State of the Union Address 2006

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/1/27/11451/1587

....as seen in my unvisited thread

Ask a Republican

and then the govt just sort of forgot about actually doing it

Excerpts were released in advance of the 9 p.m. EST speech.

One is tempted to sneer, "No shit, Sherlock", but that would be petty of one.

TRANSLATION (courtesy Moogle Language Tools): "You may want me to call a halt to endless, ruinously expensive wars, but the only way we're going to stave off the fate that befell imperial Rome is to fight everybody on the planet, one by one, or all together if necessary, under my leadership. They all hate us anyhow, so let's drop the big one now."

well he allowed that there might be something worse, which is practically a thumbs-up from him. anyway, i don't have any stanley kubrick movies at home to watch.

WIZARDISHUNGRY

"Gee, thanks Senator Feinstein, I'd love to come along!"

Reminded me a lot of when WCW tried to restart the NWO for the fourth or fifth.

---

• Iran said to have nuclear warhead plans
• Activist Cindy Sheehan arrested at Capitol
• Japan to pull all its troops from Iraq by May
• Supreme Court blocks Florida execution

---

like, despite bush annointing himself with the blood of the soldiers he's fruitlessly sent to die, despite talking of a war that presidents of both parties will fight (assuming he hopes and thinks repubs will win in 2008, that means he foresees at least another seven years of "the war on terror"??) it's like, is this the least momentous state of the union ever, or what???? i just get this huge sense that so much is out of his hands now.

haha awesome - "congress did not act last year on my program to save social security" - congress erupts with applause!!!

and then he raises his voice and actually yells at them!! haha lovely

1: Rank of 2005 as hottest year on record
(tied with 1998), according to NASA.

100%: Increase in intensity and duration
of hurricanes and tropical storms
since the 1970's, according to a 2005 MIT study.

$100 billion: Estimate of damage caused by
hurricanes hitting the U.S. coast in
2005 alone, according to the National Climatic Data Center.

2030: Year by which Glacier National Park will have no glaciers left, according to the U.S. Geological Survey predictions.

400,000: Square miles of Arctic sea ice that have melted in the last 30 years (roughly the size of Texas), threatening polar bear habitats and further accelerating global warming worldwide, according to the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment.

15%-37%: Amount of plant and animal species that global warming could wipe out by 2050.

1: Rank of the United States as a global warming polluter
compared to other large nations.

6: Number of former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency leaders who say the U.S. is not doing enough to fight global warming.

0: Number of bills passed by Congress to cut global warming pollution.

0: Number of times President Bush has mentioned the words "global warming," or "climate change" in previous State of the Union addresses.

Source

Of course, we know why he won't mention the environment this time either: Al Gore invented it.

...no embarrassing gaffs

Is that better or worse than tapping her phone?

xpost

possibly! No, uh, I like Tim Kaine a lot, he'll do a good job governing VA, but he's not the guy to talk about foreign policy. I am guessing the party thought, OK, he's our red state candidate who won an election, therefore he's the guy to give the speech, but it was odd. I was watching with a bunch of Congress staff peoples & they were like, d'oh, uh.. not so hot, there and again Kaine will be fine at his actual job but they really could use someone to hammer on the foreign policy/Iraq war issues in a real serious way.

Granted, the comment above about solving a heroin addiction by growing our own poppies is OTM... But while most of us thought of this statement as an obvious "uh DUH!", I'm sure many who watched the speech didn't think too clearly about the issue before, and might now. I HIGHLY stress "might", of course.

Then again, Bush stating that the U.S. is addicted to oil is also admitting that the U.S. acted like violent heroin junkies by attacking Iraq to get the ultimate fix pipelined back, which kinda counters the sentiment of the statement... oh right, we're there for "freedom".. forgot about that. (oops)

Savor the irony that Bush, who is born into oil wealth says "You guys are addicted to oil!" OK shittymouth, why don't you impose taxes on oil companies or something - OH YEAH THEYRE YOUR FRIENDS!!!!!

I think it was a good thing for Bush to say that the US is "addicted to oil", but it would be a much better thing if he actually did something about it. Increasing research funding for alternative fuels is nice, but an SUV tax would be better.

OK, was Sheehan arrested for a t-shirt or a banner?

Stephen Colbert

More on CS:

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2006/02/sheehans_shirt.html

Disruptive? Now, "offensive" I could see. Disruption usually requires something a bit more lively than just sitting down and wearing clothes.

"If Condoleeza Rice were a Wheel of Fortune contestant, she'd still be staring at the board with a blank expression and an equally blank mind long after the vowels had been chosen, the puzzle solved, the show wrapped, the studio lights dimmed, and Vanna White home doing whatever it is she does to stay peppy."

We could start with adults not being children, and the Congress -- where one would expect the Bill of Rights to actually mean something -- not being a school. What, would Bush supporters have been unable to restrain themselves from acting out if they had seen Sheehan's shirt? We're talking grown men and women here, right?

aw, xpost

(I would also be less bothered if this stuff didn't apparently happen to Bush opponents with some regularity, being removed from appearances and whatnot.)

Anyways, Sheehan's cause is helped by being arrested. If they would have left her alone, and kept the cameras off her, I wouldn't be typing this paragraph.

And another thing, the members of congress don't bring in banners and flags, but ain't the jumping up and orgasmic clapping for saying he's for education nearly as over-the-top???

WASHINGTON - Capitol Police dropped a charge of unlawful conduct against anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan on Wednesday and apologized for ejecting her and a congressman's wife from President Bush's State of the Union address for wearing T-shirts with war messages.

ADVERTISEMENT

"The officers made a good faith, but mistaken effort to enforce an old unwritten interpretation of the prohibitions about demonstrating in the Capitol," Capitol Police Chief Terrance Gainer said in a statement late Wednesday.

"The policy and procedures were too vague," he added. "The failure to adequately prepare the officers is mine."

The extraordinary statement came a day after police removed Sheehan and Beverly Young, wife of Rep. C.W. "Bill" Young, R-Fla., from the visitors gallery Tuesday night. Sheehan was taken away in handcuffs before Bush's arrival at the Capitol and charged with a misdemeanor, while Young left the gallery and therefore was not arrested, Gainer said.

"Neither guest should have been confronted about the expressive T-shirts," Gainer's statement said.

Gainer added that he was asking the U.S. attorney's office to drop the charge against Sheehan. The statement also said he apologized to the Youngs and "share the department's plans for avoiding this in the future."

"A similar message has been left with Mrs. Sheehan," Gainer said.

I hate cops.

it's tradition, deal with it.

It is good to note that the Capitol police understood, upon reflection, they had no leg to stand on. One can't help but wonder if they knew this beforehand, and decided that it is easier to ask forgiveness than to ask persmission.

uhm, DUH. of course that's what they did. Someone in Team Dubya said "get that woman out of here" and the cops said "YESSIR!"

Sheehan's T-shirt alluded to the number of soldiers killed in Iraq: "2245 Dead. How many more?" ...

Young's shirt had just the opposite message: "Support the Troops — Defending Our Freedom."

Dear Friends,

As most of you have probably heard, I was arrested before the State of the Union Address tonight.

I am speechless with fury at what happened and with grief over what we have lost in our country.

* CindySheehan's diary :: ::
*

There have been lies from the police and distortions by the press. (Shocker) So this is what really happened:

This afternoon at the People's State of the Union Address in DC where I was joined by Congresspersons Lynn Woolsey and John Conyers, Ann Wright, Malik Rahim and John Cavanagh, Lynn brought me a ticket to the State of the Union Address. At that time, I was wearing the shirt that said: 2245 Dead. How many more?

After the PSOTU press conference, I was having second thoughts about going to the SOTU at the Capitol. I didn't feel comfortable going. I knew George Bush would say things that would hurt me and anger me and I knew that I couldn't disrupt the address because Lynn had given me the ticket and I didn't want to be disruptive out of respect for her. I, in fact, had given the ticket to John Bruhns who is in Iraq Veterans Against the War. However, Lynn's office had already called the media and everyone knew I was going to be there so I sucked it up and went.

I got the ticket back from John, and I met one of Congresswoman Barbara Lee's staffers in the Longworth Congressional Office building and we went to the Capitol via the undergroud tunnel. I went through security once, then had to use the rest room and went through security again.

My ticket was in the 5th gallery, front row, fourth seat in. The person who in a few minutes was to arrest me, helped me to my seat.

I had just sat down and I was warm from climbing 3 flights of stairs back up from the bathroom so I unzipped my jacket. I turned to the right to take my left arm out, when the same officer saw my shirt and yelled; "Protester." He then ran over to me, hauled me out of my seat and roughly (with my hands behind my back) shoved me up the stairs. I said something like "I'm going, do you have to be so rough?" By the way, his name is Mike Weight.

The officer ran with me to the elevators yelling at everyone to move out of the way. When we got to the elevators, he cuffed me and took me outside to await a squad car. On the way out, someone behind me said, "That's Cindy Sheehan." At which point the officer who arrested me said: "Take these steps slowly." I said, "You didn't care about being careful when you were dragging me up the other steps." He said, "That's because you were protesting." Wow, I get hauled out of the People's House because I was, "Protesting."

I was never told that I couldn't wear that shirt into the Congress. I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things...I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later. I was immediately, and roughly (I have the bruises and muscle spasms to prove it) hauled off and arrested for "unlawful conduct."

After I had my personal items inventoried and my fingers printed, a nice Sgt. came in and looked at my shirt and said, "2245, huh? I just got back from there."

I told him that my son died there. That's when the enormity of my loss hit me. I have lost my son. I have lost my First Amendment rights. I have lost the country that I love. Where did America go? I started crying in pain.

What did Casey die for? What did the 2244 other brave young Americans die for? What are tens of thousands of them over there in harm's way for still? For this? I can't even wear a shrit that has the number of troops on it that George Bush and his arrogant and ignorant policies are responsible for killing.

I wore the shirt to make a statement. The press knew I was going to be there and I thought every once in awhile they would show me and I would have the shirt on. I did not wear it to be disruptive, or I would have unzipped my jacket during George's speech. If I had any idea what happens to people who wear shirts that make the neocons uncomfortable that I would be arrested...maybe I would have, but I didn't.

There have already been many wild stories out there.

I have some lawyers looking into filing a First Amendment lawsuit against the government for what happened tonight. I will file it. It is time to take our freedoms and our country back.

I don't want to live in a country that prohibits any person, whether he/she has paid the ulitmate price for that country, from wearing, saying, writing, or telephoning any negative statements about the government. That's why I am going to take my freedoms and liberties back. That's why I am not going to let Bushco take anything else away from me...or you.

I am so appreciative of the couple of hundred of protesters who came to the jail while I was locked up to show their support....we have so much potential for good...there is so much good in so many people.

Four hours and 2 jails after I was arrested, I was let out. Again, I am so upset and sore it is hard to think straight.

Keep up the struggle...I promise you I will too.

Love and peace soon,
Cindy

I did not couch my comment in terms of their targeting Ms. Sheehan specifically, but in broad sweeping terms - of whether they calculated the wrath of their bosses would fall down hotter on their necks if they allowed one breath of protest to make it before the television cameras, than any possible wrath they might face, if they just strongarmed potential problems offstage and then were forced to eat crow later. That way they look bad, not Bush - a PR version of taking a bullet.

If you don't think this kind of situation hasn't ever been discussed among the Capitol police, quietly among themselves, then you are probably naive.

A-ok. I won't point out the sacred absurdities ever again.
(fingers crossed)

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/13767738.htm?source=rss&channel=krwashington_nation

This shouldn't baffle you in the slightest. Bush was following the Clinton playbook to the letter this time. These are school uniforms and V-chips.

Still, unlike Japan and China, which have plans to import Brazilian ethanol, the Bush administration has retained a 54 cent tariff on every gallon of imported ethanol.

"It's remarkable that we're not taxing fuel from Saudi Arabia while we're taxing fuel from Brazil," said Gal Luft, a co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, a research organization in Washington that specializes in energy issues.

Meanwhile, the official Democratic Party response to Mr. Bush's fucking nonsense was the stupendous fatuousness of newly-elected Virginia Governor Tim Kaine's rebuttal, a saccharine gruel of platitudes and panderings that made me want to shoot members of my own party on sight.

History will look back in wonder and nausea at the twitterings of these idiots as the world they pretended to run lurched into darkness.

http://jameshowardkunstler.typepad.com/

he did!

It's nice to think that somehow we've arrived at an age that doesn't require big national ideas and big national risks, and our leaders have nothing more to do than manage our vast machinery. But I don't think that's so.

how about anyone who's for expanding the EITC?

I would love a quality passenger rail system that did nothing to hurt our budget. I would also like a daily government-provided wild strawberry waiting at my front door. We have a major divided highway system in our country (which could fit 20 Latvias inside it), an ingrained automobile culture, and cheap airfare. Rail would be nice, but we don't need it.

Kunstler's response to that is, How do we know the change is going to be gradual? What if it's sudden and disruptive? Maybe the market won't have time to adjust. We are facing an impending catastrophe and we must act now to prepare for it.

However, I think the fact that oil prices have been increasing fairly rapidly yet still smoothly and steadily over the past couple of years supports the first view - that the change will be gradual enough for the market to react.

America's fatal dependency on oil isn't even about commuters with dinky stupid office jobs in cities - it's the fact that everything you buy or sell travels some huge distance in the trailer of a truck with 18 retreaded tires, in questionable mechanical condition and running on diesel over roads paid for by everyone's taxes. That's what's going to kill us, when those guys start to squirm. They burn oil all day and all night while you and I only do it for an hour a day. And if they don't burn that oil, you and I don't eat. Pay up. "Why do we need trains? Cars work just fine!" For one person's groceries, maybe, not 250 million.

huh?

America's fatal dependency on oil isn't even about commuters with dinky stupid office jobs in cities - it's the fact that everything you buy or sell travels some huge distance in the trailer of a truck with 18 retreaded tires, in questionable mechanical condition and running on diesel over roads paid for by everyone's taxes.

i'd argue that it's more to do with almost every manufacturing process you can think of, way way before products get to market. the shortsighted thinking in all this, to me, is thinking of gasoline as solely a transportation fuel.

Of course the govt. investment required for high-speed rail would be sustantial. Of course it would impact "the budget." Everything does, especially huge projects whose benefits will be measured over decades rather than next quarter. I don't see how this is a criticism.

The DOT estimated in the mid-1990s that there is enough demand for a high speed rail system serving major metro groupings (journeys up to 500 miles or so) that the industry would be sustainable and could turn a profit. Yes, we have a "car culture" in the US, but every time a mass transit option has sprung up here, the public has flocked to it.

For a thorough breakdown of the rail options, you can look at this CBO report - http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=4571&sequence=0&from=0

interesting. are there any subsequent studies? the world has sped up a lot since the mid-90s, and it's easier to communicate across distances. would demand have fallen?

185 mph

xpost - o i see, yes

This graph seems to show that transportation is the major use of oil in the US (>60%).

Another interesting graph:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/oil_market_basics/images/conspcap.gif

I do. I like trains better than planes or cars. I just don't think it's necessary right now. Thinking about prospects, though, it some potential lines in the Southeast started to seem logical, i.e. Hampton Roads-Richmond-Raleigh-Charlotte-Atlanta-Nashville-Memphis (or Louisville?), but is there a geographical reason Nashville isn't already rail-connected?

too many proles, natch

does that make you feel good?

Southwest Airlines to thread, pls. JetBlue to follow with AirTran in tow.

I dunno I just can't honestly see how anybody could be AGAINST a quality passenger rail system

there's not a viable market for one in the US. Light rail is glamorous but inflexible; busing in metro areas is a more cost effective solution. gabbneb OTM. Anyone want to pull out the financials for Amtrak so we can discuss our culture's adaptation of choo-choos?

Anyone want to pull out the financials for Amtrak so we can discuss our culture's adaptation of choo-choos?

Good lord, don, why don't we also pull out the financials for the auto companies after we stop maintaining and building all the roads for them with our tax money? I am so fucking sick of that shit, it's goddamn nonsense if you take a split second to think about it

At any rate this argument is a waste of time since we have one group assuming catastrophic results if we continue to consume oil at current rates and another group assuming that the American Way Of Life can persist indefinitely or change to adapt to new conditions at such a gradual pace that nobody really notices.

don, the DOT says otherwise. full report

Anyone want to pull out the financials for Amtrak so we can discuss our culture's adaptation of choo-choos?

OMB link, with analysis, already provided. and tom obviously on the money. you might also want to look at the positive effects on 1) airfares 2) wasted time at the airport 3) highway congestion 4) highway maintenance -- for starters -- if an effective high speed rail network were built to serve even just the NE corridor and the west coast.

o. nate - "big!" "centrally planned!" you're pulling out the big anti-commie guns, there, but if "no one can be sure where the rails will be most needed when crunch time finally hits," surely the issue is not one of private vs. public but the US's monumental lack of engineering and planning expertise in general?

the car people are winning the battle for tax dollars (i.e. more roads, metropolitan-centric priorities, etc.)

why don't we also pull out the financials for the auto companies after we stop maintaining and building all the roads for them with our tax money?

I have no idea what you are intimating here.

Someone should comment on the light rail they are building in Minneapolis. I haven't checked lately, but does the LA rail system service LAX?

Tracer, that report is a decade old nor does it adequately address the cultural barriers to light rail success, let alone the optimistic, Mineta-fueled projections of fiscal viability.

yes. it's just a skeleton for now. but it has the potential to be serious in 10 years.

don weiner solves the energy crisis!

I was waiting for Tom to answer you about the taxpayer funded highway system, but he hasn't, so I will -- what do you think our auto manufacturers' balance sheets would look like if they had to pay the cost of putting in new traffic lights and repaving miles of interstate?

From your article: "So far, the building splurge hasn't boosted transit use much. Subway, bus and rail ridership has been flat since 2002. The Gold Line especially — 14,000 daily boardings — has been disappointing, but officials note that it runs only 13.7 miles and new links will pick up more riders. The subway took years to attract 111,000 weekday passengers."

I don't have any factual data at hand (in fact, my infant daughter is at hand and making it hard to type) but that paragraph alone suggests that there are cultural barriers to the embrace of rail.

what do you think our auto manufacturers' balance sheets would look like if they had to pay the cost of putting in new traffic lights and repaving miles of interstate?

what's the point of that question, exactly?

kingfish, there's a bunch of info on light rail (and other stuff) here --> http://www.apta.com

xpost: the point is that effective daily transport -- whether by automobile or by rail -- needs massive government investment to keep it viable, and by asking us to look at amtrak's financials as a barometer of passenger rail's success, you're holding it to a totally different standard than the auto industry, whose products are guaranteed smooth sailing thanks to taxpayer investment to the tune of billions a year.

Baltimore, MD
Boston, MA
Buffalo, NY
Calgary, AB
Cleveland, OH
Dallas, TX
Denver, CO
Edmonton, AB
Guadalajara, JA
Hudson-Bergen, NJ
Los Angeles, CA
Mexico City, DF
Monterrey
Newark, NJ
Ottawa, ON
Philadelphia, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
Portland, OR
Sacramento, CA
Salt Lake City, UT
San Francisco, CA
San Jose, CA
San Diego, CA
St. Louis, MO
Toronto, ON

with a bunch under construction and a bunch more proposed.

xpost thanks

Cleveland has one (four lines). I moved last year specifically to get closer to the rail line. I now drive my car once or twice a week. Fares don't cover the budget however and the citizens of the county raised the sales tax in order to cover the deficit.

this is true, but note that the list doesn't include something like the People Mover in detroit, which really IS something that small(tho it originally had far greater plans 30+ years ago)

i meant to say "don"

I'm holding it to an entirely different standard because it's an entirely different industry and as the infrastructures and they are incomparable because of structural and cultural reasons. Like Rahmneb, I like riding trains and prefer them to a plane or a bus. Are you going to take my argument of the efficiency of buses head-on? (and also, what do you make of the CBO report that says, "outside the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak's cost structure differs from that of freight railroads in that it is not characterized by the large fixed costs of infrastructure (since Amtrak uses the freight railroads' tracks).?)

Again, I like trains. You do have to start somewhere, as far as encouraging the public to try to embrace mass transportation. But it kinda flies in the face of the suburbian lifestyle.

No, cause I honestly don't know enough about it. But I imagine that without significant decongestion schemes, buses would be a misery in many cities.

A pro-light-rail site does take on "BRT" (bus rapid transit) head-on in a series of articles. Here's one which notes the public appears to prefer rail to buses - http://www.lightrailnow.org/myths/m_brt002.htm

thing is, how many more decades is the suburban lifestyle gonna go on, as is? what happens down the line when gasoline stays over $4?

Altho, I think they'll do anything to keep the suburban thing going as long as possible, even when this means everybody switching over to hybrids and alt.fuels

laurence, do also you work in downtown Cleveland or near an RTA stop? I lived in Cleveland for many, many years, and aside from the Red Line to/from the airport I always found RTA terribly inconvenient, since so many stops weren't actually near anything, and instead dropped off at bus depots. And don't even get me started on how bad the bus schedules were in parts of the county. Good luck getting anywhere south of 480 on a Sunday!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v134/tracerhand/dcmetrofantasy.gif
http://www.chesapeake.net/~cambronj/wmata/mymap.htm

still pretty light on NE, though

Riverdale Park
Hyattsville
Mount Rainier
Arboretum (Bladensburg & R)
Northeast (14th & H)
Stanton Park (East side)
Union Station
Convention Center
Logan Circle (14th & P)
Adams Morgan (18th & U)
Mt Pleasant (16th & Irving)
Carter Barron
Walter Reed
Silver Spring
Walter Reed Annex

and the Gray Line...
Kennedy Center
GWU
Dupont
Adams Morgan
Kalorama
Glover/Dumbarton
Whitehaven
Chain Bridge
Spring Valley
Glen Echo
Cabin John
Great Falls
Potomac