Was anyone else really frightened that in the event of disaster John Ashcroft would be president? Yikes. Dust off the crown and all hail Emperor Ashcroft!
Also, was this speech particularly biased and I missed it, or did Democrats just not feel like ever standing up?
"All told, more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. And many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way: They are no longer a problem to the United States and our friends and allies." Um, creepy.
Note to W: learn how to pronounce "peninsula."
Ted Kennedy was definately asleep at one point late in the speech. That's probably for the best.
We all thought that last year was going to be the defining State of the Union for this president. It had come just months after the September 11 attacks but far enough after that our shock had turned to resolve. It was a strong speech. Possibly too strong with the "Axis of Evil" denunciation. It set the tone for the "war on terror" and made clear that this administration would define its own destiny and would do so by going after "evildoers." That State of the Union defined Bush as a terror-eliminating crusader.
While last year was crucial for this past year, it is tonight's State of the Union and the progress made from it, that will define not only the next two years of this presidency, but also if there will be four more after it. Tonight will be the blueprint for the next two years and the success or failure of the promises made tonight will determine the future of this president.
Various leaks in the past few days have suggested that Bush will again try to link Iraq to Al Qaeda. There clearly isn't evidence there, but Bush won't let it go. To this administration, terror is all the same. It all is motivated by the same goals; hates America for the same reasons, and must be dealt with across the board in a uniform manner.
Unfortunately this method is bound to fail. Each "Axis of Evil" member is motivated by vastly different ideologies. While Saddam Hussein, a Sunni Muslim, hates America because it prevents him from his dreams of Arab consolidation and racial supremacy, Iran and North Korea are much different. Iranians, mostly Shiite Muslims, hate America because it invades their strict, fundamentalist society and corrupts their devout beliefs. To Iranian clerics, the enemy is liberty, for it is a mechanism for their collapse. For the North Koreans, their militarism and Korean superiority complex has made them a seemingly unstable nemesis in a vital region. While North Korea may actually be the most stable of the three, since it has an established political and hiarchical system by way of its ridiculously large military, it is the threat that is most troubling. Of the three, it is the only one capable of effectively lashing out.
Each of these three trouble spots deserves a different degree of corrective influence from the U.S. An all encompassing dogma against evil may sound good, but it won't get the job done effectively.
Tonight's speech will define this president. Tune in.