NationStates Jolt Archive

I have not decided as I think it will be the usual "don't worry be happy everything is great"

Might be an X-Files night for me......

Oh I'll watch it.

I just have to figure out the rules for this year's associated drinking game.

Drinking on the his favourite buzzwords "Terror" and "Freedom" is just too easy and predictable (and too hard on my liver!).


I'm looking for some more subtle phrases to pour the tequila to this year.

Like...

"enemy who lurks"
"no doubt in my mind"
"surveillance"
and
...


Any ideas?

i'll toast every time he refers to democracy in iraq... the downfall of Saddam... etc.

Damn! Where is my head! A drinking game is a good idea.

Hmmm How about:

Judge Alito
Reconcilliation
Working together
Tax cuts
Assorted Religious references.

Damn! Where is my head! A drinking game is a good idea.

Hmmm How about:

Judge Alito
Reconcilliation
Working together
Tax cuts
Assorted Religious references.
Iran--it'll be all over this thing.

And no, I won't watch it. If I want heartburn, I'll go to the gas station and eat a burrito out of the museum case they call a freezer.

"Iran", like "Freedom" and "Terror" are givens. If you want to include them in your drinking game then just concede that you intend to get blotto, chug the tequila, and don't even bother with the speech....


:p

Iran--it'll be all over this thing.

And no, I won't watch it. If I want heartburn, I'll go to the gas station and eat a burrito out of the museum case they call a freezer.

Speaking of heartburn...

I had been convinced by the tirades of you and others that Bush was done, his political power spent, his future on the ropes, no ability to get anything anywhere anytime through Congress... unpopular, etc., etc.

So, how did he get Alito through? Why didn't the Democrats remain unified?

Listening to how hopeless a political situation Bush is in from you, and then watching Kerry and Kennedy ream themselves in public is a severe contradiction.

"Iran", like "Freedom" and "Terror" are givens. If you want to include them in your drinking game then just concede that you intend to get blotto, chug the tequila, and don't even bother with the speech....


:p


:D Ok that was funny!

Speaking of heartburn...

I had been convinced by the tirades of you and others that Bush was done, his political power spent, his future on the ropes, no ability to get anything anywhere anytime through Congress... unpopular, etc., etc.

So, how did he get Alito through? Why didn't the Democrats remain unified?

Listening to how hopeless a political situation Bush is in from you, and then watching Kerry and Kennedy ream themselves in public is a severe contradiction.

Where have the democrats been unifed? They really have gotten lost. Hell at times I can't tell who is the Demo and who is the Republican. ;)


I am not going to blast Kerry or Kennedy. They took a stance and stayed with it.

Where have the democrats been unifed? They really have gotten lost. Hell at times I can't tell who is the Demo and who is the Republican. ;)

I am not going to blast Kerry or Kennedy. They took a stance and stayed with it.

What I want to know is this:

For all of the Democrats who hate Bush on this forum, have any of you asked yourself why, in the face of what you assert is the "worst" or "most unpopular" President in the history of the United States, can the Democrats not get their shoelaces tied properly?

Looks like they're along for the ride, kicking and screaming only occasionally.

bush is so unpopular, i bet he will not be reelected.

I will watch it, just to see if he makes anymore "Bushvish." or however it's spelled.

bush is so unpopular, i bet he will not be reelected.

Ahm? Is that a Joke?

He can't be re-elected since it's his second term.

bush is so unpopular, i bet he will not be reelected.

ROFLMAO. That's the funniest thing I've ever read on NS.

What I want to know is this:

For all of the Democrats who hate Bush on this forum, have any of you asked yourself why, in the face of what you assert is the "worst" or "most unpopular" President in the history of the United States, can the Democrats not get their shoelaces tied properly?

Looks like they're along for the ride, kicking and screaming only occasionally.

I don't know if he has reached Harding's level yet. Too many things are hidden under the national security argument.

I guess the question would be to ask what exactly has he accomplished?

Tax Cuts? How are is that for a Republican to get done with a Republican congress?

So what has he done to not deserve the label?

I don't know if he has reached Harding's level yet. Too many things are hidden under the national security argument.

I guess the question would be to ask what exactly has he accomplished?

Tax Cuts? How are is that for a Republican to get done with a Republican congress?

So what has he done to not deserve the label?

The economy is doing pretty well for a President who is claimed by Democrats to be bad for the economy.

The question I have is - if you accept the labels thrown at him - why isn't his unpopularity translating into a Democratic Party that can keep him from nominating whoever he wants to the Supreme Court?

The question I have is - if you accept the labels thrown at him - why isn't his unpopularity translating into a Democratic Party that can keep him from nominating whoever he wants to the Supreme Court?

Simple. The Democratic party really doesn't have a message anymore. They tried to play republican-lite and are finding out that *shock* only republicans can be republicans. They can't even take a stance on the big things. IF the Iraq war is wrong, stand by it and argue it. Even conservatives can respect a liberal standing for his principles no matter how misguided they perseve them to be.

They really don't have any real interesting people. I have taken a liking to Obama but I doubt he will get a serious shot at anything.

Speaking of heartburn...

I had been convinced by the tirades of you and others that Bush was done, his political power spent, his future on the ropes, no ability to get anything anywhere anytime through Congress... unpopular, etc., etc.

So, how did he get Alito through? Why didn't the Democrats remain unified?

Listening to how hopeless a political situation Bush is in from you, and then watching Kerry and Kennedy ream themselves in public is a severe contradiction.
One thing you never heard from me was that he wouldn't be able to get stuff through Congress--he's still got the whip hand there, because his own people haven't turned on him. After the '06 elections, that might be another story, but for now he's still got the power. The Dems have been able to beat back a couple of things--the dismantling of Social Security is the best example of that--but people vote on what you do to Social Seecurity. They don't vote on Supreme Court Justices, which is why I thought a filibuster was a no-lose situation for the Dems.

As to why the Dems didn't remain unified, getting a filibuster to hold is always dicey, even at the best of times. I wish it would have held, but getting 25, 26 Dems to vote for it, including the leadership and prominent moderates like Feinstein is a substantial step, because it meant they looked back toward the base instead of the ever-mushy center. And on the final vote, only four Dems crossed over, and one Republican crossed over. Of those four Dems, Nelson, Johnson and Conrad are all from deep red states and Byrd, well, who knows why he votes the way he does at times. 40 of 44 voted against Alito--that's pretty unified in my book, at least compared to the Scalia vote.

I haven't watched a State of the Union by the Shrub yet, why start now that he's a lame duck? *shrug*

"The Union is Strong."

There. Saved you the trouble. :rolleyes:

One thing you never heard from me was that he wouldn't be able to get stuff through Congress--he's still got the whip hand there, because his own people haven't turned on him. After the '06 elections, that might be another story, but for now he's still got the power. The Dems have been able to beat back a couple of things--the dismantling of Social Security is the best example of that--but people vote on what you do to Social Seecurity. They don't vote on Supreme Court Justices, which is why I thought a filibuster was a no-lose situation for the Dems.

As to why the Dems didn't remain unified, getting a filibuster to hold is always dicey, even at the best of times. I wish it would have held, but getting 25, 26 Dems to vote for it, including the leadership and prominent moderates like Feinstein is a substantial step, because it meant they looked back toward the base instead of the ever-mushy center. And on the final vote, only four Dems crossed over, and one Republican crossed over. Of those four Dems, Nelson, Johnson and Conrad are all from deep red states and Byrd, well, who knows why he votes the way he does at times. 40 of 44 voted against Alito--that's pretty unified in my book, at least compared to the Scalia vote.

I think that in mid-terms, the people who vote are your hard core constituency. So for Dems, they had to do the filibuster attempt to prevent from looking like they were taking it in the *** again. And Bush had to nominate Alito and the Republicans had to vote for him to keep the core happy on their end.

The core does vote on things like Supreme Court.

As for Byrd, he has a white sheet at home that he wears out at night, and I think that explains him completely.

I'll watch it because I like hearing the President speak and I want to know what he is going to say.

I'll watch it because I like hearing the President speak and I want to know what he is going to say.

Like hearing him speak? Orator is not exactly a word that can be applied to him.

Like hearing him speak? Orator is not exactly a word that can be applied to him.

I always listen to what the president has to say. I sat through the ones of the guy before him too.

Like hearing him speak? Orator is not exactly a word that can be applied to him.
I'll send you the list of "code words".

I'll send you the list of "code words".

Ahhh thank you! ;)

Ahhh thank you! ;)

For the Democrats who might be listening, you only have to worry about two phrases:

"The chair is against the wall."

and

"Execute Order 66."

I'll watch it because I like hearing the President speak and I want to know what he is going to say.

Damn, how I hate hearing that man speak. I always read the State of the Union. I watch the State of the State because my Governor has a grasp of basic English, but although I do believe Bush is smarter than many give him credit for (not that I like him, mind you) language skills aren't his strong point.

Always do.

Im gonna watch just to say what he's about Iran. If he mentions "grave threat" or "mushroom clouds", we'll be in there by the end of the year. I also want to see if he slips in a steriod reference.

Im gonna watch just to say what he's about Iran. If he mentions "grave threat" or "mushroom clouds", we'll be in there by the end of the year. I also want to see if he slips in a steriod reference.

Is this guy sane?

The State of the Union Address is going to sound like a Fatboy Slim mix with the following words:

"Freedom"
"Terror"
"Evil"
"9-11" (Not a word but still)
"Democracy"
"Iraq"
"Nukular" (Again not a word but hey, it's Shrub)
"Coalition"

"Anybody going to watch the State of the Union?"

Not if I can help it, no!

What do you mean by "an X-Files night?" I LOVE the X-Files!

For the Democrats who might be listening, you only have to worry about two phrases:

"The chair is against the wall."

and

"Execute Order 66."

Would only Democrats know where the "Execute Order 66" comes from? :confused:

Would only Democrats know where the "Execute Order 66" comes from? :confused:

Nope, us Republicans are Star Wars fans too.

Is this guy sane?
What? Its not like he hasnt slipped in roid reference before...

What? Its not like he hasnt slipped in roid reference before...

First I heard of him saying something on that.

First I heard of him saying something on that.

He talked about steroid abuse in professional sports at the end of the last year's State of the Union.

He's a baseball fan, used to work in Baseball, so he threw something in there about it last year when it was starting to become a moderately big deal.

He's the President; he's allowed to have some pet issues.

He talked about steroid abuse in professional sports at the end of the last year's State of the Union.

He's a baseball fan, used to work in Baseball, so he threw something in there about it last year when it was starting to become a moderately big deal.

He's the President; he's allowed to have some pet issues.

Thank you.

I do not watch sports so I didn't know.

Thanks for clarifying it :)

Nope, us Republicans are Star Wars fans too.

So you guys are not all bad. :p

Really though does anyone think Bush is going to say anything new? It'll be the same rhetoric as always. Iraq this, WMD's that, terrorists, Axis of Evil, Americans support him... Trying not to roll my eyes already. Sorry, failed. :rolleyes:

He talked about steroid abuse in professional sports at the end of the last year's State of the Union.

He's a baseball fan, used to work in Baseball, so he threw something in there about it last year when it was starting to become a moderately big deal.

He's the President; he's allowed to have some pet issues.

Nah trading Sammy Sosa says he going get to be a fan! :p

I'll watch as I usually do. I like to listen to what he has to say.

And I rarely give a flying fuck for anyone's criticism of same.

If the President is viewed as not addressing the nation often enough, people shriek. When he does address the nation, we have bitter know-it-alls criticizing him in advance.

Yes, because I am in on the President's secret plan. He's going to pull out an American flag with fifty-one states and announce that Europe is now part of the U.S. ;)

Although, since the government won't want to make all new flags, the fifty-first will just be colored on with magic marker.

I'm not watching it.

If I want to see a sad middle-aged man masturbating, I'll go to an adult theatre. :p

So you guys are not all bad. :p

Really though does anyone think Bush is going to say anything new? It'll be the same rhetoric as always. Iraq this, WMD's that, terrorists, Axis of Evil, Americans support him... Trying not to roll my eyes already. Sorry, failed. :rolleyes:

I watch it less for what he says (although that's important) than for how he says it.

The State of the Union is high political theater, and so much goes into crafting it that there's a lot of nuances you don't get if you don't watch and listen.

How long it takes for him to bring up 9/11...how long it takes to bring up Iraq...if he mentions Coretta Scott King...if he acknowledges Justice Alito...which domestic programs are highlighted...what comes first - domestic or foreign policy...what DOESN'T he say...who he uses as his 'prop'...

All this stuff means something and gives you a good clue as to how 2006 is going to play out, especially the elections in the fall.

Plus I enjoy listening and seeing how good his speechwriters are. Speechwriting is one of my fortes, so I like seeing how the "masters" do it (not Bush - his speechwriting team).

It's usually an interesting show. And I also like to see how many things I can bring up that the talking heads bring up after, too.