Americans, I seriously hope all of you either watched or read the President's inaugural speech. It is truly the outline for a huge change in the American lifestyle, and I for one am not happy about it in the least.

Bush's Speech

A few points about the speech I'd like to make: First, I noticed quite a few massive contradictions, especially concerning "freedom" which he coincidentally mentioned somewhere around 37 times.

Also, he only mentioned the three main middle eastern religions and left out any mention of any asian religions or african religions, instead refering to them as "the varied faiths of our people." Last time I checked, Asia was the largest continent in the world, and Buddhism is highly prevalent there.

I found these statements quite interesting:






Who exactly are the unwanted, Mr. Bush? Gays? Blacks or other Minorities? Homeless? Atheists?



The lost? Are these people those who aren't devout christians? Who are the lost?

I don't believe you can achieve "freedom" as he puts it by taking away the rights of the American people.

Also, for those of the international community, I'd just like to say not all americans agree with this concept:



I don't believe in the "USA WAY OR THE HIGHWAY" ideal.

Anyway, I hope some good discussion becomes of this thread, the next four years will be a critical time in the lifespan of our country, and could certainly push us back in time rather than move us forward.

Its interesting, he is using euphamisms that I think remain consistant with his speech about freedom. For some reason I'm just not as synical.

Judging by other speeches he has given, and the one thing that is nice about bush, is he rarely says anything outside of his talking points, I will interpret the words you questioned differently.

Bush Has recently read "A case for Democracy" by Natan Sharansky, a peacenic from Russia. Natan Sharansky also is a major political figure in Israel. It has often been said as rhetoric that Terrorists have no value on life. Its also a common policy to convince suicide bombers that they have no purpose in life, and the best thing they can do is die for thier family. (cause the family gets money).

So to me, the Unwanted would be a statement about Abortion which is done for convienece and materilism, and terrorism or terrorists.

I believe the "lost" would be those that have lost their way in life, and judging by What Bush has been saying about Ownership, the lost would be people who are unable to make a living on their own and do not have a path to home ownership, which appears to be a large goal of his, and economic freedom from the government.


About freedom and "the American way."

Europe, Canada, America, Israel, Australia, Japan, Some African countries, all have a system where people vote for their government. They are commonly all called Democracies. America for instance, is actualy a republic, but for some reason (I blame the democrats ) we like to call it a democracy. I think that when Bush speaks of Freedom, he speaks of people being allowed to vote for their government. An example of this would be how involved the U.S got with the Ukraine.

It just so happens that almost all of the countries that people view as being threats to others are not democracies. Some Americans may not like France, but nobody is saying we need to change the way France does business, or what they build.

I see Bush as trying to push this kind of freedom on the rest of the world. Most definitly a dangerous thing, but I don't think its as bad as people want to make it sound. When he says "freedom" he means , in my opinion, the ability for the people to have their voice heard and affect the government that protects them.

The middle east is currently the only place in the world where only 1 country is a democracy.

Even though Bush might be a born again Christian, and is open about his beliefs, I do not think it is Bush's goal to make everybody in America Christian, or to make the rest of the world Christian. I do believe however, he wants everybody in the world to have the option and choice to be Christian if they like.

I think if Bush wanted everybody to be Christian, the Orthodox Jewish community would not support him as much as they do. And let me tell you, the Jewish community is very paranoid when it comes to people who even mention the word Jesus.

I didn't catch the speech, as I was busy the other night. But when he was referring to the unwanted, I don't think he was trying to alienate anyone. When he was talking about the lost, I don't think he was talking about non-christians.

There was a point in my life where I was "lost" and I'm somewhat "found" now. Had nothing to do with religion. And unwanted... Don't tell me you think that no one feels unwanted. Think third world countries. He's not trying to single anyone or anything out, he's trying to say that we should think about everyone else in the world, besides ourselves.

Not that I agree with his methods all the time, but I think you missed the point of his speech.

With that said, I have a nice picture of a kid reading to him, and he's got another book in his hands that he's looking at, just upside down.

Richter, photoshop does wonderfull things.

*chin*

Perhaps. Go read about Bush-isms though.

yes, Bushism are funny. But I find the primeminister of Canada or President (I forgot which one had all the silly quotes that canadians make fun of. From the time when Quebec was voting to succede, again) to be much more funny. Asian leaders are also always entertaining.

Combine them *shudder* Asian bush says:

www.allyourbasearebelongtous.com

Sorry for being picky, but there's two things wrong with this. First, sabbatical is an adjective, this is just really bad grammatically. It's akin to years of happy, as opposed to years of happiness. Of course he meant sabbatical years, but it's just really annoying to me.

Second, not everyone is in on the whole Sabbath thing. Bush is just so religiously biased.

More on this when I finish reading it.

That was GREAT. Bush would spout a one-liner, America would cheer, Ian would vomit. Then the electric company showed up to turn off my power, and I was urging him to hurry it the hell up.

Doesn't freedom mean we're allowed to have hatred and resentment? Does freedom mean we have to be decent and tolerant? I know, it's a silly point, but still...

The only reason there's problems with liberty in America is because people don't like how liberty is being forced on them. He's talking about terrorists, naturally. For example, let's look at Britain. Have they been going around the world giving people liberty? No. And have they had any massive terrorist attacks lately? Also no.

No we haven't. In the beginning, we thought that the only people with equal rights, dignity, and value were rich white males. Anyway...

Um, yeah, same thing there.

Right. Who in the world is going to openly attack America?!? If I remember correctly, the last person who attacked us was promptly let out of our grasp so we could go attack one of those coutries that needs to chose freedom, not have it forced on them. Ayup!

That's all for now, more to come.

Edit: Oh, I have to add this one:

But, earlier he said that America only supports democracies! Gosh!

Obviously Archthron, you've never heard of Northern Ireland. Though it is going down quite a bit, and they too do have terrorist attacks, but not the level of September 11th and the one ship being attacked.

In the beginning, the constitution was said to say every person was born equal, but people did not accept that.

I agree with you on slavery, but you have to look at times. Slavery was normal then, and if you happen to know, America forced every European country in control of Africa to give all slaves their freedom.


In Europe, Asia, or the Americas, when was the last time a country had openly attacked someone (aside from Bosnia, it'd be.. the 60s).

Yes we do have terrorism, you just don't often here about it over there, 8 years ago, my home city was bombed by the IRA and a large portion of it destroyed, luckily the police had enough warning to evacuate the whole of the city center so there were no deaths and only a few injuries. SO yes we do have terrorist attacks...but hell we started that one 400 years ago when we let Oliver Cromwell take control of the country.

Bush's speaches always make me laugh and scare me just a little. He sounds as though he is in a Hollywood action blockbuter, spouter words like evil, denouncing the Axis, spreading the Fires of Freedom and such. Really, are we that stupid? Do we need everything made into a movie?

last attack was in 1960?? gulf war, gulf war 2, fawklands war, kosovo, chechneya, afganastan, have you bin napping?

also being not american i don't care about your internal policy but the foreign policy was just hilarious to listen to

listen to it - forget that you're american and pretend that you have an opinion that isn't dictated (where applicable) and listen to it and see if you can't apply every word to USA.

No iraq, no iran, just lots of people hating and not tolerating and starting conflict and spreading terror and being despotic and suppressing freedoms.

biggest terrorist network in the world - fox

ask yourself do terrorists hide under the bed?

go watch farenheit 9/11 and see if you believe what you're told about the US again

go watch team america and if you don't die from laughter at the (delibarate) irony and satire on the whole american foreign policiy then you deserve to be slapped by a moist plaice

Thats not an attack on America, thats mostly a civil war stuff, and I knew about the Gulf Wars, but those took place in the Middle East, I never mentioned the Middle East. I also said forgot about Bosnia.




And who says I'm an American?

Actually that would be considered a liberty. I did not get to see the speech because listening to Dubya speak is like watching a drunk man walk across a frozen street. He keeps stressing the 'fact' that America has always fought for freedom, but he seems to forget that we had a whole slavery period as well as a civil rights movement for those who weren't free.

The Black men, in the world, was not considered a human. It wasn't America's fault that they most of them descended from a cultural of European history where the black man was inferior, but America was one of the first countries to begin a change. Though, eventually Southern states found a way around it.

I despise Bush as President. His 'No child left behind" act is laughable and the "Patriot Act" is the greatest blow to civil liberties ever, but that movie is pure propoganda. Michael Moore lost his objectivity as a documentor after he became famous. Bowling for Columbine was objective for the most part but certain scenes, mainly the one with Chartlen Heston holding the gun saying "from my dead cold hands" was all propaganda.

I would like to apologize for my president's idiocy. I didn't vote for him, but atleast look at the bright side. After this he can NEVER EVER EVER EVER run for president again. So, only a mere 3 more years or torture and the only thing left is room for a better life.

Let him apologize for himself... Wait, don't.

Still.. 3 years...

"Patriot", and all words rooted from it, shouldn't exist. A) Politicians and leaders use it to their advantage for recruiting support. How can you be proud to be a citizen of a country which you had no say whether you'd be born there or not... Of course, you can move countries -- but basically every country supports patriotism in some form or another, so you're trapped.