Pure bs speculates with democratic party strategist on 'longish term' U.S economic outlook -- over breakfast. (pure bs picked up the tab)

I had breakfast this morning in Concord, NH as I live less than a mile away. Two democratic party strategists sat down in nearby seats. One of these two gentlemen who wishes to remain anonymous, started pontificating about the general state of the economy, lending lavish attention on the direction of the U.S. stock markets.

His basic arguments were that:

a) major publicly traded companies are relying on cost-cutting measures to bolster their 'earnings growth.' In essence saying that the current quarters numbers as well as those a few quarters out are likely to be inflated not by true earnings growth, but by cost cutting.

b) he further stated that companies have slashed as much as they can from their budgets, and that Wall Street is likely to overlook the inevitable for the time being. He gave 'the street' until 2008 before his version of economic reality set in, and sends the markets into an a slow unrelenting retreat.

c) he stated that Bush's tax cuts whilst increasing spending over his first term will come home to roost, and the U.S. economy will falter due to the massive debt and burdens of deficit spending.

Those are very basically his positions.

My position regarding "c" is identical. The U.S. needs to balance the books and fast. If not, the most likely scenario is that foreign investments will not only slow, but contract. And the dollar will wilt as foreign investor's look for better places to store currency.

Now that may not sound like a big deal, but it is when the federal government is running deficits as far as can be forecast, nad we're not even keeping pace with our interest payments on our ballooning debt.

We need to adopt a realistic spending policy. Not one that is a huge giveaway to defense and oil. Think of it as you would your own budget. Because essentially it is. Can you continue to borrow money without any real plans to pay it back? Of course not. Neither can the U.S. government.

This administration is led by a man that has never had to be financially responsible. But wasn't he the Governor of the state of Texas, you ask? Yes, he was, but it is the Lieutenant Governor that handles the Texas budget. So, no, GWB has never had to worry about money, and although he somehow got an MBA, he's not concerned about it now.

Regarding item "a". It is true that companies have cut out most of the fat of their budgets. And yes, this has lead to earnings growth numbers that are difficult to judge on a year over year basis. But Wall Street looks at other metrics to determine if a company is truly growing or not. Revenue growth the obvious metric here. There are many other things on a company's balance sheet that are equally important, but in the interest of brevity, I'll leave it there.

Now, as far as to how lean these companies can get, that has yet to be determined. Manufacturing and pretty much the entirety of the technology sector is in a period of flux. Companies can still save as much as a third or more of their operational costs by continuing, and/or accelerating the move to the East. China and India are both sucking jobs out of the U.S. at an ever increasing rate. It is not just the U.S. that is losing jobs to there economic engies, it is the entire West, as well as Japan.

So, as far as cost cutting can be realized, we honestly cannot judge what the future will bring. We know the general course, and it doesn't look good for young Americans, but we as of yet do not know the depth.

Item "c". This is an extension of item "b," and the factor that was neglected was that millions of baby boomers will start retiring in 2008. These people are going to move money. If not entirely out of equity markets, then into more sedate 'income' oriented investment equities. You can also count on the housing boom in many parts of the country to come to a bust of epic proportions as boomers move into smaller quarters. I fully expect the housing market to have deflated before then, but if not, it is certain to at that time.

That's the short version of our discussion. I saved you from all the jargon, and other hypotheticals. But these are things that every investor, or career seeker must take into account. That's all for now :)

Krugman

Democracy at Risk

By PAUL KRUGMAN

The disputed election of 2000 left a lasting scar on the nation's psyche. A recent Zogby poll found that even in red states, which voted for George W. Bush, 32 percent of the public believes that the election was stolen. In blue states, the fraction is 44 percent.

Now imagine this: in November the candidate trailing in the polls wins an upset victory — but all of the districts where he does much better than expected use touch-screen voting machines. Meanwhile, leaked internal e-mail from the companies that make these machines suggests widespread error, and possibly fraud. What would this do to the nation?

Unfortunately, this story is completely plausible. (In fact, you can tell a similar story about some of the results in the 2002 midterm elections, especially in Georgia.) Fortune magazine rightly declared paperless voting the worst technology of 2003, but it's not just a bad technology — it's a threat to the republic.

First of all, the technology has simply failed in several recent elections. In a special election in Broward County, Fla., 134 voters were disenfranchised because the electronic voting machines showed no votes, and there was no way to determine those voters' intent. (The election was decided by only 12 votes.) In Fairfax County, Va., electronic machines crashed repeatedly and balked at registering votes. In the 2002 primary, machines in several Florida districts reported no votes for governor.

And how many failures weren't caught? Internal e-mail from Diebold, the most prominent maker of electronic voting machines (though not those in the Florida and Virginia debacles), reveals that programmers were frantic over the system's unreliability. One reads, "I have been waiting for someone to give me an explanation as to why Precinct 216 gave Al Gore a minus 16022 when it was uploaded." Another reads, "For a demonstration I suggest you fake it."

Computer experts say that software at Diebold and other manufacturers is full of security flaws, which would easily allow an insider to rig an election. But the people at voting machine companies wouldn't do that, would they? Let's ask Jeffrey Dean, a programmer who was senior vice president of a voting machine company, Global Election Systems, before Diebold acquired it in 2002. Bev Harris, author of "Black Box Voting" (www.blackboxvoting.com), told The A.P. that Mr. Dean, before taking that job, spent time in a Washington correctional facility for stealing money and tampering with computer files.

Questionable programmers aside, even a cursory look at the behavior of the major voting machine companies reveals systematic flouting of the rules intended to ensure voting security. Software was modified without government oversight; machine components were replaced without being rechecked. And here's the crucial point: even if there are strong reasons to suspect that electronic machines miscounted votes, nothing can be done about it. There is no paper trail; there is nothing to recount.

So what should be done? Representative Rush Holt has introduced a bill calling for each machine to produce a paper record that the voter verifies. The paper record would then be secured for any future audit. The bill requires that such verified voting be ready in time for the 2004 election — and that districts that can't meet the deadline use paper ballots instead. And it also requires surprise audits in each state.

I can't see any possible objection to this bill. Ignore the inevitable charges of "conspiracy theory." (Although some conspiracies are real: as yesterday's Boston Globe reports, "Republican staff members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee infiltrated opposition computer files for a year, monitoring secret strategy memos and periodically passing on copies to the media.") To support verified voting, you don't personally have to believe that voting machine manufacturers have tampered or will tamper with elections. How can anyone object to measures that will place the vote above suspicion?

What about the expense? Let's put it this way: we're spending at least $150 billion to promote democracy in Iraq. That's about $1,500 for each vote cast in the 2000 election. How can we balk at spending a small fraction of that sum to secure the credibility of democracy at home?

Lest you think this a tin-hatter theory, see Bev Harris' work, or better yet read Black Box Voting available for a free download.

"It's not the people who vote that count. It's the people who count the votes." Quote often attributed to Josef Stalin, but I can't confirm via any literature I have.

Yeah. I'm in the political attention of the nation right now. I'm taking a hiatus from political posts until our primary is concluded on Tuesday next.

In really cool factual stuff, New Scientist amongst others reports the first confirmation of water on Mars It is likely that simple life will be found there as well, in the form of microfossils. It'll sure mess with Christian fundamentalist's heads. Always a good thing in my book, lest they go on a killing spree or commit other dastardly crimes when their worldview is shown to be demonstrably wrong. Literal reading og the Christian bible has always been at odds with the healthy pursuit of science. Galileo certainly found out the herd way. Christians can be pretty uppity when confronted with date that should cause a bit of cognitive dissonance.

Without further ado:

First data from Mars Express confirms ice water

16:39 23 January 04

NewScientist.com news service

Direct measurement of water on the surface of Mars - in the form of ice on the southern polar cap - tops the list of the first scientific data returned by the European Space AgencyÂ’s (ESA) Mars Express mission.

Principal investigators of the spacecraft's six instruments, turned on since 5 January, presented their results at a press conference in Darmstadt, Germany on Friday.

The instrument that made the measurement, OMEGA, searches for the telltale signature of molecules such as water by studying the spectra of sunlight reflected from Mars.

Previous studies have only indirectly indicated the presence of water near the surface of Mars, including one in December 2001 that inferred water from hydrogen in the soil, said Jean-Pierre Bibring, principle investigator of OMEGA.

"I think you just saw a Eureka moment," added David Southwood, ESA's director of science, after Bibring presented a brightly coloured image of the water ice. Much more at link

I've said it before many times, and I'm going to state it again. These are the types of missions that we should continue to make. Manned space flight is just too costly given the current and likely future economic landscape in the U.S.

The U.S. really needs to come to terms over the impending environmental cataclysm that is already upon us. This is where we need true leadership. Everything else takes a back seat. Everything.

Does Charlie Resse reads bs? We're either both sane, or insane. I leave that to you, the reader to decide. Here's a snip:

Are You Going To Get Mad?

It is now about as clear as it's going to get that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction. Secretary of State Colin Powell even contradicted himself (in his U.N. speech) by admitting recently that there is no evidence of any link between Saddam and al-Qaida.

Prior to the Iraq War, the Bush administration asserted as fact that Saddam had huge quantities of chemical and biological weapons and was actively pursuing nuclear weapons. Administration members ridiculed people who expressed any doubts. Today, after spending millions of dollars looking for the weapons, they haven't found anything. And every Iraqi official captured, none of whom has any reason at all to lie, has said the same thing: There are no weapons of mass destruction.

In fact, the Iraqis had been saying that for years, and the Bush administration replied, "You're lying." Now we have this situation. The facts on the ground prove that the Iraqis, whom President Bush called liars, were telling the truth. What does that make Bush? It makes Bush either very badly mistaken or a liar.

It seems to me that if Bush were merely mistaken, he would admit it. He would say to the American people: "Look, I thought Iraq had those weapons based on intelligence, but apparently the intelligence was wrong. I apologize for misleading you." But the president will not do that. He gets huffy and defensive when asked about weapons of mass destruction. Before the war, he never opened his mouth without talking about weapons of mass destruction. It might be that there is simply an arrogant gene in the Bush family. It might be that he was just lying.

It is true that the intelligence reports contained a lot of reservations, expressions of doubt and uncertainty, but when this came out of the political process, it was told to the American people as unquestionable fact without reservations. "Intelligence gathered by this government and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and to conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised," Bush said on March 17. All the Bush people were asserting this to be a fact. More at link.

Well? Are you going to get mad?

Then there is:

Threat Of Terrorism

You know, I'm sure, that the Bush administration has greatly exaggerated the threat of terrorism. Those who employ the tactic of terrorism do so because they are weak. They have no army. They have no great popular following.

Osama bin Laden was a crank living in the mountains of Afghanistan with only a small following in the Islamic world — until George W. Bush elevated him to world celebrity status.

It's true that bin Laden knocked down the World Trade Center towers and struck the Pentagon — or at least we're pretty sure he was behind those attacks. He was able to do that because his 19 people were lucky and because our immigration screening, our intelligence, the FBI and the airport security system were all sloppy.

To the extent that these attacks roused the federal government from its previous apathy and sloppiness, he did us a favor, though at the terrible cost of about 3,000 lives. But that attack was not justification for a "war on terrorism." A war on bin Laden, yes; a war on terrorism in general, no.

In the first place, there aren't that many terrorists in the world. You can check with the State Department's annual report on terrorism if you doubt me. In the second place, most of the world's terrorists are local guys with local beefs against local folks. All the time the Irish terrorists were bombing and shooting the British, Great Britain never felt the necessity of declaring a worldwide war on terrorism. It went after the Irish terrorists.

When bombs were going off in Paris some years ago, the French didn't say everyone must fight terrorism. They went after the guys who were planting the bombs.

It pleases George Bush to call Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorist organizations, but they are not, as far as the United States is concerned. Their target is Israel. The Israelis are right to call them terrorists, but we, as a sovereign country, should never go about adopting other people's enemies as our own. Neither Hamas nor Islamic Jihad has ever attacked the United States or expressed any desire to do so. And the same is true of most so-called terrorists in most parts of the world.

Our problem is with bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization. We should have concentrated on that instead of declaring a global jihad against terrorists everywhere in the world. More at link.

I'm sure that well reasoned commentary like this must give those that are still supportive of Bush mental shutdown. If they were capable of cognitive dissonance, it would have happened by now....unless you're an exclusive watcher of Faux News.

pure bs' SOTU Address Analysis Final

Plese note: It will take me a few days to complete this analysis. I have to work you know :)

Without further ado:

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Speaker, Vice President Cheney, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens: America this evening is a nation called to great responsibilities. And we are rising to meet them.

As we gather tonight, hundreds of thousands of American servicemen and women are deployed across the world in the war on terror. By bringing hope to the oppressed, and delivering justice to the violent, they are making America more secure.

They are indeed fighting. To what end? In Iraq there was never a threat. In Afghanistan, the Taliban are regouping. Outside of Kabul, warlords reign and these people are far from free. Hamid Karzai, President of Afghanistan, has recently survived two assassination attempts. He is likely the most well protected citizen of Afghanistan. What about everyone else? Is America more secure?

What are the metrics by which we define success in the WoT? I must disagree, and say that with some 200,000 troups in harms way, that Americans are no safer. Iraq? Free? Safe? If the issue was not so serious, I'd ask if you were joking.

Each day, law enforcement personnel and intelligence officers are tracking terrorist threats; analysts are examining airline passenger lists; the men and women of our new Homeland Security Department are patrolling our coasts and borders. And their vigilance is protecting America.

Americans are proving once again to be the hardest working people in the world. The American economy is growing stronger. The tax relief you passed is working.

I certainly hope that these folks are doing their jobs. We do not know if America is any safer due to their efforts. Again, no metrics. The lack of an attack on American soil is no measure of success. If increased chatter and noise raise alarm amongst the populace, there is no need for terrorists to expend capital. A heightened state of alert is almost as good as an attack.

Tax relief working? No. This is the weakest recovery in the last 100 years. People that received the bulk of the relief didn't use it to buy stuff. They used it to further line their wallets. Supply side economics only benefits the well to do. I should know. I am one of them.

Tonight, members of Congress can take pride in the great works of compassion and reform that skeptics had thought impossible. You're raising the standards for our public schools, and you are giving our senior citizens prescription drug coverage under Medicare.
We have faced serious challenges together, and now we face a choice: We can go forward with confidence and resolve, or we can turn back to the dangerous illusion that terrorists are not plotting and outlaw regimes are no threat to us. We can press on with economic growth, and reforms in education and Medicare, or we can turn back to old policies and old divisions.

I need some color to this 'works of compassion' statement. I see nothing but compassion for corporate donors, as the States have to scramble to make up for budget shortfalls caused by 'tax relief.' Can you not see the irony here?

What about money for the schools? "Is No Child Left Behind " fully funded? No. It is not. "Leave No Millionaire Behind" is a far more accurate statement than the two paragraphs above.

Medicare. I know what the prize is: privatization. Reform is simply a GOP code-word for privatization and/or dismantling. This man, GWB cannot be trusted with the purse strings of this nation. Record spending across the board, and veto power? You'd think it doesn't exist. GWB has never met a spending bill he didn't like. All the while racking up the largest deficits and debt that this country has ever known.

We've not come all this way -- through tragedy, and trial and war -- only to falter and leave our work unfinished. Americans are rising to the tasks of history, and they expect the same from us. In their efforts, their enterprise, and their character, the American people are showing that the state of our union is confident and strong.

Our greatest responsibility is the active defense of the American people. Twenty-eight months have passed since September 11th, 2001 -- over two years without an attack on American soil. And it is tempting to believe that the danger is behind us. That hope is understandable, comforting -- and false. The killing has continued in Bali, Jakarta, Casablanca, Riyadh, Mombasa, Jerusalem, Istanbul, and Baghdad. The terrorists continue to plot against America and the civilized world. And by our will and courage, this danger will be defeated.

We have come through one act of self-defense in Aghanistan, and one of outright agression in Iraq. I agree that America's security is important. But it is not the most important issue in either the short or long term.

This is how Bush is going to frame his election bid. "Over two years without an attack on American soil." Maybe not a terrorist based attack, but the Bush Administration has sought to gut the protections of the EPA. It is this danger - the danger to our environment that remains the greatest long term threat. It is also a great opportunity to make a lasting statemnt by funding of cleaner technologies. Let's ditch the whole Moon-Mars bs, and get to work on cleaning up our own world. This has the greatest risk to reward ratio of any project that the governmet can assist with.

The most important issue to people right now, as evidenced by recent polling, is the economy and more specifically, job creation. I can see shifting some of the half-trillion dollars from the Department of Defense to get to work on cleaner alternatives to fuels we're using now. Maybe half. That would be a start. This would fuel job growth, and show the world that the U.S. is sincerely dedicated to the slowing of the poisoning of our planet.

Inside the United States, where the war began, we must continue to give our homeland security and law enforcement personnel every tool they need to defend us. And one of those essential tools is the Patriot Act, which allows federal law enforcement to better share information, to track terrorists, to disrupt their cells, and to seize their assets. For years, we have used similar provisions to catch embezzlers and drug traffickers. If these methods are good for hunting criminals, they are even more important for hunting terrorists.

Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year. The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule. Our law enforcement needs this vital legislation to protect our citizens. You need to renew the Patriot Act.

America is on the offensive against the terrorists who started this war. Last March, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a mastermind of September the 11th, awoke to find himself in the custody of U.S. and Pakistani authorities. Last August the 11th brought the capture of the terrorist Hambali, who was a key player in the attack in Indonesia that killed over 200 people. We're tracking al Qaeda around the world, and nearly two-thirds of their known leaders have now been captured or killed. Thousands of very skilled and determined military personnel are on the manhunt, going after the remaining killers who hide in cities and caves, and one by one, we will bring these terrorists to justice.

I agree. The DHS needs every tool to protect us, and not one more. This could mark the beginnining of a redux of COINTELPRO. Any American who knows what that is, would surely be against it.

The Patriot Act should not be renewed unless there is concrete evidence made available to Congress that it has done anything of value. We know how poorly versed a room full of lawyers are at parsing evidence, as they were mostly all duped into buying the Administration's claims about Iraq's WMD programs - this is especially appalling when Powell and Rice are on tape stating earlier in 2001 that Iraq was no threat. Either to its neighbors, the region, and certainly not to the U.S. Sanctions worked, and everyone inside the loop knew it. We were quite simply lied into war.

All of these alleged successes that are in the above text of the speech, were made outside of the U.S. where the U.S. Patriot Act is invalid. If you read this carefully, it is absurd without REAL evidence. The Patriot Act is the worst piece of legislation to come out of Washington in my lifetime. There was a reason that it had a 'sunset clause.'

Until it can be shown that the horribly mis-named Patriot Act has been a success in catching terrorists, its sun has set.

As part of the offensive against terror, we are also confronting the regimes that harbor and support terrorists, and could supply them with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. The United States and our allies are determined: We refuse to live in the shadow of this ultimate danger.

The first to see our determination were the Taliban, who made Afghanistan the primary training base of al Qaeda killers. As of this month, that country has a new constitution, guaranteeing free elections and full participation by women. Businesses are opening, health care centers are being established, and the boys and girls of Afghanistan are back in school. With the help from the new Afghan army, our coalition is leading aggressive raids against the surviving members of the Taliban and al Qaeda. The men and women of Afghanistan are building a nation that is free and proud and fighting terror -- and America is honored to be their friend.

Since we last met in this chamber, combat forces of the United States, Great Britain, Australia, Poland and other countries enforced the demands of the United Nations, ended the rule of Saddam Hussein, and the people of Iraq are free.

"We are also confronting regimes that harbor and support terrorists" This would not include Iraq, as Iraq did not harbor terrorists - even the much discussed 'Ansar al-Islam' was in the northern 'no-fly zone,' and hence had little to no contact with the Ba'athist's. At least none that has been reported.

Iraq has neither nuclear, nor biological agents. It is still unclear if any chemical weapons will appear. It appears to be a mirage. A myth perpetuated to help win popular support for a war that would have otherwise been dismissed as insane. In truth that is exactly what the GW2 was - an insane action.

The Taliban. Well, they seem to be doing quite well along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. We did achieve a small portion of our goals in Afghanistan, but we have left the country thus far, a violent, dismal place. The people of Afghanistan are not free. They live a frightful existence.

America is honored to be the friend of a country that has seen its opium crop all but wiped out, bloom into a major export again?

Some 90% of the heroin found in Great Britain got its start on the hills of Afghanistan.

The Iraqis are free. We have freed perhaps 20 thousand of them from the ills of living. Anything that this administration says must be held to the highest levels of skepticism. Iraq is free, yet they are unable to hold direct elections. This is ridiculous. The notion of Iraqi freedom is a fruit unripened on the vine.

We have so damaged relations with our traditional allies that we will be forced to go, hat in hand, begging for their assistance in the messes we have brought to Afghanistan and Iraq. They are hesitant to follow, because they are aware as to how dangerous the situations in those two countries truly are. American belligerence has made a shamble of once strong ties with long time allies.

Having broken the Baathist regime, we face a remnant of violent Saddam supporters. Men who ran away from our troops in battle are now dispersed and attack from the shadows. These killers, joined by foreign terrorists, are a serious, continuing danger. Yet we're making progress against them. The once all-powerful ruler of Iraq was found in a hole, and now sits in a prison cell. Of the top 55 officials of the former regime, we have captured or killed 45. Our forces are on the offensive, leading over 1,600 patrols a day and conducting an average of 180 raids a week. We are dealing with these thugs in Iraq, just as surely as we dealt with Saddam Hussein's evil regime.

The work of building a new Iraq is hard, and it is right. And America has always been willing to do what it takes for what is right. Last January, Iraq's only law was the whim of one brutal man. Today our coalition is working with the Iraqi Governing Council to draft a basic law, with a bill of rights. We're working with Iraqis and the United Nations to prepare for a transition to full Iraqi sovereignty by the end of June.

If these people are 'violent Saddam supporters,' it would be nice if you told our generals in the field. It is likely that some of these people are Saddam supporters. What is most likely is that these are regular Iraqis fighting a war of resistance. If the U. S. had its government overthrown, and was occupied by an outside force, it seems likely that we would fight the occupiers in any way we could. I know that I would. I need to see some hard data. Until then, the Iraqi resistance will remain a common resistance force. After all, in a country of roughly 25 million, if a mere 10% of the populace takes up arms in defiance of an occupation, that is 2,500,000 fighters. This number seems realistic.

Ah, the 'spider-hole' capture. Who got the 25 million bucks for that? It seems likely that someone didn't want Saddam found, and it wasn't Saddam. This played well for a few days, until the attacks started up again. Now we've over 500 U.S. troops dead over George's Little War. Saddam was exactly where we thought he was, yet it took eight months to find him. Seems like we weren't trying too hard. I'm sure that he gas a lot to say about the once cozy relationship between himself and various U.S. Administrations. Including that of '41.'

Offensive, defensive, it doesn't much matter. This was, and continues to be an illegal action. Just ask Richard Perle. The UN? I thought that the UN was a "debating society." I guess we need them after all.

Whatever is said about Iraq, we must never forget that it was a war waged in violation of international law, and that the U.S. under George W. Bush is directly responsible for all the death, and suffering. It appears that we've also adopted the entire Iraqi populace.

Nice work.

As democracy takes hold in Iraq, the enemies of freedom will do all in their power to spread violence and fear. They are trying to shake the will of our country and our friends, but the United States of America will never be intimidated by thugs and assassins. The killers will fail, and the Iraqi people will live in freedom.

Month by month, Iraqis are assuming more responsibility for their own security and their own future. And tonight we are honored to welcome one of Iraq's most respected leaders: the current President of the Iraqi Governing Council, Adnan Pachachi.

Sir, America stands with you and the Iraqi people as you build a free and peaceful nation.

Democracy is taking hold in Iraq? You must mean the Shia clerics that are demanding a direct count of the vote, which we, thus far are unwilling to give them. Huh. When you talk about thugs and assassins, you could be talking about Frostbite Falls, Minnesota, or virtually anywhere. The U.S. has a special problem with murderers, wouldn't you agree? We do have a lot of them.

Iraq's 'thugs and assassins' were either held in check by Saddam, or employed by Saddam. Now with no Saddam, they are indeed free.

Let's not get all gushy over Pachachi. It'll be after Iraq's elections that we'll need to engage the elected leaders of Iraq. Nice photo-op, though.

Because of American leadership and resolve, the world is changing for the better. Last month, the leader of Libya voluntarily pledged to disclose and dismantle all of his regime's weapons of mass destruction programs, including a uranium enrichment project for nuclear weapons. Colonel Qadhafi correctly judged that his country would be better off and far more secure without weapons of mass murder.

This is a bit like preaching to the choir, George. Nearly all of the rest of the world sees the U.S. as a threat. Your little excursion into Iraq has really thrown a spanner into global diplomacy. Hopefully, you'll get real religion and tear up the 'Bush Doctrine.' For someone that claims to ba a Christian, you're certainly not averse to violence.

Libya. It's not likely that Libya has any WMD. It makes for a nice press release, but I think that we all know that Moammar doesn't have much in the way of 'programs,' much like another country with a murderous thug as a dictator. No, not the U.S. -- Iraq, silly. Nothing there, either. Until I know what concessions were made to get Libya to cooperate with the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty, I'll cede you this point. A good job of diplomacy with the potential for an asterisk.

Nine months of intense negotiations involving the United States and Great Britain succeeded with Libya, while 12 years of diplomacy with Iraq did not. And one reason is clear: For diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible, and no one can now doubt the word of America.

Different threats require different strategies. Along with nations in the region, we're insisting that North Korea eliminate its nuclear program. America and the international community are demanding that Iran meet its commitments and not develop nuclear weapons. America is committed to keeping the world's most dangerous weapons out of the hands of the most dangerous regimes.

Well, the Iraqis were, for all intents, telling the truth when they declared that they had no WMD. If the equally vicious Moammar Kadaffi is left in power, the U.S. sends a troubling double standard.

As for doubting the 'word of America,' I am sure that the greater world doesn't doubt the word of average Americans, but they have no reason to believe the Bush Administration. In fact, the world should not, under any circumstances trust the U.S. under this adminstration. Lies upon lies are what we, and the world are given. Everyone now doubts the 'word of America' with very good reason.

Different threats. Yes, if a nation is likely harboring nuclear weapons, we are wise to engage them diplomatically. If they are not, we are still wise to engage them in a like manner. No knowledgeable and sane person can now doubt that this Administration was bent on invading Iraq from the beginning. All that was needed was an event. A catalyst to sway public opinion which would have wisely scoffed at the prospect of a redux of the Gulf War. 9/11, and strategic lies provided that catalyst. Now with over 500 dead, and over a hundred billion dollars spent for nothing, the insanity of the military action is clear.

The message seems to be: get a nuke, and the U.S won't send it's military to intercede. Let is hope that the Bush Doctrine - which in reality is the neo-cons recipe for international supremacy does not result in a wide expansion of nuclear equipped nations.

When I came to this rostrum on September the 20th, 2001, I brought the police shield of a fallen officer, my reminder of lives that ended, and a task that does not end. I gave to you and to all Americans my complete commitment to securing our country and defeating our enemies. And this pledge, given by one, has been kept by many.

You in the Congress have provided the resources for our defense, and cast the difficult votes of war and peace. Our closest allies have been unwavering. America's intelligence personnel and diplomats have been skilled and tireless. And the men and women of the American military -- they have taken the hardest duty. We've seen their skill and their courage in armored charges and midnight raids, and lonely hours on faithful watch. We have seen the joy when they return, and felt the sorrow when one is lost. I've had the honor of meeting our servicemen and women at many posts, from the deck of a carrier in the Pacific to a mess hall in Baghdad.

Many of our troops are listening tonight. And I want you and your families to know: America is proud of you. And my administration, and this Congress, will give you the resources you need to fight and win the war on terror.

I know that some people question if America is really in a war at all. They view terrorism more as a crime, a problem to be solved mainly with law enforcement and indictments. After the World Trade Center was first attacked in 1993, some of the guilty were indicted and tried and convicted, and sent to prison. But the matter was not settled. The terrorists were still training and plotting in other nations, and drawing up more ambitious plans. After the chaos and carnage of September the 11th, it is not enough to serve our enemies with legal papers. The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got.

Why is it that on 20 September, 2001 you brought that officers badge, and yet you have not attended one funeral for the fallen in Iraq? They died as a direct result of your lies and deceptions to Congress, and to the American people. To me, the schism is both glaring, and unconscionable.

Are you so racked with guilt that you are unable to attend even one service, one memorial, or is it that you simply do not care enough? Politics over compassion?

Congress did the honorable thing in Afghanistan, but in Iraq, they were misguided by your Administration. By all accounts, sanctions and no-fly zones had done their jobs only too well. With over a million Iraqi children needlessly dying since Gulf War 1, sanctions were too effective.

If you really honored the troops, you would attend memorials, and as you said, "I'm the one who will have to look the mothers in the eye." QED, Mr. Bush. This is rubbish. I am ashamed to have you as head of state. People are still dying on both sides, and to what end? You have brought pain and suffering to this nation under false pretenses. That can never be excused.

I'm sure that the troops listened, and it is my hope that they know at least part of the truth as to why they are dying in Iraq.

The War on Terror was quickly moved to the removal of Saddam Hussein. This did not help the cause. It was, and is harmful. Nearly all of the good spirit that we were one world, evaporated almost overnight. By your belligerence, we have damaged relationships that in some cases took decades to build. It is not inaccurate to state that our excursion into Iraq has done more for al-Qaeda recruitment than bin Laden could have possibly hoped. It is likely that al-Qaeda sympathizers are now more in number, and that more Muslim's will become radicalized as a result of a war fought without justification. Rightly or wrongly, Gulf War 2 will serve as a demonstration to many in the Arab world that America is indeed, "The Great Satan."

Terrorism is a law and order issue. Many of the steps your own Administration has taken are those that a police force would use. This is no more a war than the War on Drugs. We are dealing with non-state actors, that we would better expend our resources drying up their financial ties, and cooperating with the international community in intelligence sharing to undermine terrorists' activities.

We only have two valid ways of prosecuting these agents. Either as enemy combatants, or as common criminals. It is good intelligence that is going to thwart future attacks. It is for this very reason that existing criminal law serves as the best model to prosecute terrorist agents.

The Afghans, to a huge extent were not involved in terrorism. We went to war against a largely docile populace. Our objectives were clear. Get the Taliban out of power, and capture or kill Osama bin Laden. It is still unclear how successful we have been at routing the Taliban, and Osama bin Laden remains at large.

In Iraq, we were, and continue to be, lied to at every opportunity. It wasn't even a war of choice. It was a violation of International Law. Officials high in the Administration knew it, yet played along to get along. When history judges this moment, it is likely to be seen with the same sort of derision that other State sponsored agressions have been viewed.

This is a scar that won't easily heal. Iraq was not harboring anyone, nor anything, with any capabilities to harm their neighbors, their region and most certainly not us.

We need the POLICING powers of the international community to effectively combat terrorism. It is the very community that we have damaged in our Iraqi excursion.

Some in this chamber, and in our country, did not support the liberation of Iraq. Objections to war often come from principled motives. But let us be candid about the consequences of leaving Saddam Hussein in power. We're seeking all the facts. Already, the Kay Report identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations.

Had we failed to act, the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day. Had we failed to act, Security Council resolutions on Iraq would have been revealed as empty threats, weakening the United Nations and encouraging defiance by dictators around the world. Iraq's torture chambers would still be filled with victims, terrified and innocent. The killing fields of Iraq -- where hundreds of thousands of men and women and children vanished into the sands -- would still be known only to the killers. For all who love freedom and peace, the world without Saddam Hussein's regime is a better and safer place.

Why yes, they did have principles that are alike those of the American populace. You can say what you want, but when one of your own, Richard Perle declares the Iraq adventure a breach of, "International Law", it is impossible for this commentator to believe anything that you say. There is always an ulterior motive. David Kay was hand picked to provide you with weapons, any weapons. He is a non-scientist that was supposed to spread FUD(fear, uncertainty and doubt) amongst the populace and give you cover from behind which to hide. He was honest, and failed to produce any concrete evidence of ongoing WMD programs. Hence, he quit. Both the Bush Administration and David Kay were hoping that reality would somehow conform to their fantasies. Oddly enough, it has not. Nor shall it.

It is unfathomable that an American president can lie so often and so obviously. The U.N. resloutions never allowed for overthrow of soveriegn Iraq. This is an easily dismissed myth. A lie.

Is Iarq a better place today than it was under Saddam? I'd say no. I fully expect it to be at some point in the future, but as of this writing it is no better, and on some accounts - the IGC's allowance of Sharia law, not providing the iraqis with jobs, and basic services - are demonstrably worse. I only hope that we as a nation are patient enough to finish the job of rebuilding Iraq. What the president fails to achknowledge, is that life for the average Iraqi today, is worse than it was under Saddam.

We didn't go to war over any killing fields, we went to war under knowingly false pretenses of a country teeming with active weapons programs and the means to deploy them against American troops on the battlefield, and or spread them globally. Once no WMD was used in battle, the Administration found itself scrambling to justify the invasion and occupation with a whole series of ever-shifting casii belli.

You can lie to the majority, but there is always a segment of any population that demands, 'show me.' The administration went to war on its own terms, and in a spiraling mountain of lies, continues to mislead us today.

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. As we debate at home, we must never ignore the vital contributions of our international partners, or dismiss their sacrifices.

Any sane, non-partisan, individual must now be a critic of our Excellent Iraq Adventure™. This critism is hard to explain? Shall I do it for you? Say it with me: "I George W. Bush, 43rd President of the United States of America took your sons and daughters into war under knowingly false pretenses. They fought and died because of a series of demonstrable lies, perpetrated and perpetuated by my Administration. Oh, and thanks for the few bucks you kicked our way."

See, that wasn't so bad. We really do appreciate your sacrifices as Americans. It is not our fault our leadership failed both us, and you at this most troublesome time. We are most regrettably sorry.

From the beginning, America has sought international support for our operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and we have gained much support. 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.

Correction. We had broad international support for ousting the Taliban in Afghanistan, and because of this Administration's belligerence, have tossed all of that spirit of cooperation into the hopper of history.

We also hear doubts that democracy is a realistic goal for the greater Middle East, where freedom is rare. Yet it is mistaken, and condescending, to assume that whole cultures and great religions are incompatible with liberty and self-government. I believe that God has planted in every human heart the desire to live in freedom. And even when that desire is crushed by tyranny for decades, it will rise again.

As long as the Middle East remains a place of tyranny and despair and anger, it will continue to produce men and movements that threaten the safety of America and our friends. So America is pursuing a forward strategy of freedom in the greater Middle East. We will challenge the enemies of reform, confront the allies of terror, and expect a higher standard from our friend.

Sure you hear doubts. Any thoughtful person has doubts. I fully agree with the statement about democracy of some form being viable for the Middle East. But you know, democracy can be messy. It is unlikely to be based on the American model - which at present might not be such a bad thing - but real change is possible.

About the whole 'God' thing. Let's stick to what we know by observation, and experiment. Oh yeah, you're an MBA. And by the way, you could use an anatomy lesson. Emotions and desires are located within the structure of the brain. Which in most people's cases is located atop their shoulders :)(sorry to veer off course, but I had to)

The thing that fuels terrorism is a political agenda. It does not arise simply out of, 'tyranny, despair and anger.' Although those are major components of much violent behavior. Terrorists, be they of the Timothy McVeigh variety, or Islamic Fundamentalists, or entire States have a poltical agenda. It is childish to say things like, "they hate us for our freedoms," and other nonsense. Be they individuals or entire States, it is politics which motivates them.

To cut through the barriers of hateful propaganda, the Voice of America and other broadcast services are expanding their programming in Arabic and Persian -- and soon, a new television service will begin providing reliable news and information across the region. I will send you a proposal to double the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy, and to focus its new work on the development of free elections, and free markets, free press, and free labor unions in the Middle East. And above all, we will finish the historic work of democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq, so those nations can light the way for others, and help transform a troubled part of the world.

From what quarters are 'hateful propaganda' coming from? I guess one man's accurate reporting is a President's 'hateful propaganda.' This Administration has lied so frequently, and with such impunity, I'm not surprised that they're going to issue official 'State-sponsored propapganda.'(lies)

It is our actions that do our talking. If we have the resolve to stay the course in Iraq, and to make a real effort in Afghanistan, this will speak to the Arab world more than nonsensical U.S. propaganda. Remember, most of these countries know propaganda. We should not attempt to distort the facts. There are true journalists in the region that will expose us if we go this route.

Regarding Iraq and Afghanistan, we are either going to stay in these countries where we are not wanted and finish the job, or true anarchy will reign. Let's put a light on our own foreign policy so that we can be a beacon for the rest of the world. We have squandered the good-will post 9/11, and it is unknown if the current Administration will be trusted enough to win some of our long term allies back. This is extremely troubling when the future of two Middle-Eastern countries lies in the balance.

America is a nation with a mission, and that mission comes from our most basic beliefs. We have no desire to dominate, no ambitions of empire. Our aim is a democratic peace -- a peace founded upon the dignity and rights of every man and woman. America acts in this cause with friends and allies at our side, yet we understand our special calling: This great republic will lead the cause of freedom.

In the last three years, adversity has also revealed the fundamental strengths of the American economy. We have come through recession, and terrorist attack, and corporate scandals, and the uncertainties of war. And because you acted to stimulate our economy with tax relief, this economy is strong, and growing stronger.
You have doubled the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000, reduced the marriage penalty, begun to phase out the death tax, reduced taxes on capital gains and stock dividends, cut taxes on small businesses, and you have lowered taxes for every American who pays income taxes.

The mission that America is truly on is not known to this commentator. It would seem that our most pressing missions are three. The protection of our citizenry, the protection of our environment, and building a strong economy.

When you speak of not having ambitions of empire, our actions speak otherwise. This Administration lied to the American people, to Congress and to the world, in getting what little support they did for the Iraq war. It would be foolish to believe that anyone living outside our borders would not question this Administration's goals. When the casus belli was shown to be fabricated, there are not many other alternatives to empire.

Save the whole peace rubbish. This Administration's policies and actions have directly resulted in tens of thousands of deaths. You have brought war to nations already ravaged by sanctions and decades of fighting. Our president is a serial liar. It is as simple as that. Our 'great republic' is in jeopardy of being a parody of itself. We must act now to show the world that we are a responsible power, not a hegemon. I was fully for rooting out al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Since then, everything this Administration has done has been at odds with 'American values.'

Okay, tax relief. It was, and remains a millionaire's tax relief package. The 'average American' is not the 'mean.' Most people saw their state tax burdens wipe out and exceed any relief that they have seen from this Administration.

This Administration needs to really parse the tax relief issue with more honesty. If it does not do so, the Democratic challenger most certainly will, and the thinking American will see that this is another example of bait and switch politics. I asked someone today to name me two examples of 'compassionate conservatism.' The platform which Mr. Bush ran under. He said that in all honesty he could not name one.

He is a true middle-class American, and is still waiting for real tax relief. He understands that the needs of the nation are greater than his own. He is for abolishing the tax cuts, so that his children, and their children will not have to shoulder the burden we have left them with.

Americans took those dollars and put them to work, driving this economy forward. The pace of economic growth in the third quarter of 2003 was the fastest in nearly 20 years; new home construction, the highest in almost 20 years; home ownership rates, the highest ever. Manufacturing activity is increasing. Inflation is low. Interest rates are low. Exports are growing. Productivity is high, and jobs are on the rise.

These numbers confirm that the American people are using their money far better than government would have -- and you were right to return it.

America's growing economy is also a changing economy. As technology transforms the way almost every job is done, America becomes more productive, and workers need new skills. Much of our job growth will be found in high-skilled fields like health care and biotechnology. So we must respond by helping more Americans gain the skills to find good jobs in our new economy.

Americans took those dollars and either spent them on one time items, or invested them. Rich folks didn't go and spend that money. I know. I am in top few percent of wage earners. Given all the stimulus, you must ask why the recovery has been so slow to take hold. It's the weakest recovery this far into the cycle in the last 125 years.

Housing is the internet bubble built out of wood. As Americans retire and move into smaller quarters, this bubble is going to deflate. If it doesn't before 2008, you can count on it happening before then. You can count on it.

Let's look at the average American. The average American has never in history held such a large amount of debt. Both in real numbers, and as a percentage of the overall economy. Is this using those tax refunds wisely? No. It is simply not. If you were really serious about giving Americans something of value, you'd come up with a robust savings plan that would cause consumers to think about their savings, rather than spend everything they make plus. You see growth. I see record debt across the board.

In fact, these are both accurate statements. It is just that your supply side economics don't work for very long. Your new Treasury Secretary is on record as saying, "you can do that math as well as I can." Nine months of 150,000 jobs per month translates to 1.35 million jobs, while nine months at 300,000 per month would make 2.7 million jobs. So, here we have a 100% potentiality of job growth difference forecast for 2004.

If December's 1,000 added jobs is any indicator, job creation is likely to fall short of even the most cautious forecasts. This is, in fact, what I expect. I expect this to be the shortest, weakest economic recovery in the last 80 or so years. I've elucidated the reasons why in other entries. A simple site search will give you the data.

I agree wholeheartedly about job retraining. There are millions of jobs that are not going to be done in America any longer. Just how much, and how many industry groups are affected is an unknown at present, but the trend is toward more industry groups, at an accelerating pace. This, coupled with the 'Boomers'' retirement, and the Administration's ill-timed tax cuts have the potential to devastate this economy.

There is a reason that the dollar is falling. It's not because foreign investors see the U.S. as a great place to invest.(sarcasm) Quite the contrary. If this becomes a panic, interest rates will skyrocket, and both the federal government and the individual could easily go bankrupt. The "this isn't Argentina" line isn't as strong as it once was.

All skills begin with the basics of reading and math, which are supposed to be learned in the early grades of our schools. Yet for too long, for too many children, those skills were never mastered. By passing the No Child Left Behind Act, you have made the expectation of literacy the law of our country. We're providing more funding for our schools -- a 36-percent increase since 2001. We're requiring higher standards. We are regularly testing every child on the fundamentals. We are reporting results to parents, and making sure they have better options when schools are not performing. We are making progress toward excellence for every child in America.

The Administration's Leave No Millionaire Behind™ tax relief package could have been used to fully fund No Child Left Behind, but it was not. Speaking of requiring higher standards, I think that all of us should require a higher standard of honesty from our leadership. You can only hide so much bs behind the cloak of, 'national security.' I mean, if you really think about it, who are we afraid of? Besides John Ashcroft's alleged fear of calico cats, and his aversion to the nude female body, but I digress. :)

We have a wee bit more money for our underfunded shools, when the Pentagon gets every dollar for every hair brained scheme. Let's look at the reality of the need for a missile defense shield. At this juncture, there is not one valid threat or any in the foreseeable future that would warrant us having an anti-ICBM shield. Most likely scenario. A missile fired from a submarine a few kilometers off shore. Unstoppable. That's a real threat. Let's get our priorities in line with reality. It's easy if you try.

But the status quo always has defenders. Some want to undermine the No Child Left Behind Act by weakening standards and accountability. Yet the results we require are really a matter of common sense: We expect third graders to read and do math at the third grade level -- and that's not asking too much. Testing is the only way to identify and help students who are falling behind. This nation will not go back to the days of simply shuffling children along from grade to grade without them learning the basics. I refuse to give up on any child -- and the No Child Left Behind Act is opening the door of opportunity to all of America's children.

Of course the status quo has its defenders. In this country they are known as 'conservatives.' There is no such thing as common sense. It is most uncommon. Everyone thinks that they possess common sense, when they are the easiest people to fool.

Getting back on track, I agree with the basic tenets of NCLB, but let us fully fund the program if we are going to hold people accountable for their results.

At the same time, we must ensure that older students and adults can gain the skills they need to find work now. Many of the fastest growing occupations require strong math and science preparation, and training beyond the high school level. So tonight, I propose a series of measures called Jobs for the 21st Century. This program will provide extra help to middle and high school students who fall behind in reading and math, expand advanced placement programs in low-income schools, invite math and science professionals from the private sector to teach part-time in our high schools. I propose larger Pell grants for students who prepare for college with demanding courses in high school. I propose increasing our support for America's fine community colleges, so they can -- I do so, so they can train workers for industries that are creating the most new jobs. By all these actions, we'll help more and more Americans to join in the growing prosperity of our country. Job training is important, and so is job creation.

Sorry to poop in the Administration's Cheerios, but we've had three full years to work on these issues. Issues that have been apparent to the people effected for years, maybe decades. The rest of the world is rushing by us in terms of educational levels. It is this, that is the biggest threat to us economically. Other threats are of course, more serious than any economic issues. I agree with everything that is said above, and if we didn't have hundreds of billions of dollars wasted to fight a war, wholly without merit, we just might have already made progress in these areas. Let us now have the uncommon sense to see these initiatives through to their fruition.

We must continue to pursue an aggressive, pro-growth economic agenda. Congress has some unfinished business on the issue of taxes. The tax reductions you passed are set to expire. Unless you act -- unless you act -- unless you act, the unfair tax on marriage will go back up. Unless you act, millions of families will be charged $300 more in federal taxes for every child. Unless you act, small businesses will pay higher taxes. Unless you act, the death tax will eventually come back to life. Unless you act, Americans face a tax increase. What Congress has given, the Congress should not take away. For the sake of job growth, the tax cuts you passed should be permanent.

Our agenda for jobs and growth must help small business owners and employees with relief from needless federal regulation, and protect them from junk and frivolous lawsuits.

Consumers and businesses need reliable supplies of energy to make our economy run -- so I urge you to pass legislation to modernize our electricity system, promote conservation, and make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy.

We, as a nation need to face some economic realities. This Administration's agenda hasn't been one of an 'aggressive, pro-growth' nature. Military spending is a closed loop. A few get wealthy from bleeding the masses.

I agree that each taxpayer should get the same standard deduction. However, making the Bush tax cuts permanent will only hasten the onset of some harsh economic realities. We can cut the Pentagon's budget to a fraction of its current size -- this is where I'd cut. It is increasingly clear that our 'type' of military is wholly unsuited to deal with cells of 5 terrorists. Other unpopular choices are cuts to Medicare, school funding, and Social Security. Being from American royalty, Mr. Bush is apparently unaware that budgets are a compromise. Having an MBA is apparently of no use as a tool to gauge the balance between revenue and spending. I thought that this was one of the prime reasons for getting a business degree. That, and the fact that the math is easier than it is for post-grad degrees in engineering.(joking)

Those lawsuits are only frivolous unless you happen to be a plaintiff. The whole scale of this 'problem' has been played far beyond its real effect on the efficiency of the courts. Courts which by the way, are in REAL need of more judges and facilities. I know.

Electricity. Makes you wonder. Why aren't we dealing with automobile emissions? If you've read down to this point, I suspect that you know the answer. If not, I'll tell you. Bush has been bought and paid for by the petro-chemical industry, which is inexorably linked to the automobile industry. So, let's work on modernizing our electrical system(a place where I am a qualified expert) that is only a mess due to the miracle of privatization, and leave the heaviest polluters alone.

I really wish I could speak to Bush's plan for upgrading the nation's electricity grid further, but without any material to work with, I'd be speculating.

My administration is promoting free and fair trade to open up new markets for America's entrepreneurs and manufacturers and farmers -- to create jobs for American workers.

Two words: steel tariffs Honestly, they've been repealed and the U.S. is now ranked as the sixth freest place in the world to conduct trade. If you're a globalist, this is terrific, if not, it should make you a bit uneasy. Open trade has been great for buying stuff, but horrible for job seekers. You immediately see the problem. If you had a good job, you could participate in globalisation. Goods are not the only thing that freely flow across borders. Jobs do as well.

Younger workers should have the opportunity to build a nest egg by saving part of their Social Security taxes in a personal retirement account.

We should make the Social Security system a source of ownership for the American people. And we should limit the burden of government on this economy by acting as good stewards of taxpayers' dollars.

I agree with the spirit of this. However, Americans flatly SUCK at saving money. It has to be either done on a mandatory measure - which it could be argued that SS already is - but mandatory anything, is likely to freak out those conservatives, who'll wrongly see it as creeping socialism.

I love the next sentence. Let's repeat it, it is that fun! "And we should limit the burden of government on this economy by acting as good stewards of taxpayers' dollars."

This is laughable in the face of the wholly unnecessary war in Iraq, subsidizing numerous industries that cannot survive in the miracle of globalisation, and of course, tax cuts in the face of huge deficits. It makes the mind somewhat numb. I have to move on, lest I have an aneurysm.

In two weeks, I will send you a budget that funds the war, protects the homeland, and meets important domestic needs, while limiting the growth in discretionary spending to less than 4 percent. This will require that Congress focus on priorities, cut wasteful spending, and be wise with the people's money. By doing so, we can cut the deficit in half over the next five years.

Shorter version: Everyone will get everything they want, because I've never had to balance a budget.

Of course, he'll not going to tell you if his budget halves the predicted growth in the deficit, or halves it from today's levels.

Wasteful spending: Veteran's benefits.

Compassionate and conservative.

Tonight, I also ask you to reform our immigration laws so they reflect our values and benefit our economy. I propose a new temporary worker program to match willing foreign workers with willing employers when no Americans can be found to fill the job. This reform will be good for our economy because employers will find needed workers in an honest and orderly system. A temporary worker program will help protect our homeland, allowing Border Patrol and law enforcement to focus on true threats to our national security.

Real version: This hereby launches W's election bid. He hopes the Hispanics vote in force. For him.

W still can't grasp the 'true threats' thing. It is not the terrorist's, but this may make it easier for them to enter the country. It will not make it harder.

I oppose amnesty, because it would encourage further illegal immigration, and unfairly reward those who break our laws. My temporary worker program will preserve the citizenship path for those who respect the law, while bringing millions of hardworking men and women out from the shadows of American life.

I oppose amnesty for most people as well. Not because it would further encourage immigration, but because we cannot afford to care for our own citizenry adequately, much less a flood of new citizens. This three year work visa deal will only be successful if it displaces no American jobs - no matter how 'new' these Americans may be.

Our nation's health care system, like our economy, is also in a time of change. Amazing medical technologies are improving and saving lives. This dramatic progress has brought its own challenge, in the rising costs of medical care and health insurance. Members of Congress, we must work together to help control those costs and extend the benefits of modern medicine throughout our country.

I know what the ultimate goal here is: privatization. Hell, it worked so well for California's energy industry, let's use it to overhaul Medicare. This will not happen. The boomers are to close to retirement. Privatization will not hold the costs down. State subsidized universal health care could accomplish this, but the HMO and Pharma lobbies are powerful. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. If Bush gets elected, he'll be a lame duck from day one. This is going nowhere.

Meeting these goals requires bipartisan effort, and two months ago, you showed the way. By strengthening Medicare and adding a prescription drug benefit, you kept a basic commitment to our seniors: You are giving them the modern medicine they deserve.

Starting this year, under the law you passed, seniors can choose to receive a drug discount card, saving them 10 to 25 percent off the retail price of most prescription drugs -- and millions of low-income seniors can get an additional $600 to buy medicine. Beginning next year, seniors will have new coverage for preventive screenings against diabetes and heart disease, and seniors just entering Medicare can receive wellness exams.

The commitment was VERY basic, and is likely to be appended in the very near future. These seniors got a pretty raw deal. They know it, and if it wasn't for our horribly mis-informed population about W's performance post-9/11, he'd be facing impeachment, not an election effort.

In January of 2006, seniors can get prescription drug coverage under Medicare. For a monthly premium of about $35, most seniors who do not have that coverage today can expect to see their drug bills cut roughly in half. Under this reform, senior citizens will be able to keep their Medicare just as it is, or they can choose a Medicare plan that fits them best -- just as you, as members of Congress, can choose an insurance plan that meets your needs. And starting this year, millions of Americans will be able to save money tax-free for their medical expenses in a health savings account.
I signed this measure proudly, and any attempt to limit the choices of our seniors, or to take away their prescription drug coverage under Medicare, will meet my veto.

I wonder if anyone's crunched the numbers on how many seniors are likely to die, or suffer a degraded quality of life between now and 2006? It would be interesting to know.

I hate to belabor the point, but Americans SUCK at saving. They won't do it. They'll drive a new car, rather than look far down the road, and see the big picture. Of course Mr. Bush cannot fathom what the average American does, or behaves. He's utterly above it all. American royalty.

On the critical issue of health care, our goal is to ensure that Americans can choose and afford private health care coverage that best fits their individual needs. To make insurance more affordable, Congress must act to address rapidly rising health care costs. Small businesses should be able to band together and negotiate for lower insurance rates, so they can cover more workers with health insurance. I urge you to pass association health plans. I ask you to give lower-income Americans a refundable tax credit that would allow millions to buy their own basic health insurance.

The easy answer, and the one that nearly all of the West has adopted is that of universal health care. We need to decide what is more important, the health of our citizenry, or the half-trillion dollars a year we spend on our military. We must also be prepared for the days when the U.S. is merely another player on the world's stage. India and China are almost certain to overtake us as the dominant players economically, and it's only a short time before they exceed our military. I know that this is not the 21st century the neo-cons envisioned, but it is the most likely way that the 21st century plays out. This being the likely case, why not offer our citizens global health care. Who knows? We might even have the life expectancy of those evil socialist Scandinavian countries if we do so.

By computerizing health records, we can avoid dangerous medical mistakes, reduce costs, and improve care. To protect the doctor-patient relationship, and keep good doctors doing good work, we must eliminate wasteful and frivolous medical lawsuits.

Umm, doesn't W know that nearly all patient records are on a hard drive somewhere? I think what he means is an onerous federal database. But isn't this a bit close to socialized health care for the GOP's liking? I guess if there's profit to be made, it's all good.

Those frivolous lawsuits again. That dog won't hunt with this commentator. I have the facts. Sorry, W. Well, I'm really not sorry. :)

And tonight I propose that individuals who buy catastrophic health care coverage, as part of our new health savings accounts, be allowed to deduct 100 percent of the premiums from their taxes.

100% deduction? Does that mean if I put $1,000.00 into CHC that I'll get $1,000.00 dollars taken off from my tax liability. No, it does not. I'll get 38% or thereabouts off. I cannot fathom why those flunkies in Congress applaud so much. This stuff pretty much sucks, and I'm getting tired of editing out all the 'applause's.

A government-run health care system is the wrong prescription. By keeping costs under control, expanding access, and helping more Americans afford coverage, we will preserve the system of private medicine that makes America's health care the best in the world.

Yeah, state run health care is stupid. That's why the rest of the West has pretty much adopted it as a model. Lest you think it would sink the great U.S. economic engine, our neighbor to the north, and largest trading partner is a net exporter to the world. Canada also happens to have universal health care. It's not perfect, but it's a great deal better than the NO coverage some 48 million(?) Americans are currently without.

We are living in a time of great change -- in our world, in our economy, in science and medicine. Yet some things endure -- courage and compassion, reverence and integrity, respect for differences of faith and race. The values we try to live by never change. And they are instilled in us by fundamental institutions, such as families and schools and religious congregations. These institutions, these unseen pillars of civilization, must remain strong in America, and we will defend them. We must stand with our families to help them raise healthy, responsible children. When it comes to helping children make right choices, there is work for all of us to do.

Mr. Bush is absolutely right. We are living in constant flux. We need someone with a nimble mind to keep atop all these changes. He is saying a lot of the right things, but on matters of any real substance, he is conspicuously vague. No, that's not scripted. :)

One of the worst decisions our children can make is to gamble their lives and futures on drugs. Our government is helping parents confront this problem with aggressive education, treatment, and law enforcement. Drug use in high school has declined by 11 percent over the last two years. Four hundred thousand fewer young people are using illegal drugs than in the year 2001.

In my budget, I proposed new funding to continue our aggressive, community-based strategy to reduce demand for illegal drugs. Drug testing in our schools has proven to be an effective part of this effort. So tonight I proposed an additional $23 million for schools that want to use drug testing as a tool to save children's lives. The aim here is not to punish children, but to send them this message: We love you, and we don't want to lose you.

We all know that drugs are not a good idea. Alcohol is a drug as well. :) I'm sure you can cherry-pick data to suit whatever your agenda might be. But you know what, George, in Afghanistan, since we bombed it into the stone age, we have allowed their opium production to revive itself. It is now back to pre-Taliban levels. Some 90% of the heroin making its way into Great Britain is being raised in fields of poppies in Afghanistan. This is 'hit with a 2-by-4' irony. You need to choose your topics a little more carefully. We need to be vastly more vigilant, but we mustn't be hypocritical either.

This is an important subject, and you've introduced it at a most uncomfortable time for your Administration.

Let's go finish the job in Afghanistan, so the British don't lose needless lives to drugs.

To help children make right choices, they need good examples. Athletics play such an important role in our society, but, unfortunately, some in professional sports are not setting much of an example. The use of performance-enhancing drugs like steroids in baseball, football, and other sports is dangerous, and it sends the wrong message -- that there are shortcuts to accomplishment, and that performance is more important than character. So tonight I call on team owners, union representatives, coaches, and players to take the lead, to send the right signal, to get tough, and to get rid of steroids now.

Pot. Kettle. Black? I can only imagine that under your 'leadership' the Astros were using anabolic steroids. It was okay then, but isn't now. I do understand the issue. As a powerlifter, I have been accused of using steroids many times. I have never used them. Ever.

I think that this is a good, sensible position to take. That said, I feel that this feel-good initiative will not effect things one iota. I wish that the opposite was true, but being involved in a sport where androgenic substances are widely used, the culture of 'win at any cost' is very entrenched.

Taking the money out of sports would be the real ticket, but that's not going to fly.

To encourage right choices, we must be willing to confront the dangers young people face -- even when they're difficult to talk about. Each year, about 3 million teenagers contract sexually-transmitted diseases that can harm them, or kill them, or prevent them from ever becoming parents. In my budget, I propose a grassroots campaign to help inform families about these medical risks. We will double federal funding for abstinence programs, so schools can teach this fact of life: Abstinence for young people is the only certain way to avoid sexually-transmitted diseases.

This is another feel-good, zero risk position. Teenagers are going to have sex. That is not going to change. Kids aren't dumb. They already know that abstinence is the only certain way to protect themselves from STDs. That doesn't stop them from engaging in risk-taking activities. This is a non-response to a very important issue. The distribution of liquid barriers would be a more effective way to proceed. It may not be the GOP's stance on the issue, but it is the only one likely to effect disease and pregnancy rates in a positive way.

Decisions children now make can affect their health and character for the rest of their lives. All of us -- parents and schools and government -- must work together to counter the negative influence of the culture, and to send the right messages to our children.

A strong America must also value the institution of marriage. I believe we should respect individuals as we take a principled stand for one of the most fundamental, enduring institutions of our civilization. Congress has already taken a stand on this issue by passing the Defense of Marriage Act, signed in 1996 by President Clinton. That statute protects marriage under federal law as a union of a man and a woman, and declares that one state may not redefine marriage for other states.

The negative influence of our culture? No mirrors in the White House? When young people look to their representatives in Washington, and they see a consistent pattern of lies and deceptions, is it any wonder that they make less than wise decisions? No, it is not.

Defining marriage is going to cost you. The problem with conservatives is that they rarely make social progress. If you want to define marriage as stated above, then are you ready to accept the fallout from those who cannot marry? Gay men will continue to get AIDS, and other STDs. These things have real, tangible costs. Huge costs. Although it may not be politically palatable, giving full legal marital status to ANY two consenting adults is the best response, by far. It is the only one that makes sense given the reality of the situation on the ground.

Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives. On an issue of such great consequence, the people's voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage.

Why are judges, 'activist judges' only when they disagree with someone's position? This is borderline insane. The issue is only one of 'great consequence' if you make it so. If this issue was properly and fully explained to the American people, then the American people would not have the aversion to it that they presumably have today. Let the people have all of the facts, and let them decide. One more thing about 'activist judges', they are strictly reading the Constitution as far as I can tell. That whole mess about everyone being created equal. You know what I mean.

The outcome of this debate is important -- and so is the way we conduct it. The same moral tradition that defines marriage also teaches that each individual has dignity and value in God's sight.

I agree it's an important debate. Either America is for true equality, or it is not. That is exactly what this distills down to. Marriage is not a religious institution. It is a legal one. That is why judges have ruled as they have. It is a matter of law, not religion. Pretty simple really. If we do not give gays equal rights under the law, then what the hell have we been fighting for over the past 200 plus years? I do not know.

It's also important to strengthen our communities by unleashing the compassion of America's religious institutions. Religious charities of every creed are doing some of the most vital work in our country -- mentoring children, feeding the hungry, taking the hand of the lonely. Yet government has often denied social service grants and contracts to these groups, just because they have a cross or a Star of David or a crescent on the wall. By executive order, I have opened billions of dollars in grant money to competition that includes faith-based charities. Tonight I ask you to codify this into law, so people of faith can know that the law will never discriminate against them again.

Religion is divisive. It is not inclusive. By invoking God in the above, you have made this abundantly clear. Non-governmental Organizations based on myths that are thousands of years old should not be able to receive any federal money. The way I see it is simple, if you get your moral code from a book with talking animals, people rising from the dead, and walking on water that isn't frozen, should we trust you with the limited dollars we have? It sounds ridiculous when put in this context.

That is because it is ridiculous. There have been no studies that I am aware of, that demonstrate that religious organizations are any better at distributing to our needy than the other institutions already in place. Until this is studied further - AND that no one shall be discriminated against for not harboring a given belief system, this program should not go into the divisive realm of religion.

In the past, we've worked together to bring mentors to children of prisoners, and provide treatment for the addicted, and help for the homeless. Tonight I ask you to consider another group of Americans in need of help. This year, some 600,000 inmates will be released from prison back into society. We know from long experience that if they can't find work, or a home, or help, they are much more likely to commit crime and return to prison. So tonight, I propose a four-year, $300 million prisoner re-entry initiative to expand job training and placement services, to provide transitional housing, and to help newly released prisoners get mentoring, including from faith-based groups. America is the land of second chance, and when the gates of the prison open, the path ahead should lead to a better life.

Faith-based recidivism is more apt. Again, I think that assisting ex-convicts(that's a truly ugly use of English) is a grand idea. It should be noted that again, there is no evidence that faith-based assistance is any more beneficial than the already existing means of assisting people back into society. Another issue that this raises, and it is a recurring one for this Administration is that religious organizations are another group that doesn't report their finances to the government. There is no accountability once the flood gates are open. I say that this is recurring issue, because it is raised every time religious organizations are mentioned.

Before any money is allocated to religious groups, there must be a methodology in place to overlook their finances. The obvious issue here is that it adds another layer of bureaucracy somewhere. Nevertheless, it is absolutely imperative that this be done.

In addition, a monitoring system needs to be in place to judge the effectiveness of any faith-based programs. Therein lies a huge issue. Given the choice between 'faith-based' and 'reason-based' programs, the astute observer will pick reason over faith every time.

For all Americans, the last three years have brought tests we did not ask for, and achievements shared by all. By our actions, we have shown what kind of nation we are. In grief, we have found the grace to go on. In challenge, we rediscovered the courage and daring of a free people. In victory, we have shown the noble aims and good heart of America. And having come this far, we sense that we live in a time set apart.

I've been witness to the character of the people of America, who have shown calm in times of danger, compassion for one another, and toughness for the long haul. All of us have been partners in a great enterprise.

Well, it's difficult to know where to begin. We certainly have not shown the world what America has stood for for more than two centuries. Yes, we have had trials. In one instance, we did the correct thing, by removing the Taliban in Afghanistan, and now we need to go back and finish the job.

In Iraq, we have shown the worst of human frailties. As a nation we were mislead into going to war for no apparent reason. Only the Administration knows why. We now know it was not because of weapons of mass destruction. It now appears that this action was the brain child of GW Bush himself.

There is also little doubt that many of his neo-conservative allies in various positions in Washington, and the press were complicit in fomating this action. It is a very troubling time for those of us that wish to believe the best on our elected officials.

And even some of the youngest understand that we are living in historic times. Last month a girl in Lincoln, Rhode Island, sent me a letter. It began, "Dear George W. Bush. If there's anything you know, I, Ashley Pearson, age 10, can do to help anyone, please send me a letter and tell me what I can do to save our country." She added this P.S.: "If you can send a letter to the troops, please put, 'Ashley Pearson believes in you.'"

Tonight, Ashley, your message to our troops has just been conveyed. And, yes, you have some duties yourself. Study hard in school, listen to your mom or dad, help someone in need, and when you and your friends see a man or woman in uniform, say, "thank you." And, Ashley, while you do your part, all of us here in this great chamber will do our best to keep you and the rest of America safe and free.

My fellow citizens, we now move forward, with confidence and faith. Our nation is strong and steadfast. The cause we serve is right, because it is the cause of all mankind. The momentum of freedom in our world is unmistakable -- and it is not carried forward by our power alone. We can trust in that greater power who guides the unfolding of the years. And in all that is to come, we can know that His purposes are just and true.
May God continue to bless America. END 10:05 P.M. EST

Ashley is wise beyond her tender years. "Please send me a letter and tell me what I can do to save our country."

Ashley is right. Our country is in serious trouble. We are being mis-lead at the highest levels of government, our finances are so far out of balance, no one knows when they'll be put right, and we are engaged in a military operation that was the creation of one man's fertile imagination.

The best thing that young Ashley can do is to develop her mind, and learn how to spot deceptions and lies. Make critical thinking a part of her every waking moment. Always be vigilant and recognize propaganda. The grown-ups in uniform can always use a nice word, but our country needs the Ashley's, the leaders of tomorrow, to have the tools to navigate an ever more sophisticated landscape.

It is up to the next generation to see that the true principles of democracy are upheld. That jingoism is replaced by real patriotism, and to keep the pillars of this country strong. It seems a hard fight, but it is also the good fight.

Quote of the day:

"He promised us a humble foreign policy. Instead, he's alienated our allies, lost the respect of the world community, and cost 500 brave young men and women their lives in Iraq." - Wesley Clark

George W Bush and the real state of the Union

Today the President gives his annual address. As the election battle begins, how does his first term add up?
20 January 2004

232: Number of American combat deaths in Iraq between May 2003 and January 2004

501: Number of American servicemen to die in Iraq from the beginning of the war - so far

0: Number of American combat deaths in Germany after the Nazi surrender to the Allies in May 1945

0: Number of coffins of dead soldiers returning home from Iraq that the Bush administration has allowed to be photographed

0: Number of funerals or memorials that President Bush has attended for soldiers killed in Iraq

100: Number of fund-raisers attended by Bush or Vice-President Dick Cheney in 2003

13: Number of meetings between Bush and Tony Blair since he became President

10 million: Estimated number of people worldwide who took to the streets in opposition to the invasion of Iraq, setting an all-time record for simultaneous protest

2: Number of nations that Bush has attacked and taken over since coming into the White House

9.2: Average number of American soldiers wounded in Iraq each day since the invasion in March last year

1.6: Average number of American soldiers killed in Iraq per day since hostilities began

16,000: Approximate number of Iraqis killed since the start of war

10,000: Approximate number of Iraqi cililians killed since the beginning of the conflict

$100 billion: Estimated cost of the war in Iraq to American citizens by the end of 2003

$13 billion: Amount other countries have committed towards rebuilding Iraq (much of it in loans) as of 24 October

36%: Increase in the number of desertions from the US army since 1999

92%: Percentage of Iraq's urban areas that had access to drinkable water a year ago

60%: Percentage of Iraq's urban areas that have access to drinkable water today

32%: Percentage of the bombs dropped on Iraq this year that were not precision-guided

1983: The year in which Donald Rumsfeld gave Saddam Hussein a pair of golden spurs

45%: Percentage of Americans who believed in early March 2003 that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 11 September attacks on the US

$127 billion: Amount of US budget surplus in the year that Bush became President in 2001

$374 billion: Amount of US budget deficit in the fiscal year for 2003

1st: This year's deficit is on course to be the biggest in United States history

$1.58 billion: Average amount by which the US national debt increases each day

$23,920: Amount of each US citizen's share of the national debt as of 19 January 2004

1st: The record for the most bankruptcies filed in a single year (1.57 million) was set in 2002

10: Number of solo press conferences that Bush has held since beginning his term. His father had managed 61 at this point in his administration, and Bill Clinton 33

1st: Rank of the US worldwide in terms of greenhouse gas emissions per capita

$113 million: Total sum raised by the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign, setting a record in American electoral history

$130 million: Amount raised for Bush's re-election campaign so far

$200m: Amount that the Bush-Cheney campaign is expected to raise in 2004

$40m: Amount that Howard Dean, the top fund-raiser among the nine Democratic presidential hopefuls, amassed in 2003

28: Number of days holiday that Bush took last August, the second longest holiday of any president in US history (Recordholder: Richard Nixon)

13: Number of vacation days the average American worker receives each year

3: Number of children convicted of capital offences executed in the US in 2002. America is only country openly to acknowledge executing children

1st: As Governor of Texas, George Bush executed more prisoners (152) than any governor in modern US history

2.4 million: Number of Americans who have lost their jobs during the three years of the Bush administration

221,000: Number of jobs per month created since Bush's tax cuts took effect. He promised the measure would add 306,000

1,000: Number of new jobs created in the entire country in December. Analysts had expected a gain of 130,000

1st: This administration is on its way to becoming the first since 1929 (Herbert Hoover) to preside over an overall loss of jobs during its complete term in office

9 million: Number of US workers unemployed in September 2003

80%: Percentage of the Iraqi workforce now unemployed

55%: Percentage of the Iraqi workforce unemployed before the war

43.6 million: Number of Americans without health insurance in 2002

130: Number of countries (out of total of 191 recognised by the United Nations) with an American military presence

40%: Percentage of the world's military spending for which the US is responsible

$10.9 million: Average wealth of the members of Bush's original 16-person cabinet

88%: Percentage of American citizens who will save less than $100 on their 2006 federal taxes as a result of 2003 cut in capital gains and dividends taxes

$42,000: Average savings members of Bush's cabinet are expected to enjoy this year as a result in the cuts in capital gains and dividends taxes

$42,228: Median household income in the US in 2001

$116,000: Amount Vice-President Cheney is expected to save each year in taxes

44%: Percentage of Americans who believe the President's economic growth plan will mostly benefit the wealthy

700: Number of people from around the world the US has incarcerated in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

1st: George W Bush became the first American president to ignore the Geneva Conventions by refusing to allow inspectors access to US-held prisoners of war

+6%: Percentage change since 2001 in the number of US families in poverty

1951: Last year in which a quarterly rise in US military spending was greater than the one the previous spring

54%: Percentage of US citizens who believe Bush was legitimately elected to his post

1st: First president to execute a federal prisoner in the past 40 years. Executions are typically ordered by separate states and not at federal level

9: Number of members of Bush's defence policy board who also sit on the corporate board of, or advise, at least one defence contractor

35: Number of countries to which US has suspended military assistance after they failed to sign agreements giving Americans immunity from prosecution before the International Criminal Court

$300 million: Amount cut from the federal programme that provides subsidies to poor families so they can heat their homes

$1 billion: Amount of new US military aid promised Israel in April 2003 to offset the "burdens" of the US war on Iraq

58 million: Number of acres of public lands Bush has opened to road building, logging and drilling

200: Number of public-health and environmental laws Bush has attempted to downgrade or weaken

29,000: Number of American troops - which is close to the total of a whole army division - to have either been killed, wounded, injured or become so ill as to require evacuation from Iraq, according to the Pentagon

90%: Percentage of American citizens who said they approved of the way George Bush was handling his job as president when asked on 26 September, 2001

53%: Percentage of American citizens who approved of the way Bush was handling his job as president when asked on 16 January, 2004

You decide what his report card should be.

Compiled by The Independent