So where was the Arab-Israeli conflict in Bush's SOTU?

[Wetzelbill]

or Kashmir?

I thought his speech was flat. Toned down, dumbed down, lacking depth or passion. Bush specializes in simple rhetoric and direct, easily understood messages. He usually comes out and puts on a solid show - even though I, personally, have great distaste in his words. Bush has always been pretty on point and hit his message well. Granted, his message is always foolish and lacks any substance, but he comes across to a great many people, especially after 9-11. This speech lacked any bold ideas, was loosely tied together, had no real direction and seemed as weak as his U.N. debacle and the one he gave on a Sunday late last summer that bombed. Many times I hear a speech of his and think:"Good move, your followers and the average person can relate and will eat this stuff up, even though it's lying garbage." This time nothing stood out. No "Mushroom clouds", "axis of evils" or fearsome "WMDs and Al-qaeda connections." Rather uninspired, even to conservative ears I would imagine. The steroid thing raised some eyebrows, although that was more because it was so out of place and goofy sounding.

I do find the leaving out something like the Arab-Israeli conflict -which Bush has failed ineptly on, even more so than I expected was possible - to be inexcusable. Syria has called for peace talks. The Palestinians are in the 3rd year of an intifada. Israel has been rocked by corruption allegations. This is the about the biggest "terror" issue of them all and we got a big, fat zero on it.

Just goes to show you how disengaged with valid policy this administration is.

[Braden]

1. he's going to clean up baseball first

and investor confidence in the financial markets is going to have to take a backseat to the Players union's woes.

even many of his followers are pissed at the low brow speach.