SOU 2007 - Reactions, Explanations & Translations

Anyone who is anyone is busily making comments on the State-of-the-Union (SOU) address. The pundits--or should we call them the usual suspects--are all commenting on the response that President Bush got. Some of them are busy analyzing how the overall message was received by analyzing the number of standing ovations and the applause received. Others are going through the pans of the faces among the congress critters. Some even went so far as to criticize Nancy Pelosi for missing a few cues from her fellow Dems.

One of the best analyses I managed to get hold of was from my fellow blogger, Eddie Copeland at The Institute for Lower Learning. Eddie added interpretations and editorial comments to help us really understand what Bush was saying (implying, inferring and/or stating between the lines). Not only was the analysis fairly square on the money, but it also made me laugh.

Keith Obermann's Countdown on MSNBC did a comparison of the issues raised and promises made in this year's SOU and past SOU addresses. Unfortunately, I was unable to catch it on TV. I am reviewing the online video late this morning and cannot wait to get the transcript (usually posted within 24 hours of the broadcast). Obermann's critiques of President Bush and company have been boldly assertive, truthful and courageous as of late:

Bush's Legacy: The President Who Cried Wolf (Jan 11, 2007)

Olbermann: Special Comment About ‘Sacrifice’ (Jan 3, 2007)

Olbermann: Lessons From The Vietnam War (Nov 20, 2006)

Olbermann: Where Are The Checks, Balances? (Nov 7, 2006)

Bloggermann: Bush Owes Us An Apology (Sep 18, 2006)

Compared to Chris Matthews, Bill O'Reilly, Wolf Blitzer, Tucker Carlson, Hannity and Colmes, Obermann seems to be a giant among Liliputians because he has the audacity to call things the way they are when it comes to this president.

Now onto my own analysis of the SOU:

Thank you very much.

This may be the last time Bush gets any applause, even the polite applause of the congress doing its best to be respectful of the office, if not the man in the office.

But that is something that has bugged me for some time. When the Bishop of the Gary Diocese was stonewalling teachers working in the parochial schools in Northwest Indiana regarding parity and equity in salary, and amid several rumors and news stories regarding corruption in the diocese, we were told to "respect the office." When Cardinal Law was stonewalling regarding the Catholic church crises in Boston, we were advised to respect the office. When it comes to the president, we are told to respect the office. When they elevated a racist bastard like Cardinal Ratzinger to the office of Pope, we were told to respect the office. But when the people elevated to such positions where we all rely upon their dedication to service, integrity, principle and honesty do not respect their own office... when these people violate every fundamental rule of effective leadership... when these people operate in secrecy and stonewall anyone that has the audacity to ask for answers... How the hell are we supposed to respect the office. They certainly do not.

And tonight, I have the high privilege and distinct honor of my own, as the first president to begin the State of the Union message with these words: "Madam Speaker."

The only reason Pelosi is accorded this sort of respect is because she is the only obstacle between Bush and impeachment. The fact that Speaker Pelosi has opposed impeachment is more evidence that things are not going to be all that different with the Dems in the majority.

Two members of the House and Senate are not with us tonight, and we pray for the recovery and speedy return of Senator Tim Johnson and Congressman Charlie Norwood.

I wish them well for two reasons: 1) I am a decent human being and do not want anyone to suffer; and 2) I want to maintain the current balance of things in the Senate and House. If Senator Tim Johnson fails to return to congress, his seat could be filled by a Republican. While Charlie Norwood is a Republican, his district could be represented by a more ultra-conservative and less reasonable Republican than Norwood. So wishing him well helps the progressive cause.

This rite of custom brings us together at a defining hour -- when decisions are hard and courage is needed. We enter the year 2007 with large endeavors underway, and others that are ours to begin. In all of this, much is asked of us. We must have the will to face difficult challenges and determined enemies -- and the wisdom to face them together.

While Bush knows something of being stubborn, entrenched in his ideology, and a distinct penchant for ignoring the advice of people a lot wiser than he is (despite what Harriet Miers might say), he knows nothing of courage, effective decision-making or wisdom. It bothers me when people use their position to claim attributes and characteristics that they do not inherently posses. President Bush is a coward that uses the courage of others to push forward his wrong-headed agendas, hyper-religious theocratic ideology, and entrenched world views.

Some in this chamber are new to the House and Senate -- and I congratulate the Democratic majority.

An ill-fitted effort to acknowledge his own defeat and failures in the face of an overwhelming mandate from the mid-term elections. Unfortunately, the Dems are already working hard at losing the momentum of their success by not adhering to the mandates that were inherent in that election. One of the pundits I heard this past week restated something that the Dems better remember: "The Democrats did not win this election, the Republicans lost it." If Pelosi, Reid and company do not get focused on the mandates, George W. will be looking forward to the run in 2008 because the Republicans will win back the House, the Senate and the White House.

Congress has changed, but not our responsibilities. Each of us is guided by our own convictions -- and to these we must stay faithful. Yet we are all held to the same standards, and called to serve the same good purposes: To extend this nation's prosperity ... to spend the people's money wisely ... to solve problems, not leave them to future generations ... to guard America against all evil, and to keep faith with those we have sent forth to defend us.

The irony of these words is that George W. Bush has not been faithful to the responsibilities of his office, his oath or to his party. He has not adhered to the standards that all presidents and leaders of our democracy are called to as a mandate. His violation of our civil liberties, the treaties prohibiting torture and maltreatment of prisoners, the invasion of non-aggressive sovereign nations, and the disregard for our laws via so-called "signing statements" all speak to his disregard of and failure to keep faith with us as Americans.

President Bush speaks of prosperity, but that prosperity is experienced only by the upper echelon of our nation's people. The gap between the haves and the have-nots is ever increasing due in large part to the pro-big business stance and the stacking of the decks against the working folks in this country.

As for spending our money wisely, no one can see any wisdom in the billions that we are wasting in Iraq. When Iraqi leaders manipulate the lack of oversight so that millions of dollars are siphoned off from the aid we have provided, and the Iraqi perpetrators of this fraud are allowed to slip away in the dark of night to spend their exile in the luxury of Europe without fear of being held accountable by Iraq or the US, there is no wisdom in allocating those dollars. When US and coalition contractors are mounting administrative costs that are over 50-60% of the budget already spent on projects--and then those projects fail to meet standards of quality and service--our money is not being spent wisely. When our troops are not provided with armor for vehicles and their own bodies, and contaminated food and water is being supplied by US corporations without being held accountable, there is no wisdom in the mix.

When our troops come home in an injured state, only to find that VA resources are not fully funded, rehab services are not up to speed, their pay and benefits are monkeyed with in unfair ways, we do not show our respect for their service or sacrifices. When members of our armed services who have served faithfully in one or more tours of duty in combat zones are rotated back for a second, third or, in some cases, fourth tours of duty in harm's way, there is not a sense of respect for our troops. When our National Guard, Coast Guard and home defense resources are sent overseas and leave our own shores less than fully protected, we are not respecting our troops. When war vets return home only to find that the law that is supposed to protect their employment opportunities is practically null and void, we do not show them our respect.

So when President Bush makes references to respect for our uniformed heroes that are doing the dirty work of this administration without ever saying "No," my stomach churns and I want to puke out of the overwhelming sense of disgust for his lack of respect.

We are not the first to come here with government divided and uncertainty in the air. Like many before us, we can work through our differences, and achieve big things for the American people. Our citizens don't much care which side of the aisle we sit on -- as long as we are willing to cross that aisle when there is work to be done. Our job is to make life better for our fellow Americans, and help them to build a future of hope and opportunity -- and this is the business before us tonight.

Compromise is based on being reasonable. Mr. Bush and company have not been reasonable throughout his occupation of the Oval Office. He has muscled his way through the first six years of office because he had a totally entrenched GOP-led congress. Now that the other shoe has finally dropped, he comes to us and begs for compromise so that he can continue to spy on us, lead us down the wrong path in regard to Iraq and foreign affairs, and ignore the laws that are duly passed and signed... and incumbent upon him.

The compromise is that Pelosi has not called for his impeachment or criminal prosecution. But that is Pelosi's own downfall... at least it will be soon.

A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy -- and that is what we have. We are now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth -- in a recovery that has created 7.2 million new jobs ... so far. Unemployment is low, inflation is low, and wages are rising. This economy is on the move -- and our job is to keep it that way, not with more government but with more enterprise.

I don't know what Bush has been smoking, but it has put him out of touch with reality. Millions of Americans have no benefits, health insurance or even decent treatment in the workplace. Thousands upon thousands are working two and three jobs to make ends meet, wondering--waiting--for even one catastrophic event (i.e. job loss, medical condition, child care, transportation) to trash their ability to pay their bills. Many of our elderly, as well as those unemployed or under-employed, have to choose between paying their rent, buying medications or going grocery shopping. The official unemployment rate remains low because there is a "shadow list" of unemployed that are off the stats because they are no longer collecting unemployment insurance (c.f. Barabara Ehrenreich's "Bait and Switch" and "Nickle and Dimed")

If there have been 7.2 million new jobs, how many are paying a living wage? Given that Forbes.com published data that reports a need for an annual income of over $250,000 to live "comfortably" in the vast majority of our major cities (more in places like L.A., San Francisco, Boston, New York, Chicago, etc.), and most Americans are barely pulling in $40,000-$50,000, and the number of bankruptcies due to catastrophic economic events is on the rise, and every day jobs are being lost at major corporations by the thousands (i.e. Ford, GM), and job layoffs for the first three years of his administration were the highest on record, and more jobs are being outsourced, sent overseas, or eliminated by attrition, consolidation or other means... well, we can see that there is no room for bragging about the economy.

Next week, I will deliver a full report on the state of our economy. Tonight, I want to discuss three economic reforms that deserve to be priorities for this Congress.

He and his gang need another week to conjure up the facts.

First, we must balance the federal budget. We can do so without raising taxes. What we need to do is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009 -- and met that goal three years ahead of schedule. Now let us take the next step. In the coming weeks, I will submit a budget that eliminates the federal deficit within the next five years. I ask you to make the same commitment. Together, we can restrain the spending appetite of the federal government, and balance the federal budget.

If we want to balance our budget, the first thing we have to do is be honest about how much we are spending. We need to include our losses in Iraq in the budget figures. We need to stop passing stop-gap measures and appropriations for Iraq. We need to accurately identify the fraud, waste and theft that has occurred in Iraq, as well as in Afghanistan. Until we do that, there is no sense in talking about a balanced budget. Then again, if we want to save a couple hundred billion, if not a trillion, we can recognize the futility of our current efforts in Iraq and move to a "containment strategy" and let the Iraqis work out there own solutions. We would spend less money making sure no one brought stuff into Iraq and let them do whatever they want to do to resolve their differences. If faced with the atrocities of a full-blown civil war, the Shi'ites, Sunna and Kurds might be more inclined to work out the details of their own destiny.

But currently, as is evidenced by more and more reports coming out of Iraq, there is no incentive for working out the issues. In fact, there is no military or security force reliability in Iraq, as is evidenced by the attack on American troops the other day that involved insurgents and terrorists dressed in "American-style uniforms" using fake IDs to walk by Iraqi security forces. The silly Iraqi security force members stood by and watched our troops get slaughtered by these insurgents because they could not recognize their own screw up... and they explained it as they "thought it was American on American fighting." When did they ever see such events before? Such infighting has only occurred among Iraqi troops.

Next, there is the matter of earmarks. These special interest items are often slipped into bills at the last hour -- when not even C-SPAN is watching. In 2005 alone, the number of earmarks grew to over 13,000 and totaled nearly $18 billion. Even worse, over 90 percent of earmarks never make it to the floor of the House and Senate -- they are dropped into committee reports that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk. You did not vote them into law. I did not sign them into law. Yet they are treated as if they have the force of law. The time has come to end this practice. So let us work together to reform the budget process ... expose every earmark to the light of day and to a vote in Congress ... and cut the number and cost of earmarks at least in half by the end of this session.

If we didn't have to fund the useless war in Iraq--and the illegal war in Iraq--we could afford a little pork. But if we adopted new rules for the House and Senate that restricted unrelated items and amendments from being tacked onto bills, we would eliminate such things. If we required all but those bills related to national security to be fully viewed in public, forcing all congressional activities to occur under the full light of day and in an openness of government, the problem of earmarks would all but be eliminated.

Finally, to keep this economy strong we must take on the challenge of entitlements. Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are commitments of conscience -- and so it is our duty to keep them permanently sound. Yet we are failing in that duty -- and this failure will one day leave our children with three bad options: huge tax increases, huge deficits, or huge and immediate cuts in benefits. Everyone in this chamber knows this to be true -- yet somehow we have not found it in ourselves to act. So let us work together and do it now. With enough good sense and good will, you and I can fix Medicare and Medicaid -- and save Social Security.

The problem here is that most of the people occupying the White House, working in the West Wing, serving in the Cabinet, sitting in either the House or Senate are either already independently wealthy, will retire with the full benefits of a special retirement plan designed for congress, will immediately enter lucrative lobbying or legal careers after their final term in office, will receive huge sums of money for spewing forth loads of manure (speeches) before select audiences, or any combination of the above. These people look at social security, Medicare and Medicaid as entitlements. The rest of us look at them as something we have paid for through our taxes and as our last resort should our lousy 401K, 403B, and IRA plans--all of which are latent jokes played on us by the corporate world that all but eliminated real pension plans and the GOP-dominated congress of the last 20 years. No one I know has a 401K, 403B or IRA that is going to get them through their retirement years. Hell, even the people I know that do have a pension (i.e. my father-in-law who worked almost 40 years in the steel industry) have had their pension cut by at least a third because the steel mills have played fast and loose with the pension plans, especially dumping the whole affair when they declared bankruptcy for the fourth or fifth time. These big corporations made multi-millions in profits without ever planning for the future, distributed those millions to their managers and stockholders, screwed over the workers many, many times over the years, played games with the unions, offered PR campaigns to make the workers appear greedy, and then moved most of their operations overseas to avoid the "high costs" of American labor.

There is no motivation for our political leaders to fix the mismanagement of our retirement or medical stop-gap programs... They've got theirs. As far as Bush, the GOP and most of our leaders are concerned, we must have done something wrong in our careers to be relegated to relying upon Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. I point out to them however, that they have raided Social Security funds when it was in the black, played fast and loose with our tax dollars, and that the billions being spent (and often wasted) overseas could fully fund Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and a fully implemented national health care plan as well as better education for our children and college-bound youth.

Education

Spreading opportunity and hope in America also requires public schools that give children the knowledge and character they need in life. Five years ago, we rose above partisan differences to pass the No Child Left Behind Act -- preserving local control, raising standards in public schools, and holding those schools accountable for results. And because we acted, students are performing better in reading and math, and minority students are closing the achievement gap.

It is bold of this president to cite the NCLB as a success. The real deal is that NCLB is an utter failure because it was not fully funded, was not fairly funded, and put our entire nation's education system focused on teaching to a hodge-podge of non-standard "standardized tests." The MCAS (Massachusetts) system of standardized testing is a prime example of how astray our focus on testing has gone. The same quandry of problems have been produced in Indiana's ISTEPs, Florida's tests, and in California. In the 1960s we recognized the very same problems with the California, Iowa and other standardized achievement tests. We did not take those lessons from the 1960s to heart. Instead of using these tests as a guide to diagnosing and addressing learning issues and deficits for each student, we now use them to determine each student's status, as well as the status of each school.

I submit that no standardized test in the entire world can be the sole determinant as to whether a student is achieving, whether faculty members are performing, or whether a school or school district is a success. Education is a far more complex matter than can be measured on a written test... and those of us working in the field of education know this! But the political right became fixed on a fix that they could control, despite the claim that the NCLB empowered local control. The reality is that the NCLB, when examined in its entirety, is a major flaw in our approach to education, equality, and success... and it has never been properly funded to boot!

Now the task is to build on this success, without watering down standards, without taking control from local communities and without backsliding and calling it reform. We can lift student achievement even higher by giving local leaders flexibility to turn around failing schools and by giving families with children stuck in failing schools the right to choose something better. We must increase funds for students who struggle -- and make sure these children get the special help they need. And we can make sure our children are prepared for the jobs of the future, and our country is more competitive, by strengthening math and science skills. The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America's children -- and I ask Congress to reauthorize this good law.

I beg our congress to throw out NCLB and put an effective teacher-education plan in its place. In my assessment of our education system, it is our methods of training teachers and our system of locking in the bad teachers into a career path that does not allow those that are burnt out to leave with dignity. It is our lack of support for the teacher in the classroom and the "politricks" of our education system that targets any teacher, community organization, or genuine effort to make the system(s) work effectively and sets the effort to undermine effective teaching into motion.

I can cite anecdote after anecdote of undermining the teacher in the classroom, teachers that were not genuinely committed to their profession, burnouts kept in the profession because of longevity and seniority, and games played by the administrations and the unions... yes, I said unions. The teacher unions are as much to blame as the administrations. Instead of seeking to resolve issues of supplies, classroom size, having appropriate number of textbooks, school safety issues, support for effective approaches to discipline, and available resources for teaching and learning, most unions have fought hard for pay raises and ignored these other issues... or at least acquiesced on them. I dare anyone to go to Lynn, Massachusetts and review that last fifteen union contracts and find evidence to prove my statements wrong. Lynn's approach to contract negotiation is repeated in almost every large city (over 50,000 in population) in our nation. Only the more recent contract negotiations will show any real evidence of supporting the role of the teacher and dealing with the real problems in our schools.

Then there is the issue of dealing with the social problems that are brought to school. While many will immediately be drawn to the problems of special education and the like, I point to the need of a full range of medical, nutritional and social work support that is needed in our schools. We have "guidance counselors" in our schools, but the vast majority of these counselors are so bogged down focusing on guiding students to the proper curriculum and helping students to focus on college that many of the family and social issues students face every day are largely un-addressed. Despite the religious right and political right claims that school is not the place for this type of help, school is where these issues and problems manifest most often. It is difficult to teach a student who goes home every night to events and conditions that overwhelm them and interfere with the entire learning process.

Health Care

A future of hope and opportunity requires that all our citizens have affordable and available health care. When it comes to health care, government has an obligation to care for the elderly, the disabled, and poor children. We will meet those responsibilities. For all other Americans, private health insurance is the best way to meet their needs. But many Americans cannot afford a health insurance policy.

Tonight, I propose two new initiatives to help more Americans afford their own insurance. First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income. With this reform, more than 100 million men, women, and children who are now covered by employer-provided insurance will benefit from lower tax bills.

The problem with this approach is that it will not reach those that need medical care the most. If a family, or an individual, is barely making rent and bills, being able to set aside money for insurance is an unattainable goal. A tax break for insurance only helps those that are making $50 to $60 thousand dollars and are living so tight to the fist that they can squeeze out $7,500 to $15,000 to set aside for insurance. Not only that, but as soon as the insurance industry gets into this show, there will be every effort to grade insurance applicants into risk categories that will determine the cost, extent of coverage and what type of conditions will be covered. We will see more corruption on the part of the health care insurance industry than ever before.

What we need is a national health care plan that effectively calls for training programs that require service to the nation in exchange for the training and credentials. We need to change the way insurance works and fully assure that everyone in our wealthy nation does not have to worry about catastrophic health events, as well as not worrying about preventative measures as well. Other wealthy nations in the world offer this approach. While we can sit back and complain about all the flaws in those systems, we should be looking at a plan that takes those flaws into account and works out the kinks to avoid the same pitfalls.

At the same time, this reform will level the playing field for those who do not get health insurance through their job. For Americans who now purchase health insurance on their own, my proposal would mean a substantial tax savings -- $4,500 for a family of four making $60,000 a year. And for the millions of other Americans who have no health insurance at all, this deduction would help put a basic private health insurance plan within their reach. Changing the tax code is a vital and necessary step to making health care affordable for more Americans.

This is the same GOP, religious right and political right song and dance we have heard for years, only wrapped in a newer piece of shiny paper. The odor wafting from inside the package is the same.

My second proposal is to help the states that are coming up with innovative ways to cover the uninsured. States that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens should receive federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. I have asked the secretary of Health and Human Services to work with Congress to take existing federal funds and use them to create "Affordable Choices" grants. These grants would give our nation's governors more money and more flexibility to get private health insurance to those most in need.

How well has this idea worked for Medicaid? Medicare? VA hospitals? There have been numerous past efforts to shore up state medical coverage plans in the past. These approaches have failed because as soon as the budget gets tight in Washington, the old saw of a "culture of entitlements" is brought out by the GOP and undermined by cuts. Never is foreign aid cut. Never is excessive defense spending reined in. Never are the salaries of hotshot politicians cut (in fact, theses salaries usually get a vote for a raise). Never are the expense accounts of congress critters cut. Never do we seek to cut the level of corporate welfare and bailouts. The first thing the leadership--especially the GOP, religious right, political right leadership--seeks to cut are those programs specifically designed to "promote the general welfare." Mr. Bush should have paid attention in history class so he would have known how to look back at our programs and funding efforts to understand what has not worked in the past and why. What is that old saying about history repeating itself? Well, we know why it repeats... no one bothers to look at the history and learn from it.

There are many other ways that Congress can help. We need to expand Health Savings Accounts, help small businesses through Association Health Plans, reduce costs and medical errors with better information technology, encourage price transparency and protect good doctors from junk lawsuits by passing medical liability reform. And in all we do, we must remember that the best health care decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors.

Again, this approach only works for those that already have money or a level of income that can facilitate restructuring the household budgets. Those of us already hit with unemployment, catastrophic medical issues, chronic medical conditions and low income will not be able to use such a plan. And we must remember that with the current economic trends, there are more of "us" with the inability to set aside money than "them" that can.

Immigration

Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America -- with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we are doubling the size of the Border Patrol -- and funding new infrastructure and technology.

I have to give Mr. Bush some credit. He has recognized that our immigration and migrant worker systems are broken. He is also willing to oppose his own voter base and the GOP in regard to resolving the problems associated with either. But his motivation for resolving the migrant worker problems have nothing to do with the workers and everything to do with subsidizing big agro-business who rely upon migrants coming up from Mexico to work in the fields and suffer the hardships of migrant life. And shame on the Democrats for not calling him on it and not addressing these issues long ago.

We have numerous studies and news reports--some going all the way back to the 1950s--that outline the harsh realities of migrant workers. But we have never pulled together the political will to resolve any of these problems. Housing, basic sanitation, access to school resources, basic medical and dental care, and much more remain major issues for migrant worker populations... even in the face of the work of the agricultural worker organizations and unions.

Hunting for Migrant Workers


The Faithful Consumer

Florida's Fighting Grandma - Mary Ellen Beaver, Advocate For Migrant Workers

Mecca For Misery: In This Town, A Bed Is Often Cardboard, A Bath Is Often A Creek

Videocassettes and Films About the Migrant Experience

Migrant Worker Exploitation: Florida Attorneys Found Modern Form Of Slavery In Conditions

And then we have the numerous immigrants--legal, illegal and/or smuggled--that are forced into some form of slavery, most predominantly in the sex trade and porn industries. All of which remains largely ignored by our federal government (especially in these days of hunting down terrorists at every corner), as well as treated as an after-thought by state, county and local law enforcement agencies.

Wikipedia: Sexual Slavery

New York Times Archives: Prostitution & Illegal Immigrants (20 Articles)

So while Bush is sitting out on a limb in regard to immigration, it is a sturdy limb and no one is trying to saw it off the tree.

Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border -- and that requires a temporary worker program. We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis. As a result, they won't have to try to sneak in -- and that will leave border agents free to chase down drug smugglers, and criminals, and terrorists.

Well, we cannot secure our borders when the rules governing Border Patrol actions prohibit normal law enforcement standards and procedures, including hamstringing Border Patrol officers and agents from giving chase to criminals crossing the border illegally... and even to the extent that we may have a couple of cases where defense of officer lives may have resulted in aggressive prosecution (and the details of the cases are in question, so we really do not know enough to what is what).

We will enforce our immigration laws at the work site, and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers -- so there is no excuse left for violating the law. We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals. And we need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country -- without animosity and without amnesty.

How long do any of us with a sense of history about immigration, exploitation of immigrants, and the lobbying activities of big business think this effort will last? We are a nation with a long history of governmental and corporate exploitation of immigrants (legal or otherwise)... and a penchant for looking the other way when big business acts to erect stumbling blocks to enforcement, future legislation and actually meeting the basic needs of immigrant/migrant workers.

Convictions run deep in this Capitol when it comes to immigration. Let us have a serious, civil, and conclusive debate -- so that you can pass, and I can sign, comprehensive immigration reform into law.

Yeah, verily! Let us wipe out over 150 years of prejudicial, exploitive and racist immigration policy, corporate domination and exploitation of immigrant and migrant workers, and the entire notion of modern enslavement and the working poor. Let us do that and restore our standing as the land of opportunity! Let us do that and still maintain the integrity of our borders, be prepared to deal with threats to our national security and offer our heart-felt compassion to those in need of a helping hand up. Do we really have the political will to do all of these things? Do we? Certainly such has not been the case while the GOP, religious right and political right have been in the lead.

Energy/Alternative Fuel

Extending hope and opportunity depends on a stable supply of energy that keeps America's economy running and America's environment clean. For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil. And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists -- who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments, raise the price of oil and do great harm to our economy.

First, we have to stop kowtowing to the Saudis and other OPEC controllers of our fuel supply. Second, we would have to upset the big shots running the oil and energy cartels (or should I say shared monopolies, as well as the automobile and truck manufacturing industries that have put up numerous and plentiful lobbying efforts to assure that they do not have to bite any real bullets to divorce our nation from such dependence. Then there is the continuous lobbying, often behind the scenes, by the Saudis and those that are reaping huge benefits from lucrative contracts in the "kingdom" (c.f. The American House of Saud).

But I am tired of the bitching, moaning and false promises of crawling out from underneath the burden of our dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels. If we really meant to crawl out from under the thumb of our own oil dependence, we would have done something of significance when the oil embargo of 1973 hit us hard... or at least something to offset the cartel behaviors of OPEC and the oil industry since that first crisis. But we have not done so because so many of our wealthiest and most elite have profited in huge ways because of their connection to the oil industry, OPEC and the Saudis.

These loyalties on the part of our political leadership help to explain why our own government can conclude that there is no price gouging at the gasoline pump or the oil truck when the rest of us need only look at the way we are compelled to pay significantly hiked up priced that fuel record profits and bonuses for those in the oil industry.

It is in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply -- and the way forward is through technology. We must continue changing the way America generates electric power -- by even greater use of clean coal technology ... solar and wind energy ... and clean, safe nuclear power. We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel. We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol -- using everything from wood chips, to grasses, to agricultural wastes.

In the process of encouraging innovation of energy resources and technologies, we need to assure that the patents for such innovation are not bought up and forced out of the market place, or locked up in such a way that we will pay through the nose in order to reap any benefits. We also need to assure that any innovations, research or technology developed with the benefit of tax breaks, subsidies, grants or funding with our tax dollars are shared openly with everyone capable of participating in a competing marketplace. Far too many inventions and innovations created by NASA, other federal agencies, and/or extensions of colleges and universities operating under federal and state grants turn around and create a monopolizing hold on the technology to their own benefit. Many innovations created under tax-payer grants are then turned into non-competitive marketing efforts by those that conducted the research with our funds. While we want to encourage capitalism, we do not want to promote elitism and corporatism as a part and parcel of that capitalism. We must remember that business (commerce) is supposed to benefit the general good of our nation, not just those that know how to manipulate the system in such a way that their pockets are lined with gold.

We have made a lot of progress, thanks to good policies in Washington and the strong response of the market. Now even more dramatic advances are within reach. Tonight, I ask Congress to join me in pursuing a great goal. Let us build on the work we have done and reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent in the next ten years -- thereby cutting our total imports by the equivalent of three-quarters of all the oil we now import from the Middle East.

Let us be bolder than that! Let us reduce our consumption of fossil fuels--including so-called clean coal (which is a farce)--by 50 percent in the next 10 years and by 100 percent in the next 20 years. Let us find new ways to harness wind, solar, geological sources of energy, as well as hybrid engines for vehicles, machines and electricity generation. Let us find economical ways to produce biofuels. Let us rethink the way we distribute fuels and build safe storage tanks for home or cooperative distribution. Let us renew our efforts to make our housing safer and more energy efficient by using newer technologies and construction materials, as well as more stringent building codes. Let us force those landlords that have been reaping the benefits of poorly maintained SROs and MDUs to improve the conditions that tenants have to endure. Let us build and maintain more affordable housing that employs effective energy and construction standards rather than the slap-together sub-standard approaches we have not only endured, but encouraged over the last five decades.

To reach this goal, we must increase the supply of alternative fuels, by setting a mandatory fuels standard to require 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017 -- this is nearly five times the current target. At the same time, we need to reform and modernize fuel economy standards for cars the way we did for light trucks -- and conserve up to eight and a half billion more gallons of gasoline by 2017.

Let's be bolder than that! Let us reach the target of 35 billion gallons of renewable biofuels by 2012, and double that by 2015, and triple that by 2018... and quadruple that by 2020. We, as Americans, have a proven history of rising to the needs of a crisis. We have done great things in the face of adversity, conflict and crisis. But our achievements in this regard was during a different era where our politicians actually gave a damn about meeting some of the needs of our nation... even if they did manage to line their pockets in the process.

Achieving these ambitious goals will dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but will not eliminate it. So as we continue to diversify our fuel supply, we must also step up domestic oil production in environmentally sensitive ways. And to further protect America against severe disruptions to our oil supply, I ask Congress to double the current capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

We need to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels altogether. And we need to do it as if we were facing a major crisis... because we are facing that crisis in terms of energy, economics and ecology.

America is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that will enable us to live our lives less dependent on oil. These technologies will help us become better stewards of the environment -- and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change.

This is nothing less than the same old song and dance, same old dog and pony show. Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton and now Bush have sung this tune, made similar statements, and offered similar hopes in the past. In fact, Bush has addressed these issues and ideas in almost every SOU address since he took office. It's a tired routine and will remain so until such time as we DO SOMETHING more than talk, bitch, moan and groan. And our politicians will continue to pay lip service to these matters until we force them to do something about it. If anything, George W. Bush has given us a prime example of this reality: he has refused to do anything in the best interest of our people, as a whole, unless he was absolutely forced to do so. The GOP-dominated congresses of the past four or five administrations have failed to do anything unless they were forced to do so. Nancy Pelosi's refusal to pursue impeachment and hold those who violate our Constitution accountable to our laws and processes is nothing but evidence of the same dynamic.

A future of hope and opportunity requires a fair, impartial system of justice. The lives of citizens across our nation are affected by the outcome of cases pending in our federal courts. And we have a shared obligation to ensure that the federal courts have enough judges to hear those cases and deliver timely rulings. As president, I have a duty to nominate qualified men and women to vacancies on the federal bench. And the United States Senate has a duty as well -- to give those nominees a fair hearing, and a prompt up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.

We have not seen a fair and impartial system of justice for a long time. The compulsion to stack the decks with ideological demagogues has interfered with the process of achieving a full, impartial and reliable judicial branch. Rather than looking at the record of nominees and asking whether or not this candidate understands our Constitution, our laws, our adversarial system and the fundamental truth that we must balance the rights of the individual and the society, we ask whether they are of one moral and religious preference or another. Rather than depending upon the traditions of common law we inherited from our British and European founders and framers, we seek only those that will advocate for one brand of judicial activism or another. Rather than seeking out the best legal minds with a diverse backgrounds, training, experience and expertise, we seek only those that have done favors for one political party or another.

War On Terror

For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger. Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that terrorists can cause. We have had time to take stock of our situation. We have added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us -- unless we stop them.

Unfortunately, Mr. Bush has not read the Preamble of our Constitution which places protecting us as one of seven important responsibilities our political leaders. He has failed to recognize that balancing these responsibilities is his duty. On top of that failure, Mr. Bush has created an atmosphere of fear that has empowered him to grab for more power than the Constitution allows, and a penchant for trampling our rights, principles, values and ideals.

A reasoned examination of the threat of terrorism would demonstrate that our current manner of addressing the threat is way out of perspective and far from reasonable. We are wasting resources and engaging in criminal acts to attempt making us completely safe from those that seek to do us harm. That goal is not only unreasonable, it is unachievable. Then, too, we have been misled by those that have been advocating wrong-headed methodologies (i.e. making everyone take off their shoes at the airport because one lunatic tried to sneak a bungled explosive in his shoe).

While the events of 9-11 were tragic, we are wrong to allow those events to define our nation, our way of life and the way we perceive others in our world. Allowing our fears, prejudices and anger to redefine our basic values and undermine our principles is not the way to combat terrorism, nor to make us safer. Doing such only leads us--as has been demonstrated under this president--down the path toward fascist extremism, elitism, corporatism, theocracy and authoritarian regimes.

With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflict and the course we have followed. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled -- that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy.

If this is true, why then has Mr. Bush and company operated so deeply in secret, putting up barriers to open government and open discourse at every turn of events? Why has he attempted to spin the media into his own brand of fascist media control and propaganda. Why has he gone after those that have investigated issues through leaks at the highest levels, but defended his use of these very same leaks when it was to his advantage? Why has he operated in the darkness of secrecy in everything within our government?

From the start, America and our allies have protected our people by staying on the offense. The enemy knows that the days of comfortable sanctuary, easy movement, steady financing, and free flowing communications are long over. For the terrorists, life since 9/11 has never been the same.

This dog won't hunt! Our enemies have enjoyed life without reprisal. We have largely ignored many tactics and methods necessary to track down the leaders of the movements that seek to do us harm. While we have entangled ourselves in regime change and the importation of Americanized democracy, we have ignored those that are truly aligned against us. We have acted like international bullies, picking on those whom we assessed as being susceptible to our military might... and we failed even in those efforts.

Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented -- but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an al Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coast. We broke up a Southeast Asian terrorist cell grooming operatives for attacks inside the United States. We uncovered an al Qaeda cell developing anthrax to be used in attacks against America. And just last August, British authorities uncovered a plot to blow up passenger planes bound for America over the Atlantic Ocean. For each life saved, we owe a debt of gratitude to the brave public servants who devote their lives to finding the terrorists and stopping them.

Bovine excrement! If there were such successes, there would be a media blitz touting these successes. We would not hear the intricate details or matters that would expose methods or operatives, but we would be bombarded with whatever details that would paint a favorable picture of the many unpopular actions, programs and violations of law that this administration has pushed down our throats.

Every success against the terrorists is a reminder of the shoreless ambitions of this enemy. The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at work in the world. And so long as that is the case, America is still a nation at war.

We are NOT at war! We are engaged in useless conflicts that have been nothing but examples of wrong-headed policy and failed foreign policy. But we are not at war by any legal or practical definition of the word. We are invaders and conquerers that have failed to consider what would happen after we demonstrated our capacity for military "shock and awe."

But tracking down terrorists, insurgents and others that use the tools of terror is a criminal matter calling for methods of security, law enforcement, investigation and successful social intervention rather than military force and invasion.

In the minds of the terrorists, this war began well before September 11th, and will not end until their radical vision is fulfilled. And these past five years have given us a much clearer view of the nature of this enemy. Al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremists, possessed by hatred and commanded by a harsh and narrow ideology. Take almost any principle of civilization, and their goal is the opposite. They preach with threats ... instruct with bullets and bombs ... and promise paradise for the murder of the innocent.

This is nothing less than an attempt to justify an endless era of conflict that will not benefit anyone other than the lawyers, big business (i.e. Halliburton, KBR and others) and the oil companies once the smoke and fog clears in Iraq. Our failures are too numerous to count any more. Any attempt to justify the endless use of military might in pursuit of Bush's fear-mongering is nothing less than denial and delusion. Both of which offer nothing but further harm to us and those in Iraq.

Our enemies are quite explicit about their intentions. They want to overthrow moderate governments, and establish safe havens from which to plan and carry out new attacks on our country. By killing and terrorizing Americans, they want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideology. Listen to this warning from the late terrorist Zarqawi: "We will sacrifice our blood and bodies to put an end to your dreams, and what is coming is even worse." And Osama bin Laden declared: "Death is better than living on this Earth with the unbelievers among us."

And those that seek to do so are a minority. And if we spent more time winning the hearts and minds of those that are moderate or progressive in their thinking, we would also lessen the appeal of the extremists. But in a parallel to our experience in Vietnam, we have failed to reach the ordinary people of Iraq. Oddly enough, we are seeing the same dynamic in Afghanistan and Somalia.

These men are not given to idle words, and they are just one camp in the Islamist radical movement. In recent times, it has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremists who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah -- a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken.

The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat. But whatever slogans they chant, when they slaughter the innocent, they have the same wicked purposes. They want to kill Americans, kill democracy in the Middle East and gain the weapons to kill on an even more horrific scale.

One of the problems we see in the way Mr. Bush is dealing with Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia and other places where conflict is actively occurring, is that we are lumping everyone into the "Al-Qaeda" category. As someone with some knowledge of the Middle East, the anger and conditions that fuel insurgency, terrorism and conflict are not linked to the ideological swill offered by Osama bin Laden and his associates. More important than the swill of the Al-Qaeda bandits are the conditions under which the people of the Middle East live. The divide between the ordinary person living in these regions and the elites of power, wealth, class, ethnicity or clan is at the heart of matters over there. We have made a grave error in lumping everyone that is against us into the Al-Qaeda basket.

In the sixth year since our nation was attacked, I wish I could report to you that the dangers have ended. They have not. And so it remains the policy of this government to use every lawful and proper tool of intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, and military action to do our duty, to find these enemies, and to protect the American people.

Perhaps if we stayed focused on those who attacked us we might be able to report some modicum of success in our efforts to quash Osama bin Laden, his band of extremists, and the entire Al-Qaeda movement. Perhaps if we were not hell-bent on regime change and importation of Americanized democracy in Iraq, we could focus our attention on tracking down the real bastards that planned and executed the 9-11 attacks.

This war is more than a clash of arms -- it is a decisive ideological struggle, and the security of our nation is in the balance. To prevail, we must remove the conditions that inspire blind hatred, and drove 19 men to get onto airplanes and come to kill us. What every terrorist fears most is human freedom -- societies where men and women make their own choices, answer to their own conscience, and live by their hopes instead of their resentments. Free people are not drawn to violent and malignant ideologies -- and most will choose a better way when they are given a chance. So we advance our own security interests by helping moderates, reformers, and brave voices for democracy. The great question of our day is whether America will help men and women in the Middle East to build free societies and share in the rights of all humanity. And I say, for the sake of our own security -- we must.

It's odd that Bush speaks to blind hatred, fears and a push to curtail freedom since that is exactly what Bush has put into effect in our own nation. It's even more odd that he has resorted to undermining our freedoms in order to make us safer and more free. It's even odder that we haven't bothered to seek the input and feedback of the people we are supposedly helping to assess whether or not we should get involved.

In the last two years, we have seen the desire for liberty in the broader Middle East -- and we have been sobered by the enemy's fierce reaction. In 2005, the world watched as the citizens of Lebanon raised the banner of the Cedar Revolution, drove out the Syrian occupiers and chose new leaders in free elections. In 2005, the people of Afghanistan defied the terrorists and elected a democratic legislature. And in 2005, the Iraqi people held three national elections -- choosing a transitional government, adopting the most progressive, democratic constitution in the Arab world and then electing a government under that constitution. Despite endless threats from the killers in their midst, nearly 12 million Iraqi citizens came out to vote in a show of hope and solidarity we should never forget.

I cannot speak for everyone in the Middle East, but the vast majority of folks there seem to be expressing a desire for something other than an American approach to democracy. Once again I point out that our president, his staff and Cabinet, our military leadership and our policy planners have failed to take into consideration the cultural dynamics in Iraq, Afghanistan and the entire Middle East.

The fact that there were elections in Iraq and Afghanistan does not equate to a mandate for an American concept of democracy. The fact that we have failed to implement a rebuilding of infrastructure and address the daily needs of most Iraqi and Afghani people speak louder than a promise of a better life in the distant future. These people were (are) willing to endure political domination in favor of having clean water, bread, food, power, and garbage removal.

I am so tired of listening to the same old garbage from this man, his merry men and the entrenched ideologues.

We are carrying out a new strategy in Iraq -- a plan that demands more from Iraq's elected government, and gives our forces in Iraq the reinforcements they need to complete their mission. Our goal is a democratic Iraq that upholds the rule of law, respects the rights of its people, provides them security, and is an ally in the war on terror.

It is NOT a new strategy. It is the same old song and dance wrapped in a more humble package. The fact is--and this fact is demonstrated by the numerous failures in Iraq (and in Afghanistan)--the Iraqi security forces are not up to the task of securing their own nation and the political will over there is weaker than it is over here.

In order to make progress toward this goal, the Iraqi government must stop the sectarian violence in its capital. But the Iraqis are not yet ready to do this on their own. So we are deploying reinforcements of more than 20,000 additional soldiers and Marines to Iraq. The vast majority will go to Baghdad, where they will help Iraqi forces to clear and secure neighborhoods, and serve as advisers embedded in Iraqi Army units. With Iraqis in the lead, our forces will help secure the city by chasing down terrorists, insurgents, and roaming death squads. And in Anbar province -- where al Qaeda terrorists have gathered and local forces have begun showing a willingness to fight them -- we are sending an additional 4,000 United States Marines, with orders to find the terrorists and clear them out. We did not drive al Qaeda out of their safe haven in Afghanistan only to let them set up a new safe haven in a free Iraq.

The Iraqi government is a loosely associated group of independent agendas and allegiances to anything but the success of a united Iraq. Al-Qaeda is not the pressing motivation behind the violence, partisan politics, sectarian allegiances in Iraq. The struggle over oil wealth, political power and religious domination are at the root of violence in Iraq. Our failure to recognize these realities is at the root of our failure in Iraq.

The people of Iraq want to live in peace, and now is the time for their government to act. Iraq's leaders know that our commitment is not open ended. They have promised to deploy more of their own troops to secure Baghdad -- and they must do so. They have pledged that they will confront violent radicals of any faction or political party. They need to follow through, and lift needless restrictions on Iraqi and Coalition forces, so these troops can achieve their mission of bringing security to all of the people of Baghdad. Iraq's leaders have committed themselves to a series of benchmarks to achieve reconciliation -- to share oil revenues among all of Iraq's citizens ... to put the wealth of Iraq into the rebuilding of Iraq ... to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's civic life ... to hold local elections ... and to take responsibility for security in every Iraqi province. But for all of this to happen, Baghdad must be secured. And our plan will help the Iraqi government take back its capital and make good on its commitments.

And what makes us think that the Iraqi politicians can fulfill their pledges?

My fellow citizens, our military commanders and I have carefully weighed the options. We discussed every possible approach. In the end, I chose this course of action because it provides the best chance of success. Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq -- because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far reaching.

Discussion implies some form of listening, understanding and comprehension. If Mr. Bush has engaged in any sort of genuine, active listening, we would not be presented with the a more modestly wrapped rehashing of the "stay the course" plan that he offered to us just a few days before the SOU address. In the end Mr. Bush chose the course of action that continued to feed his ego, fulfill his ideological aspirations and followed his world view despite all evidence contrary to his entrenched ideas.

If American forces step back before Baghdad is secure, the Iraqi government would be overrun by extremists on all sides. We could expect an epic battle between Shia extremists backed by Iran, and Sunni extremists aided by al Qaeda and supporters of the old regime. A contagion of violence could spill out across the country -- and in time the entire region could be drawn into the conflict.

Not if we withdraw with a well-reasoned plan, invoke a strategy of containment, and force the Iraqis to confront their own evils and problems directly. Even if it means an internal struggle, sometimes people have to be left to their own devices. Our presence in Iraq creates an artificial environment in which the Iraqis will never have the opportunity, motivation or impetus to move forward at a pace required to resolve their issues. As in the case of family dysfunction, we must allow a crisis to play out until fundamental changes occur. Such was the case in our own civil war, such is the case in Iraq.

The war on terror we fight today is a generational struggle that will continue long after you and I have turned our duties over to others. That is why it is important to work together so our Nation can see this great effort through. Both parties and both branches should work in close consultation. And this is why I propose to establish a special advisory council on the war on terror, made up of leaders in Congress from both political parties. We will share ideas for how to position America to meet every challenge that confronts us. And we will show our enemies abroad that we are united in the goal of victory.

This is a flowery way of saying that Bush has hopes that this "war on terror" will keep us engaged in conflict for the next 20 to 50 years, creating the same dynamics as we experienced in the Cold War... an "us versus them" mentality and entrenchment.

One of the first steps we can take together is to add to the ranks of our military -- so that the American Armed Forces are ready for all the challenges ahead. Tonight I ask the Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer Civilian Reserve Corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them. And it would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.

We do not need a military buildup. What we need to do is stop being the dictator of freedom (an oxymoronic notion from the gitgo). We need to keep our nose out of matters that do not directly concern our security and our basic interests. When we do get involved, we must strictly adhere to our own ideals, values and principles because selling ourselves short only hurts us.

If we are going to develop a Civilian Corps, let us do so in such a way as we address our own needs first. We should not be addressing poverty, health care, infrastructure and conditions of liberty outside of our borders when we have not addressed them within our borders. Until such time as we have a leg to stand upon in these matters, we cannot impart our "wisdom" to others.

Americans can have confidence in the outcome of this struggle -- because we are not in this struggle alone. We have a diplomatic strategy that is rallying the world to join in the fight against extremism. In Iraq, multinational forces are operating under a mandate from the United Nations -- and we are working with Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the Gulf states to increase support for Iraq's government. The United Nations has imposed sanctions on Iran, and made it clear that the world will not allow the regime in Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons. With the other members of the Quartet -- the UN, the European Union, and Russia -- we are pursuing diplomacy to help bring peace to the Holy Land, and pursuing the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security.

Bovine excrement! If we were really pursuing these things we would be on Israel's case to adhere to the tenets of basic human rights and decency in the manner in which they treat others. We would force Saudi Arabia to intervene instead of supplying the terrorists with financing. We would issue ultimatums to Syria and Iran that would result in isolating these rogue nations from international commerce if they refused to stop supplying money, arms and technical support to Hamas, Hezbollah, the Egyptian Brotherhood, the PLO, Al-Qaeda and other extremists.

In Afghanistan, NATO has taken the lead in turning back the Taliban and al Qaeda offensive -- the first time the Alliance has deployed forces outside the North Atlantic area. Together with our partners in China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea, we are pursuing intensive diplomacy to achieve a Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons. And we will continue to speak out for the cause of freedom in places like Cuba, Belarus, and Burma -- and continue to awaken the conscience of the world to save the people of Darfur.

Is this why the opium crop in Afghanistan continues to grow larger every year? Is this why we are struggling with the Pakistani government to deal with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda groups that use Pakistan as a safe haven? Is this why we are experiencing major skirmishes with Taliban raiders? Is this why tribal warlords continue to run the show in all but the region in direct proximity to Kabul?

AIDS/Africa

American foreign policy is more than a matter of war and diplomacy. Our work in the world is also based on a timeless truth: To whom much is given, much is required. We hear the call to take on the challenges of hunger, poverty, and disease -- and that is precisely what America is doing. We must continue to fight HIV/AIDS, especially on the continent of Africa -- and because you funded our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the number of people receiving life-saving drugs has grown from 50,000 to more than 800,000 in three short years. I ask you to continue funding our efforts to fight HIV/AIDS. I ask you to provide $1.2 billion over five years so we can combat malaria in 15 African countries. I ask that you fund the Millennium Challenge Account, so that American aid reaches the people who need it, in nations where democracy is on the rise and corruption is in retreat. And let us continue to support the expanded trade and debt relief that are the best hope for lifting lives and eliminating poverty.

Isn't it odd that Mr. Bush's words place WAR in front of diplomacy? Why haven't we really spent a lot of money and effort to assure that our humanitarian aid is effective in reaching those in need? Why haven't we been successful in assuring NGOs and ministries serving as conduits for food, medical supplies and technology are protected from war lords, raiders and corrupt officials? Why haven't we been successful in garnering more international support from member nations and allies of the United Nations, NATO, SEATO and OAS?

On the whole, this address was a waste of air time. It did not focus on the status of our nation but offered apologetics--misleading apologetics--for Bush's world view, failure to adhere to our laws and principles, and a thumbing of his nose at us for not taking him to task over his intransigence. Well there is no acceptable form of apologetics for violating our Constitution, our values, our ideals, our laws or our trust. In common parlance, all Mr. Bush proved in this address is his propensity for remaining an intractable ass.