Typhoon1244
Member in Good Standing
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Posts
- 3,078
Okay guys, brace yourselves: this forum's foremost George W. Bush opponent was pleased...pleased I said...with tonight's speech!
My opinion about a war against Iraq has been that it's the wrong battle at the wrong time...but if the President gave me some good reasons, I'd support it. Finally, after weeks of wasteful and unnecessary silence, George II explained why this battle is necessary. You say "let's go get Saddam right now?" Okay, fine. I'm convinced.
My jaw really hit the floor, however, when the President spoke of pursuing the hydrogen-powered automobile! Is George W. Bush actually taking a small step toward ending--or at least dramatically reducing--our dependence on oil? IF the President is serious about this--and given his close ties to oil, I suspect that's a big "if"--I'll take back most of the dirty, rotten things I've said about him.
(The "talking heads" have thus far laughed about the "H-car," revealing more than ever their short-sightedness and stupidity...but I suppose there were similar reactions to J.F.K.'s famous challenge to NASA that resulted in the Apollo 11 landing.)
I was furthermore pleased with George's insistence that we take the lead in the fight against HIV. Worldwide, this problem is almost as serious as the oil problem...probably more so.
I hope...I fervently hope...that these ideals were not TSA-style "window dressing." Liberal, utopian ideas that were designed to make us all feel better about George II's presidency. I have to believe that after "Monica-gate," the President wouldn't lie directly to our faces!
I still violently disagree with the President about a few things.
(1) America had to pay dearly for it's own freedom. I don't agree that it's our responsibility to pay for the rest of the world's freedom as well.
(2) Cloning is not inherently evil. It could be dangerous in the wrong hands...but so are guns, cars, and nuclear weapons, and we haven't outlawed them.
(3) (A lot of you aren't going to like this, but I can't be the only one who thinks this.) Continuous, passionate references to "faith in God" do not belong in a State of the Union address.
My opinion about a war against Iraq has been that it's the wrong battle at the wrong time...but if the President gave me some good reasons, I'd support it. Finally, after weeks of wasteful and unnecessary silence, George II explained why this battle is necessary. You say "let's go get Saddam right now?" Okay, fine. I'm convinced.
My jaw really hit the floor, however, when the President spoke of pursuing the hydrogen-powered automobile! Is George W. Bush actually taking a small step toward ending--or at least dramatically reducing--our dependence on oil? IF the President is serious about this--and given his close ties to oil, I suspect that's a big "if"--I'll take back most of the dirty, rotten things I've said about him.
(The "talking heads" have thus far laughed about the "H-car," revealing more than ever their short-sightedness and stupidity...but I suppose there were similar reactions to J.F.K.'s famous challenge to NASA that resulted in the Apollo 11 landing.)
I was furthermore pleased with George's insistence that we take the lead in the fight against HIV. Worldwide, this problem is almost as serious as the oil problem...probably more so.
I hope...I fervently hope...that these ideals were not TSA-style "window dressing." Liberal, utopian ideas that were designed to make us all feel better about George II's presidency. I have to believe that after "Monica-gate," the President wouldn't lie directly to our faces!
I still violently disagree with the President about a few things.
(1) America had to pay dearly for it's own freedom. I don't agree that it's our responsibility to pay for the rest of the world's freedom as well.
(2) Cloning is not inherently evil. It could be dangerous in the wrong hands...but so are guns, cars, and nuclear weapons, and we haven't outlawed them.
(3) (A lot of you aren't going to like this, but I can't be the only one who thinks this.) Continuous, passionate references to "faith in God" do not belong in a State of the Union address.
Last edited: