Initiative Fact Sheet Roster from White House on Bush State of the Union Address

-

sotu2007_cover.gifJust in from the White House media team:

The 2007 State of the Union Policy Initiatives book including all of the State of the Union fact sheets is now available here in pdf form.
The State of the Union fact sheets are also available individually by topic in HTML format:

OVERVIEW FACT SHEET: The 2007 State Of The Union Address
ENERGY: Twenty In Ten: Strengthening America’s Energy Security
HEALTH CARE: Affordable, Accessible, And Flexible Health Coverage
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND: Building On Results: A Blueprint For Strengthening NCLB
IMMIGRATION: President Bush’s Plan For Comprehensive Immigration Reform
HIV/AIDS: Leading The Worldwide Fight Against HIV/AIDS
MALARIA: The President’s Malaria Initiative Is Saving Lives
STRENGTHENING OUR MILITARY: Strengthening Our Military
SPENDING REFORMS: Reforms To Spend Tax Dollars Wisely

This material should be useful to those who want to dig deeper into the detail of the President’s plans.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

10 comments on “Initiative Fact Sheet Roster from White House on Bush State of the Union Address

  1. Ajaz Haque says:

    Excellent analysis. Here is what I thought of the speech:
    State of the Union
    A less than impressive 49 minute speech with only a polite applause from the Democrats. Nancy Polosi looked rather uncomfortable except when he talked about health care when all Democrats rose in applause – but Dick Cheney stayed glued to his chair. The Democrats also cheered the President enthusiastically when he talked about immigration reform. Throughout the speech Bush seemed uptight, uncomfortable and less than convincing. He talked about Iraq with not much conviction, an issue that is most important to most Americans.
    The strange thing was that Vice President Cheney sat and smirked through most of the speech and Codolozea Rice seemed to be on another planet.
    This State of the Union address did not help Republicans any. If the President continues this course the Republicans are in danger of losing more seats in the House and Senate in 2008. With already the possibility of a Democratic President in 2008, checks and balances will be out of the window.
    The Republican lawmakers may need to chart their own course to keep their seats and the balance of power which was so cherished by America’s forefathers.

    Reply

  2. Ajaz Haque says:

    Excellent analysis. Here is what I thought of the speech:
    State of the Union
    A less than impressive 49 minute speech with only a polite applause from the Democrats. Nancy Polosi looked rather uncomfortable except when he talked about health care when all Democrats rose in applause – but Dick Cheney stayed glued to his chair. The Democrats also cheered the President enthusiastically when he talked about immigration reform. Throughout the speech Bush seemed uptight, uncomfortable and less than convincing. He talked about Iraq with not much conviction, an issue that is most important to most Americans.
    The strange thing was that Vice President Cheney sat and smirked through most of the speech and Codolozea Rice seemed to be on another planet.
    This State of the Union address did not help Republicans any. If the President continues this course the Republicans are in danger of losing more seats in the House and Senate in 2008. With already the possibility of a Democratic President in 2008, checks and balances will be out of the window.
    The Republican lawmakers may need to chart their own course to keep their seats and the balance of power which was so cherished by America’s forefathers.

    Reply

  3. Marcia says:

    The fact sheet is very useful! It allows the listener to focus the delivery of the speech and the reactions much better knowing the subject in advance.
    Thanks

    Reply

  4. erichwwk says:

    Isn’t discussing the Bush agenda a bit like wondering if you’re wearing the right tie, as your house is burning to the ground?
    If we are unable to accept defeat in Iraq, and insist on FIGHTING our way to “victory”,
    We will go the way of Germany in WWII.
    Although the people and the military (Gens. Rommel and Stauffenberg gave their life trying to stop Hitler) KNEW the war was lost, Hitler would not accept defeat and turned a very bad situation into a disaster.
    We are headed that way with Iran, using Israel as a proxy to perhaps even cross the nuclear divide, just as Hitler felt his missiles (and yes, they were fired successfully from submarines) would salvage his ego and legacy.
    Is THAT were we want to go?
    Do we really think hardware and technology wins wars?
    Until the threat of turning a major mistake into a major calamity is averted, we are just pissing in the wind dealing with domestic trivia. We simply cannot hang onto ME oil by force. We MUST give up our oil contract shenanigans, the 14 enduring bases, and the 104 acre new US Embassy in Iraq (~ six times the SF of the UN). We simply have defaulted on our ability to broker solutions in the ME, must eat humble pie, and beg for help.
    How do others interpret the Chinese destruction of their satellite, right after Joseph’s speech at the USAF academy? (The NYT can’t even get the time right; the AWW released time was already adjusted to EST).
    What do folks think of “USAF radar reports on the Chinese FY-1C spacecraft have been posted once or twice daily for years, but those reports jumped to about 4 times per day just before the alleged test.”
    Have we forgotten it was Sistani, and NOT the CPA, that insisted on elections? And that it was hoped to be the best way to remove the occupying US forces from Iraq?

    Reply

  5. Mike says:

    Steve,
    How can the President talk about initiatives in saving lives from malaria and in the next breath talk about his policy in Iraq and then followup with his proposals to reform spending?
    How does his initiatives to save lives from malaria fall in to the catogory of “reforms to spend tax dollars wisely?”
    Can we impeach him now????
    Beav

    Reply

  6. ... says:

    ‘dems getting bold’… that is a novel idea.

    Reply

  7. Easy E says:

    Time for James Webb and the dems to get bold in their response by aluding to Bush lies in 2003 SOTU.
    SIXTEEN WORDS AND THE TRIAL OF SCOOTER LIBBY
    by Jason Leopold
    “Four years ago, President Bush, in his State of the Union address, said, “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”
    The intelligence those sixteen words were based upon turned out to be crude forgeries. Evidence collected by journalists and various legislative committees over the years suggests that a cabal of White House officials were fully aware that the intelligence was suspect, but allowed its inclusion in the State of the Union address because it would help the administration win support for the war…..”
    http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012307J.shtml

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *