV and AIDS even stands for ... prolly not] 030129 ... mo umm yeah i bet he does. 030129 ... Mahayana if he called it the "AIDS virus", obviously he does not know what it stands for. and to me that is just down right scarry- but that is just my opinion 030129 ... magdalena Did anyone else notice that the joint chiefs of staff were the only ones that did *not* give a standing ovation when The Shrub was talking about the Iraq issue. *snicker* the whole attack anyways... www.adbusters.com go there... it has alot of interesting things... 030129 ... magdalena I was thinking that last night would have been a perfect time to kill the entire US govt. ( Or most of them...who wasn't there besides ashcroft?) *snicker* My boyfriend said it was bad karma to wish that the shrub got shot between the eyes... :( 030129 ... Arwyn ever notice how bush doesn't speak when cheney's taking a drink? 030129 ... Strideo interesting how a lot of the posts here seem to be more interested in making personal attacks rather than comment on the actuall substance of the speech. I think he proposed too much spending and not enough budget cuts . 030129 ... girl_jane Spend more money yet lower taxes. Yes...it makes perfect sense. I think somebody failed first grade math... 030129 ... minnesota_chris Bush is going to fuck the country ... no, scratch that, he's going to fuck YOU AND ME over, because most people don't understand tax policy or foreign relations. 030129 ... Strideo explain . 030129 ... yenaldlosi What do you propose he should cut, Strideo? Education? A nation where public schools are gutted and private school flourish creating an education gap even bigger than the one between the upper and lower economic classes? Defense? I'm no hawk, but certainly no pacifist, i see no safety or wisdom in cuts there. Welfare? there may be some who abuse the system, but the ranks of people who are working and still below the povery line and needing assistance has been growing for some time now. Environmental Issues? This administration has already done its best to take the teeth out of most of the major environmetal rules and laws of the last decade in favor of its corporate sponsors. If lax enforcement of environmental laws isn't enough of a savings, then what? taking the interconnectedness of so many things into account, where would you cut the budget. Are you one of those great "compassionate conservatives" like Rush Limbaugh who once referred to the homeless as "human debris" in a moment that is sure to earn him all sorts of brownie points with him and his god. George W Bush followed his father's steps by campaiging on a platform of demonizing taxation and decrying federal spending, in typical Republican fashion. That was disingenuous, as Republicans still like spending large amounts of money, so long as it is only spent on their pet projects as opposed to the actual operation of the civil service branches of government I heard one newly elected congressman talk about how now, with a republican majority we have "fiscal responsibility" in government now. Let me tell you what, i wasn't sure whether i should laugh, shit, or cry over that one. I don't see how reducing your revenue stream while still proposing to increase spending is a fiscally responsible thing to do, and make no mistake, even if he cuts everyone else's budgets to the bone, he made it clear enough that there will be a war and those are some costly adventures to undertake, plus whatever expense is incurred in rebuilding that country afterwards. It's pretty much a given that with the overall lack of international compliance and acquiescence to our demands, much less support of our goals that it's one more bill you, me, and every other taxpayer is going to be eating soon enough. The last refuge of a conservative is to scream "tax-and-spend" at an opponent and taint him with that as an accusation, what none will admit is that the alternative they have in mind is to Borrow and spend. This, children, is where deficits come from. Of course it's just quicker and easier to be direct and call the man a loose cannon running amok in the seat of power. That's just the Cliff Notes version of it. 030129 ... e.d. how 'bout taking a slice out of the ondcp? 030129 ... minnesota_chris strideo, you asked me to explain. I'll see if I can... Bush is repealing the dividend tax. This is going to save him, and many other children who inherited huge sums, lots of dollars. I think it's unfair for him not to pay tax on such income. Bush's fiscal stimulus program also has tax cuts for the wealthy. (6.6% for top tax bracket, and 5% for bottom tax bracket, so both cuts would actually accrue to the top bracket... sorry, it's so fucking complicated...) I believe the only fair tax would be if people paid taxes only after their first say 20,000 of income. That's what you need to really live. Maybe 10,000 per child per year or so. Mom, Dad, two kids, tax exemption would be $60,000 per year. After that, tax it however you like... that 60K is money the family needs to survive. People who earn more can afford to pay taxes, not the poor. Our government has decided that certain programs would benefit the people as a whole, and our government is responsible for raising the funds to do so. Talk about a slow economy is all irrelevant. The money is needed, so it should be raised. And our schools and public transportation are a couple steps lower than those of Mexico and Russia. I've seen that firsthand. We're the wealthiest country, we should have good public entities. Geopolitically? Bush doesn't have a plan for the Middle East (pick your country: Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq) to promote democracy or justice. He treats Iraq and Kuwait like a big gas pump. We have dropped lots of cluster bombs on Afghanistan, turned one of the poorest countries in the world into a disaster area. Are we going to reconstruct it? I haven't heard about it, if we are. And the chaos and poverty were one of the reasons that bin Laden was based there, and perhaps still is there. If they were as advanced as Switzerland they would throw him out. I'm not prescribing a certain policy, but I think we could be more moral in our domestic and international policies, instead of desperately grasping for resources. It's giving the US a bad name. 030129 ... Strideo yenaldlosi - is this assuming that every government agencey runs at maximum efficiency, that there is no room for privatization, every program is nessecary? no one likes to sacrifice but you can't just spend more and tax more forever . 030129 ... je5icafletcher i don't like g w bushyman. his "let's get em' cowboy dumbass attitude is nauseating.he needs to be assassinated for many articulation and grammatical errors. he mispronounced his favorite word - nuclear. the man has done wayyy too much coke and it'd be really great if it gave him a heart attack like dick cheney, and colon powell became president. 030130 ... margadant11 Just a question how do we fight three different wars? I mean we are in Afghanistan and we are probably going to war with Iraq. What happens if North Korea opts for war as well? Do we fight all of them at the same time? I think we would lose if we tried to fight them all. 030130 ... silentbob Like yeah, mahayana Don't take it out on Bush, because everyone i KNOW calls it the AIDS Virus, including MTV. I mean, there's so many other things to rant about when it comes to bush, and like... yeah. A lot of people think of it as a virus. bush isn't the only one. 030130 ... minnesota_chris isn't it just semantics? Whether you call it the AIDS virus or the virus that causes AIDS... what's the point? 030130 ... Strideo je5icafletcher: "i don't like g w bushyman. his "let's get em' cowboy dumbass attitude is nauseating.he needs to be assassinated for many articulation and grammatical errors. he mispronounced his favorite word - nuclear. the man has done wayyy too much coke and it'd be really great if it gave him a heart attack like dick cheney, and colon powell became president." okaaay. look, name calling and wishing ill upon these people only makes you look childish and it reflects poorly on your own character. please understand, I'm not saying this to be mean to anyone. I just think you could sway more people to your view point by being civil and presenting an arguement based upon actual poliical policies. yell at me if you want, it was just a bit of constructive criticism. by the way, did you know that Colon_Powell is fourth in line for the president? . 030130 ... Strideo I think its colin_powell not colon . 030130 ... Mahayana Take what out on Bush- tell me what was "taken out" on Bush, other than me stating a fact that he chose to air in public that he does not apparently know what HIV & AIDS stands for ...which is emphatically a fundamental platform towards substantiating you have the comprehension & aptitude to put towards the prevention of such an epidemic. and I'm sorry to say but just because you and "everyone" you know identifies it the "AIDS virus" does not mean it is acceptable, accurate, proper nor something to be rationalized away when it [is] and revolves around a most important issue indeed. It is not immediately about language, terminology, and expressions it is about lives, about people, not simply numbers and statistics... and since when did MTV become such an elevated authority figure whom in which would be constructing chief pronouncements and resolutions that would unmistakably affect the lives, budgets, & deaths of MILLIONS of people ... since when did MTV, you, and your friends erroneous classification practice of the epidemic AIDS have anything to do with the billions upon billion we will be dispensing into countries endeavoring to combat this killer known as "AIDS"- MTV, you, and your associates or Joe Schamoe down the street calling it the "AIDS virus" really wasn't my concern- yes that still despairs and astounds me- but that in actuality wasn't my concern and thusly the post was addressed to Bush, but when a leader of our nation stands before us, conversating about all the billions of dollars he plans on committing towards the cause of the "AIDS virus" pardon me if i become a lil disconcerted ... if Bush isn't prepared enough to undertake the time to research the accurate name of a disease and how that disease functions, than how can we rest any amount of dependence upon him to adequately and effectively put the money he's allocating towards combating this epidemic when he doesn't even seem to be acquainted with the essentials ... learning that AIDS is not a virus and knowledge of what the H_I_V and the A_I_D_S stands for is scarcely a an elementary step towards educating yourself on how to [appropriately & effectively] not only dispute against AIDS but to also preclude it. not only is Bush a leader for this country but he's developing into a guide for other countries as well esp. when he allocates monies to their exertions against HIV-AIDS... many have and will need to depend upon Bush to fight this epidemic... so to me it is not just about using the "in term" that MTV drones out there, or the term that "everybody silentbob knows uses", or the term that your sex-ed teacher might have used as well- so its ok cuz everybody's doing it terminology ... it is about being situated as a leader to many as well as using the correct term which also happens to demonstrate that you have a fervent foundation and/or awareness to the mechanism and behaviors of such an epidemic. yes Bush may not be the only one whom inappropriately calls it the "AIDS virus" but [they] are also not the ones whom will & have excised much needed social services & programs, they will also not be the one who will be pouring money into other countries- i have no qualms about giving aid & assistance to needing nations what i am concerned about is if we are just heaving money around hoping to solve problems or are we seriously taking the time and efforts to overcome inherent barriers [which also concerns me for it is not just the financial issues that are plaguing those countries with HIV-AIDS] there are certain inherent barriers that must be respected and looked upon in order to not just fight AIDS and deal with it [after it has transpired] but to also prevent it ... issues such as not using condoms or any protective barriers due to religious beliefs...etc etc if money is just thrown at issues such as these it will not solve the problem ... we will only be handing out band-aids... and what does this have to do with calling it the "AIDS virus" .. .ill tell you .. if i can not count on the leader of our country a nation in which a plethora of accurate and modernized information regarding the AIDS epidemic is readily available- a leader in which has scores of medical & health care advisors and researches at his disposable, to demonstrate his seriousness about this cause thereby using correct terminology- if i can not count on him to do that one simple act of commitment to a cause that so many many peoples lives have been touched upon ... how can i rely upon him to address the deeper issues..how can i count on him to utilized those monies he has allocated towards the "AIDS virus" in the most qualitative and responsible way... im sorry but i do not feel secure in our leaders abilities to make major decisions about the lives of many. maybe you could, but i just cant, not when ive been involved in these issues for soo soo soo many years and have known so many people whom have given so much of their time and efforts to this cause, people whom have educated themselves on these issues not only because they had to, but because they wanted to, because they wanted to make others lives just that lives. the point is : it isn't "just" about semantics... and you just proved my point exactly for me... its about PEOPLE it goes deeper than "just" being peeved about semantics or not even getting the point at all. semantics do play a role in it- indeed- but hardly to be looked upon as if its role is merely about spelling or symbols... the exact meaning and the interpretation of a word- such as "AIDS virus" can radically affect the outcome, if you are treating something as if it is a virus when indeed it is not you are going to have big trouble, if you are allocating funding and monies to be applied towards the ratification of the "AIDS virus" you are going to have complications ... a silly simple example would be this ... your slow rising fan forced furnace went out- its winter time and bitterly cold out... now the mechanic you called upon to fix the problem, has been repeatedly using incorrect terminology and is explaining how he/she will be treating the problem as if your furnace was a water/steam fueled radiator... would this not concern you... would you after receiving the estimate for parts and labor call upon this individual to come and fix your heating source? Id think not. its the same thing will trusting in a leader to be responsible enough to make important decisions, when he can not even research, use, and understand terminology for an epidemic that has been around for over 10 years... im sorry but to me there is just no excuse to it ... ever known more than a handful of people close to you with HIV-AIDS, ever hear about how costly it is to fight this, ever hear about how the plethora of services that used to be available are now shut down-and cut back severely due to our current president that chooses to use the term "AIDS virus", ever listen to them talking about how they don't have access to certain services they need... have you ever known anyone close to you die or whom is dieing from this epidemic... if you have or do just imagine looking them in the eyes and repeatedly use the term "AIDS virus" and see how they react ... see how they react to something that has been around for over 10 years, to something that has radically changed their lives, to something that desperately needs the education & commitment of our president to allocate monies responsibly ... ask those loved ones if they are not in the least bit offended and dismayed by the president not even understanding the basics of what AIDS is and what it stands for when he uses that term in conjunction with the term virus... i have and ive seen the hurt and pain and fear in many eyes wondering if this president could do the right thing & do more for the cause than the last but also wondering if he will make things worse. its not just about terminology it is about understanding ... how deep things really go. i chose to discuss [rant] on this certain topic bc i have dedicated much time, love, effort, and energy to this cause... sure i have many many more issues i could have blathed about regarding bush & the state of the union address but this was what pushed my buttons, one chooses what one chooses to blathe about but it most certainly is not the end all be all of a person nor the issues i can see nothing more significantly imperative nor dignified then to blathe [rant] about the lives of people, beautiful people that may or may not be adversely affected by a presidents demonstrated or lack-there-of commitment towards the "AIDS" epidemic. the only way that ill ever consider AIDS as the "AIDS virus" and justify its usage [is] as a morbidly corrupting quality in the intellectual or moral conditions inwhich those whom do not seem to realize the seriousness of miscongrutioulsy labeling a serious epidemic; the term "AIDS virus" most indeedly is something that poisons the mind or the soul and clouds all judgement; as, the virus of obscene usage & outcomes. 030131 ... silentbob bush will never have to deal with AIDS. he will probably never meet anyone who has it for fear he'll "catch it" so maybe you think he is doing our nation a disservice by not being educated about something you care about but its my opinion that him dumping more money into a big huge fucking war that will kill more people "over there" and in our country than he will for AIDS is more to get upset over than him mentioning something he doesn't know anything about. and this is the opinion of someone who has dedicated no time towards AIDS. so thats MY opinion. 030131 ... minnesota_chris Sassafrass, I hope you understand I have only the highest respect for you (through your reputation) and your work. My point (and it is a small one, not even worth fighting over) is that people should hate Bush because he abuses the disadvantaged. Not because he mispronounces nuclear, or uses the incorrect term to refer to AIDS, or trips his tongue. I think Bush understands HIV pretty much the way we do, that its a lethal virus that people usually acquire sexually or by drug use. And nuclear weapons are big flying rockets that kill millions of people instantly. It's his plans about these scary things that make me lose confidence. Let's fight the conservatives with truth and ethics, the conservatives think we have neither, but in fact we have much more of them than they do. 030131 ... silentbob i agree with chris so much 030202 ... too scared to put real name I am upset with a couple things on this page. One is the intoduction of partisan politics ("Let's fight the conservatives with truth and ethics..."), but i guess that cant be helped in any political discusion, no matter how much it interfears with thinking. And the second (less important) one is the fact that alot of people, starting about half way up the page from here, ended or began their blath with something along the lines of "please dont be mad at me for saying this." It apals me to think that blather has become such a hostile place that people feel a need to defend themselvs from other blatherers. I'm not sure exactly what this means or fortells, but i do know that i dont like it 030203 ... minnesota_chris I didn't see that (the fear thing). People are awfully afraid of controversy, especially when the topic is politics. I don't think you should worry, I think your blather is very nice, in that it is asking people to listen and be tolerant. I was correcting people who were picking on Bush because he says words incorrectly. We should pick on him because of his views. And if you hold those views yourself, I'm going to poop in a bag, put it on your porch and set it on FIRE! hahaha 030205 ... niska lets just say the with state the US is in right now, i'm glad i'm north of 49, and i'll probably wait until the chaos is over. and FUCK Bush for wanting to start his ridiculous war on St. Patrick's Day - that's the best day of the year, after christmas, and MY birthday. !@#&#%!!! I have every right to be selfish, and completely ignorant to anything but two facts here: Bush is on a personal quest for vengence, and the US needs a war - why not a war on Iraq? makes sense to him. People, we can argue the complexities o this issue until we are blue in the face. the simple fact remains behind every trailed off thought in this entire debate that needs adressing: war is ridiculous. this proves nothing, it's a waste of everyone's time. terrorists wouldn't have chosen that target if america was nicer to other countries. flat truth. and i don't give a fuck what anyone has to say - this is how this situation has evolved. out of complete ignorance to the basic golden rule of society, right from the start. You do unto others as you would have them do unto you. it's not hard to be a good fucking human being - if everyone was though, we'd live in a fasntasy world. War. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. 030308 ... Em union_of_the_state 030309 ... j niska, i don't mean to counter your thoughts, but i thought you should know that america has done some good things for other countries. ninety percent of the televised media is run by liberals, which is fine, but, for some reason or another, nobody knows about these good things. a friend of mine lived in indonesia for two years, and she said that america was providing an abundant amount of food and supplies to their country, but the indonesian government was monopolizing the situation and forcing the indonesians to pay for these [although they couldn't; they didn't have any money]. well, i'm rambling, like usual. and i'm with you on the terms that i don't agree with this war. but i just wanted you to know another aspect 030309 ... niska oh, i agree. america does much to help all over the globe. some would question the intent, but that aside, it's by america's standards. there are a lot of things i think people should do, but they sometimes have to decide it's worth doing, otherwise being forced to do it causes more strife for the people than had they been left alone. many people in the third world have come to expect america to solve all their problems with force, because of past interjections in other nations - whether apprecited or not. america is known for telling countries what to do, and how to do it. canadians resent this because our freedom is a bit more extensive. that alone makes canadians especially sensitive to being forced to stop trade, stop domestic fights, or reschedule (get this) a speech form the prime minister, because Bush's MOTHER decided to come here to speak the same day. to hear her and have dinner: $500. just to hear her: $250. to hear the prime minister - free - it will be televised. so close to "war time" we'd prefer to hear our own leader tell us it will be ok. but we won't because we have been TOLD it must be postponed. yes, there has been a lot of good done by america - but the way it is carried out is perhaps not suitable. canadians aren't expected to support our governments views - being told what to do by another is simply an appalling threat to our own freedom. but, in the end, we're all trying to make a better world. it would be nice if the US government could just once try it with a handshake, rather than a cap in the ass. 030312 ... celestias shadow is anyone watching this one? God almighty, it's disgusting. Three years ago, I would never have believed that I could hate anyone this much. How things change. And why, WHY is our country being run by the Texas village idiot? Personally, he makes me feel more unsafe than the goddamn terrorists do. 040120 ... Zoe this is just a random question, but what does everyone think about the way he advocated for a constitutional amendment for the "protection of marraige"? (at least that's what i thought he was doing). i think it's aweful, some of my best friends are gay, and i expect to be a bride's maid at their weddings. i mean, i consider myself religious and i understand the clear references to homosexuality in the bible, but this country is not supposed to be based on the bible. it's supposed to be free. how can we live in a free country if one cannot get married (or really serve in the military) because of their sexual orientation? 040121 ... x state_of_the_onion 040121 ... trixie Ted Kennedy shaking his head, "no, no, no, no..." 040122 ... barbara lee fucking speaks for me maybe if all the so-called democrats hadn't just signed on to the patriot_act and all the other sabre-rattling bullshit after 911, their head shaking now might actually have been doing some good. (whoa, is that like future perfect tense or something? ero eris erit erimus eritis erint? blather latin grammar check, where are you?) 040122 ... celestias shadow the man is honestly afraid to say the word 'gay.' He'll talk all he wants about 'preserving the sanctity of marraige,' but he just can't say anything about gay marraige. Really, gay people are not scary. About half of my friends are gay or bi. And I resent people that don't even want to admit that they exist. What an asshole. 040122 ... jane drinking game!!! http://www.drinkinggame.us/ yay! 080128 ... birdmad nookyular man strikes again. he had a lot to say, he had a lot of nothing to say (but i ain't gonna miss him) 1-21-09...the End of an Error 080128 ... tourist Bush Is A Tool Cheney Is The Devil Incarnate Haliburton Is A Legion of Demons Pay No Attention To The Men Behind The Curtain Praise The Lord And Pass The Snakes 080421 ... silentbob This is happening tonight. 140128 ... oren Washington is a cesspool. 140128 ... oren D.C., that is. 140128 what's it to you? who go blather from