Deconstructing The State Of The Union Speech

s has been his custom over the past seven years, George W Bush has once again used the latest “State of the Union” to further a political agenda that by now has grown quite thin with the American people. In his speech, he uses much of the same language he did leading up to the war in March of 2003, while omitting several of his earlier claims and ignoring several facts while in the process recycling old lies. Part one of this series focused on why the Democrats let Bush get this far. Part two is a quick look at some key points.

George Bush started his speech by giving one last farewell to “Lady Bird” Johnson before he went into what he called the “four phases” of the US mission in Iraq. The first phase Bush called the “Liberation of Iraq from Saddam Hussein.” What is telling here is that he makes no mention of WMD’s (weapons of mass destruction) which he and the rest of the White House used to justify the invasion of Iraq in the first place. John Ashcroft, Dick Cheney and Powell went from network to network claiming that the White house knew that the Iraqi government had weapons of some supposed “great death”. Condoleezza Rice actually referenced a radioactive cloud in the US skies. It is difficult to forget Colin Powell’s speech where he claimed that indistinct photos of trucks were mobile bio-weapons vehicles. They had no evidence for any of these claims and, true to form, the mainstream asked no questions. Finally, there was no discussion of the legality of Bush White House’s actions, or the lack there of. A preemptive strike violates international law since it flies in the face of the Nuremberg tribunals. Nazi generals were hanged for similar violations but reporters paid no attention to this fact.

The next stage of the war in Iraq, Bush claimed, was to “return sovereignty” to Iraq. Such a statement seems odd considering it was Washington who chose the first post-Saddam government along with dismantling the country’s military and police force. Ahmad Chalabi, one of the three early leaders of Iraq had not lived in Iraq for decades and was wanted in Jordan for fraud. He was a White House sweetheart which is why he was one of the first three overseers of Iraq. All construction jobs in the war-torn country were given to American contractors, most notably Halliburton. Early agreements within the first days of the new pre-election years of Iraq prohibited the Iraqi Government from kicking American troops from the country but could request the US leaves. Just recently, a US bill set for introduction in the Iraqi Parliament would give western oil companies ownership rights to the production of the country’s main resource. US Representative Geoffrey Miller still controls Iraq’s prison system. If his name sounds familiar, that is because he was the head of Guantanamo Bay since it opened. He took over for Elliot Abrams who faced the brunt of the fallout for the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by US soliders. Abrams, who made name for himself during the Contra scandals, made the mistake of not keeping 60 minutes from learning of the Abu Graib abuses. None of this was mentioned anywhere in Bush’s speech, of course, nor was the fact that Operation “Shock and Awe” put the country in total collapse.

The third part of this war, Bush continued, was Exculpation. With the increase of US troops came the increase of abuse which despite the Pentagon’s and White House’s attempt to blackout information from Iraq, has become well known and has lead to several arrests among soldiers. There have been new charges against high ranking generals and members of the Bush White house who approved illegal policies in dealing with the residents of each neighborhood. One prime example of this was the fire bombing and not so clean “sweep” of Fallijah. The resultant death toll was so great that bodies had to be buried in a nearby soccer field. The fire bombings later spread to Najaf.

Bush went on to say that the fourth stage of the Iraq war involved deployment and an increase in troop levels. This “stage” has been protested by the vast majority of the American people. There are mixed reports about whether the increase in troop levels is working. Reports from yahoo news states there is evidence of some success pointing to a decrease in violence in Baghdad: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070726/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_crocker, but independent news sources question the accuracy of such claims with the following article claiming there is no real surge level: http://www.counterpunch.org/mindshaftgap07132007.html.Missing from the discussion is what good any increase in troops will do when the insurgence enjoys home field advantage. Furthermore, with the increasing hostility that the US presence creates, more Iraqis are now willing to join insurgency. Add in the new US threat against Iran which would expand instability in region and could very well spill over into the borders of neighboring Syria and Saudi Arabia, a situation that no increase of troop levels will be able to curb. The debate over troop levels in Iraq is a flashback to Vietnam when some thought more troops would bring the US victory but history has not been so kind to such notions. But most important, this action goes against the wishes of the American people as indicated in several polls. But, as always, Bush ignored all this and sent a clear message that public opinion means little to him.

The one area of the war that the Bush White house has successfully controlled is the language of the debate. During the early part of the speech, it became evident that Bush was working to reestablish that success. He claimed that the the debate concerning Iraq has been wrongly defined; that the argument was between those who want the troops to come home verses those who want to keep them there and that this was incorrect. Bush stated the “real debate” was between those who think the war is lost and not worth fighting and those who think the war can be won and is worth the price despite how hard it has been for American troops. He then went on to state that he supports the latter. In the history of speeches, this has got to be one of the most asinine arguments ever brought forth. Perhaps Bush forgot about his plan to create permanent military bases throughout Iraq, something the House thankfully has voted against. He could have forgotten the statement he made several months ago that he sees US troops staying in Iraq for the foreseeable future. If one was so naive, we could as easily think that he believes his own rhetoric since to believe such nonsense we would have to forget the past 7 years.

The last thing that I wanted to touch on for this piece was Bush’s comment that those who we are fighting in Iraq are the same ones who attacked us on 911. Here Bush tried to recycle an older lie for which they eventually had to own up to, sort of, since both Osama Bin Laden and the majority of the 911 high jackers came from Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda’s training camp was in Afghanistan, not Iraq and religious fanatic Bin Laden personally despised the secular “westernized” government of Saddam Hussein. The White House went on national TV saying that they did not understand why the American people thought 911 was connected with Iraq when they themselves did everything they could to blur the lines. Bush and his team continues to do their best to instill the great fiction of Iraq and Saddam being behind 9/11. The White House has clearly taken Gurbel’s statement to heart that if you tell a lie often enough, it somehow becomes truth.

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1185284834582.wmv

A Critical Look At Bush’s Latest Address To The Nation Speech

A Critical Look At Bush’s Latest Address To The Nation Speech

 

Part 1 Of 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just recently I spoke with a Congressional Democrat who will remain nameless about the impeachment of the Bush administration and if there was any movement by Democrats to move in that direction. At first he said simply, no. But then he gave me a lengthy explanation of why the Congress was looking to stay clear of taking any real actions against the White House. His answer came as absolutely no surprise since it was the same excuse the Congressional Democrats have been giving since the first day that they took over office. What he said was that there was no movement by the Democrats towards impeachment since it would never pass in the Senate. Even if he was impeached in the House, so what, Bush would still be in power and what would come out of the effort. By the time the hearings would come about wouldn’t be until the height of campaigning of next year and this would take attention away from Democrats struggle. And further more, he went onto say that the Republican’s would use the opportunity against the Democrats as the “lefts” way to divide the Country. After all this, he then asked me, quite rhetorically, what good could come out of it.

 

 

This glimpse into Nancy Pelosi’s reasoning to why impeachment was “off the table” was a clear sign that the Democrats are still a party that is still running scared. Quick note, it was not Pelosi for whom an I was speaking with. What he did not mention in his answer to me was that a Democrats move to impeach would at the very least would send a clear message to future occupiers of White House that they can’t by pass whatever laws they chose, that they are American employees and do not have the same rights as despots in the 1970s Chile or Sudan today and once they no longer follow the laws that come from the will of the people, then that leader Republican or Democrat, independent or whatever should be removed by the order of law immediately. Remember, in 1973 Nixon resign, not because of Democrats who were taken the cautious approach that they are taken today but from the pressure from his own party who saw him as a cancer on the ass of their political party which was evident from the outrage that was permeating throughout the country.

 

As for taking pressure of the Democrats presidential campaigns, we are being drowned by them. Looking at the early news on Yahoo news, two of the stories in the headlines alone were about the latest Democrats so called debates. And with Democrats most likely to gain even more power next year almost by default since the Republicans are in the same disarray   that plagued the Democrats from the early 1960s to the early 2000s, the idea that an impeachment trial would take away from Democrats steam is a great fiction, one that we all believed to some degree before they took power. I will focus on the fallacy later in this report. As for “dividing the country,” the fear of Karl Rove still rings today. With recent polls showing Bush’s poll numbers around 29% and Cheney’s even lower, and with 66% of the US population disapproving of the actions of the White house it is hard to figure how an impeach trial could possible divide a country at this late stage of the game.

 

But, or coarse is the great fiction. The idea that Democrats have the will to make any real change is not only unlikely but, ridicules. Since they took over the control of Congress, the spending on the Iraq war is more than twice what it was a year ago. There are also more soldiers in the desert sands of Iraq than before January of 2007. Their excuse is that the Republicans blocked their effort to stop the war but all they simply had to do is cut the purse strings and starve the war to end. As a reminder, it was only 4 months of fighting with the White house before the Democrats folded and not only gave Bush what he wanted but gave him what amounts to a green light to go after Iran which is being fattened like a lamb being readied for slaughter. Instead of debating when to bring the troops home, which the country knew Bush would pay no respect to but also we knew that any bill that passed in Congress would be vetoed. Instead of wasting their time, the Democrats could just as easily prepared articles of impeachment and once again, cut the purse strings.

 

One last thing for this piece, the Democrats have waited till it was safe to go against the war and what is their best proposal, too keep troops in Iraq for 120 mores days and at the same time say that American lives are not worth losing in this war, so what is the purpose of keeping this illegal war going into next year.

 

Until next time.

 

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1185284834582.wmv

Iraq Will Continue To Be An Albatross Around Bush’s Neck

Shortly after the elections of 2004 George W Bush gave a speech before an audience of thousands where he claimed that his latest victory gave him “political currency” which he planed on “spending.” Now it seems that those coffers are bare. The Democrats are bull rushing him on his Nixonian wire tape program which very well could put impeachment back on the table. But the biggest problem will he face is the major albatross around his neck which is the Iraq war.   Even members of his own party are jumping off his bandwagon like rats jumping off a sinking ship. The reason is that pesky subject of the Iraq war. Already, more than 10 GOP Republicans have called for the withdraw of US troops. Just today, Olympia Snowe and Chuck Hagel have come out in favor of a new Democrat bill the would call for US to come home in the next 120 days. And recent polls show from late June that 66% of Americans disapprove of the Iraq war and the overall job Bush is doing as the squatter of the White house.

 

To remind many of you who are reading this, the same Republican Senators who are now supporting the Democrats cause to pass a bill with a time line, allowed earlier bills to pass, knowing that they were going to go down in defeat with a Bush veto. The difference this time around might be the fact that the Senate will have the votes to over come any future vetos that would prevent this bill from passing. But the real question is what will Congress do if Bush refuses to bring US soldiers home should the bill pass in the Senate and the house and survive a veto? Equally important, what will Congress do if Bush puts a signing statement on the bill. Bush has added more signing statements on  bills than any other “president” in the history of the United States. So such a scenario is very likely. For the Democrats, they will have to make the decision of weather to walk away with egg on their face, yet again, with giving Bush what amounts to a blank check after just 4 months of fighting with the White House over the issue of a time line. The most recent polls show that the support for Congress is at a 50 year low, so they can’t afford another defeat without taking serious action that could very well remove Bush from office.

 For the Republicans, the war is dragging down many of their 2008 candidates. There is no better example of this than John McCain whose presidential campaign is coming apart at the seams. Just yesterday, some of his most important advisors have resigned. Much of this is due to the fact that McCain is trying to be George Bush the second and supports the Iraq war without question.  Rudy Giuliani’s fire is also starting to wane but, not to the same degree as McCain.  For Giuliani, he is still running on the farce that paints him as a “hero of 911.”  I say farce because for those of us who live in New York, we know the numerous missteps of the former mayor. For starters, he did little more than pose for pictures and when it came to bringing in federal emergency teams to help clean up ground zero, he refused them in favor of using local crews which lead to a fatal error that has affected more than 10,000 crew members. Further more, it was his administration who claimed the air around ground zero was safe enough for those who work in the area to return to their jobs. Now thousands of New Yorkers are suffering repertory problems. Much of the local media blasted Rudy and those were who involved in the big lie. Mitt Romney has made a minor splash. But for them, along with Fred Thomas the real issue is the Iraq war and no matter how many times the GOP tries to redirect the American attention away from the war and place it on immigration, Iraq seems to keep cropping up.  This does not bold well for Bush whose numbers are still dragging the muck of 29%. That “political capital” he claims to have had despite all the evidence that he stole the 2004 election in a manner similar to those of 2000 has been spent along time to go. A desperate American public removed those who rubber stamped the White House policies for the majority of the past 7 years. This is not to say Bush is the “lame duck president who everyone claimed after the 2006 elections.” Bush still has a lot of pull especially since the Democrats tend to fold at the worst possible time. But the Dems do have support of many Senate republicans this time around who needs this war to end to save their own political lives was much as anyone-else. But again, the Congress will have to decide what they will do if Bush refuses to withdraw US soldiers. Just yesterday he said that the decisions of Generals trump that of the politicians. So in short, both sides of those on capital hill are painted in a corner and now only time will tell how lawmakers will react to the pressure the White house has put on them.  

Until next time     

  

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1184096190957.wmv

 

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1184183786736.wmv

PBS Looks To Appeal To The Hispanic Community

   

For the first time in more than thirty years, the Public Broadcast Station is looking to expand beyond its base audience. PBS now is looking start an all Hispanic station which aims at educating children and providing programming for adults that focuses on cultural diversity.  The new station, “WEDU” looks to fill a long standing void in educational TV aimed at the young Latin community. As of now, this new channel will only be found in the Tampa area but may become nationally syndicated, depending on the success it may or may not find there. One of the hopes here is that the education provided by WEDU could be similar to what the English population had enjoyed for years.   

  

PBS may also be looking to going rejoin its grassroots beginnings. As many of those who have watched the channel for years can a-test to, the supposed Public Broad Cast station has been drawing in more corporate dollars in the past two decades than the previous years starting with the founding year of 1969. One of the main supporters as been Mercedes and a subsidiary of Exxon-mobile. Regardless, though, we were able to hold onto such shows and Bill Moyer’s Journal, formally known as “Now” and several British comedies. With the Hispanic market now being wooed it should be interesting to see if this once channel of the people will return to its roots. It maybe unlikely though. The president of the station is   “Paula A. Kerger” who comes out of the corporate sector. There former president “Ervin Duggan” was head of the FCC which relaxed the rules that allowed the further monopolization of the few media giants over the media market as a whole. Now 5 to 7 media owners control much more than 90% of the market. How PBS approaches WEDU may reveal what kind of vehicle this station might become. On the surface of things, providing quality education to the Spanish population is not only a wonderful idea but also a much need one considering the collapse of the American education system some thirty years ago. Hopefully this new channel lives up to past PBS programs despite PBS’s move away from public support and more towards corporate funding.

 

We’ll see, until next time.

 

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1183752338639.wmv

On Depression

According to new studies reported by on WFLA and which can be viewed on the link below, while antidepressants can help those on them to lead normal lives, they have also been linked to bone loss in elderly. One of the most common anti-depressants on the market “SRRIs” seem to hit post metaposal women the hardest in terms of hip erosion. Elderly males on the drugs also showed a higher percentage of bone loss than men who were never were on the drug.

These new findings do not bold well for many younger teenage girls who may have to be placed on them according to the latest numbers concerning the increase of teenage girls addicted to drugs. According to new studies which one can view on the top link below, girls are now more likely to take drugs due to depression and alienation than are teenage boys. In fact the rate of the teenage female population who are hooked on drugs are for the first time in recent history are equal to that males. You can check out the links below for more information.

Until next time.

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1183667843258.wmv

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1183665879274.wmv

The Price of Tax Cuts

For those of you who support massive tax cuts and support the idea that George Bush’s tax breaks, which mainly benefit the top 10% of the US population, should be made permanent, then you would be wisely advised to pay attention to the new situation that has suddenly crept up in Tampa Florida. After months of holding special sessions urged on by Governor Charlie Crist, the state has adopted a bill which will slash property taxes by more than 25% and will reduce next years spending to the level of what it is today. As a result several counties now face real challenges in keeping their fire department and police forces at current levels. These counties include, Hillsborough county, Hernando County and Pinellas county. There are plans in motion to put a fee on all emergencies from EMS services to the arrival of the Fire department saving your home.

The proposal would hand the bill to the insurance companies which on the surface of things would seem like a good idea but once peel back the layers of details surrounding the outcome of such a proposal it is not hard to see that the real loser in this whole affair will be the American tax pair. After all, insurance companies look loop holes that allow them to avoid paying for any of the current crises situations that we have grown accustomed to being covered for. It would be easy to assume that at some point that those who are struck with an unfortunate circumstance will have to be the ones responsible for covering charges for the needed emergency services that arrive at a crisis situation. So the question must be asked, both facetiously and partly serious, how long will it take for people to be unable to afford calling the fire department. This may sound like a stupid question seeing that no fire station would allow a home to go up in flames without attempting to save the home but, if the individual has to, in the end flip the bill, then suddenly a horrid picture develops. Remember there was a time that hospitals couldn’t withhold services but now it happened all the time. It is could very well lead to privatization of some of our most vital services.

Already, 121 employees have been cut from several of Tampa’s governmental non-emergency positions with 115 slashed altogether. In all that’s 236 jobs that no longer exist. To make matters worse, Mayor Pam Iorio have given those workers 90 days to find jobs with no severance packages. The move has reportedly cut $ 15 million dollars from the city’s budget. However, Iorio has gone on to say that more spending has to be cut from the city’s budget and more jobs will be slashed from the payroll. It seems curious that her office would allow so many workers slip through the cracks without a severance package assuming that the search for work takes many of those who were given a pink slip longer than the three months given.

We’ll see. Until Next time.

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1183407166122.wmv

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1183407043185.wmv

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1183406764185.wmv

http://www.groundhog.tv/apps/editor/staticplayer.jsp?clip=1183406582388.wmv