Bush's State of the Union- Page 5

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 1:39am

I think your signature says it all, CurtainUp2.

G'night.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 1:48am

George W Bush and all of the people who applauded and/or stood for the mention of the Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage are bigots. Plain and simple.

I will never understand how homosexuals (like Chicago) can support that.

I will also never understand why a conservative (like Chicago), who has the upperhand with the last election, still feels the need to insult and name call. The subtext speaks volumes.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 1:53am

Chicago's a homosexual? Ahh...I see my "assumption". Surely it wasn't unfounded.

[Zola Q. LaPlaya]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 6:04am

Did people really watch this crap? Television viewing last night in Zola's bedroom: Access Hollywood, Lost, Basic Plumber 2 starring Chase Hunter.

[ChicagoBwayFan]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 6:48am

Poor Spider and Curtain such little depth in them that they have to continue to resort to name calling, assumptions, and insults to feel good about themselves and pretend that they are intelligent. Keep up the humerous replies - it's hilarious.

[Zola Q. LaPlaya]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 6:50am

humorous

Papalovesmambo is the only Republican I've ever met who can spell.

[ChicagoBwayFan]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 6:52am

Poor Zola is worse yet - expects perfect spelling 100% of the time in a CHAT ROOM! Always funny when people in this room have to resort to whining about such a petty problem.

[Zola Q. LaPlaya]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 7:06am

No actually I cut people a great deal of slack in a chat room. I mean, there you are generally forced to type quickly with your one lube-free finger.

This is a message board. You have plenty of time to review and spellcheck your post. Especially if you are going to be provocative, you never want to give your opponents something tangential to criticize. I'm helping you, buddy. I'm such a giver.

One last correction, Chicagoboy with the cute ears: I am not poor.

[ChicagoBwayFan]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 7:10am

Zola, the comment "poor" wasn't meant to reflect your financial status.

[Adamaddict]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 7:24am

duh

[Unknown User]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 7:33am

Unfortunately, the level of discourse displayed in this thread probably more acurately describes the 'state of the union' than anything Mr. Bush said last night.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 8:39am

Amen, Dgrant.

[EddieVarley]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 8:43am

Double Amen, but I am always heartened when I see Auggie27 on board.

[Justice]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 8:58am

One word for CBF : Hypocrite.

"Poor Spider and Curtain such little depth in them that they have to continue to resort to name calling, assumptions, and insults to feel good about themselves and pretend that they are intelligent."

"Poor liberals are so filled with hate that all they are left with are the little bully comments that are like an old song that was never liked in the first place."

"Can only find satisfaction by trying to tear other people down with foolish personal comments."

Poor CBF: A brainwashed conservative who isn't really listening to what others have to say, but more thinking what he has to think to be a Conservative, cuz God forbid he thinks any other way the party will take away his card.

[ChicagoBwayFan]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 9:02am

Justice, you're so humerous! The liberals are irrelevant to politics - why would I ever fear them when they have such little to offer

[Jacques_Clouseau]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 9:29am

Liberals and conservatives are equally as damned in my book. Extremism of any kind should be battled against. Religious, political, fashion...

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 10:54am

what debate? sounds like a coupla kindergarteners fighting over the play-doh.

zoles, i'm glad to see your time away has not dimmed your essential luminescence (no, i don't know what it means but damned if it doesn't sound purdy, huh?).

i thought the speech was well organized, well paced and offered few, if any, surprises. i was disappointed not to get close-ups of the hooting opposition party during their vocal reaction to the social security portion of the speech. once georgie moved past that section and his sop to the rightest of the right with his marriage amendment comment, i was heartened to see that the majority of the standing ovations were undertaken by both sides of the hall (i counted approx. 28 shared ovations, the ones where just the gop stood don't count; it's like a standing ovation at a broadway show in which only the family of the cast stand up).

the speech started and ended strong beginning with the litany of countries that recently held elections (including the palestinian territories, there was also a later mention of a palestinian state) while managign to avoid the ohrase i'm sick of, "freedom is on the march," and closed smartly with the echoes of the ovation to the norwood's still reverberating by calling to the optimism of america for the future by recalling past accomplishments.

now, gw's never gonna be a stirring speaker and as always "nucular" made a few appearances but he managed to deliver what i considered a very well crafted speech without bumbling. he seemed much more comfortable than i've seen him recently while giving a speech (winking at souter during the activist judge portion). i could have done without the autograph session as he left the hall, what the hell was that all about? yer president, dumb*ss, not a star shortstop.

as far as the democratic reaction, i thought harry reid was effective and clear. he managed to delivery plenty of blows with the velvet hammer while not looking or sounding like he was particularly upset about anything. very calm and soothing but confidant. i don't know how effective he'll be as a legislator, but he's an improvement as a public face for the party.

nancy pelosi should just not be allowed in front of a camera. ever. she looks like she's choking to death trying to keep from screaming, "we're gonna geld that motherf***er and every one of you b*st*rds who voted for him! we know where you are you sick f***s and you'll get yours!" seriously, those of you from the democratic party, on a purely superficial level (one at which many here like to take gw) is she really an effective public face for the democratic party? with those marty feldman eyes? and the barely concealed contempt for everything that's not a member of the democratic party? *shudder* she skeeeers me. i'm not saying my party is not full of folks who scare me too, but really? nancy?

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 10:55am

what debate? sounds like a coupla kindergarteners fighting over the play-doh.

zoles, i'm glad to see your time away has not dimmed your essential luminescence (no, i don't know what it means but damned if it doesn't sound purdy, huh?).

i thought the speech was well organized, well paced and offered few, if any, surprises. i was disappointed not to get close-ups of the hooting opposition party during their vocal reaction to the social security portion of the speech. once georgie moved past that section and his sop to the rightest of the right with his marriage amendment comment, i was heartened to see that the majority of the standing ovations were undertaken by both sides of the hall (i counted approx. 28 shared ovations, the ones where just the gop stood don't count; it's like a standing ovation at a broadway show in which only the family of the cast stand up).

the speech started and ended strong beginning with the litany of countries that recently held elections (including the palestinian territories, there was also a later mention of a palestinian state) while managign to avoid the ohrase i'm sick of, "freedom is on the march," and closed smartly with the echoes of the ovation to the norwood's still reverberating by calling to the optimism of america for the future by recalling past accomplishments.

now, gw's never gonna be a stirring speaker and as always "nucular" made a few appearances but he managed to deliver what i considered a very well crafted speech without bumbling. he seemed much more comfortable than i've seen him recently while giving a speech (winking at souter during the activist judge portion). i could have done without the autograph session as he left the hall, what the hell was that all about? yer president, dumb*ss, not a star shortstop.

as far as the democratic reaction, i thought harry reid was effective and clear. he managed to delivery plenty of blows with the velvet hammer while not looking or sounding like he was particularly upset about anything. very calm and soothing but confidant. i don't know how effective he'll be as a legislator, but he's an improvement as a public face for the party.

nancy pelosi should just not be allowed in front of a camera. ever. she looks like she's choking to death trying to keep from screaming, "we're gonna geld that motherf***er and every one of you b*st*rds who voted for him! we know where you are you sick f***s and you'll get yours!" seriously, those of you from the democratic party, on a purely superficial level (one at which many here like to take gw) is she really an effective public face for the democratic party? with those marty feldman eyes? and the barely concealed contempt for everything that's not a member of the democratic party? *shudder* she skeeeers me. i'm not saying my party is not full of folks who scare me too, but really? nancy?

[CurtainUp2]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 11:04am

"...he managed to deliver what i considered a very well crafted speech without bumbling."

Yes. There's a lot to be said for setting the bar low and having equally low expectations. Any speech he can give without drooling or mispronouncing any big words is considered a good speech.

Updated On: 2/3/05 at 11:04 AM

[Jacques_Clouseau]

Posted: 2/3/05 at 11:04am

Jesus papa...
That's a stirring review. I agree with most of it, and can't wait to see the "wink" parodied on SNL.