Tuesday, January 30, 2007

CNN Making News?


CNN Headline news has been showing pictures from a MLK day "theme parties" that took place on some college campuses recently. I'm not sure who broke these stories, but I first read about these blatantly racist "theme parties" over on the Smoking Gun.

Here are the pictures from the Texas College MLK Day Party.

Here are the pictures from the Clemson University MLK Day Party.

Here are the pictures from a UConn Party, NOT HELD on MLK day.

Clearly poor judgement by the students. Images of fried chicken, Aunt Jemima, and students in black face are racist and offensive... especially when they are held on Martin Luther King Day.

Because these images are racist and offensive, and the party goers all appear to be white, CNN Headline news is showing some of the more offensive images.

I've been blogging all morning/afternoon. CNN Headline news has been on in the background (I usually watch Fox News, but I wasn't paying much attention to the news anyway).

So what? Well, CNN has repeatedly shown a picture that looks like it was made in Photoshop, touting the picture as "the most offensive image of all."

I don't have a screen shot of the picture. I really wish I did, because I think I can prove it is fake.

The picture is supposedly of a poster that was allegedly at one of the parties. This poster does not appear in any of the photos available on the Smoking Gun. The picture is of Martin Luther King Jr. with a crudely drawn "talk-bubble" coming from his mouth, which says "Drink More Beer." Everything about the picture SCREAMS photoshop. This doesn't mean that a student didn't photoshop it, have the photo developed into a poster, and put the poster up at one of the parties... but the picture CNN showed didn't LOOK like a poster. It looked almost exactly like this:

This is a fake picture, it looks like what was shown on CNN

(When I made this pic, I was working from memory. The pic shown on CNN only said "Drink More")


Please do not misunderstand, the above photo was photoshopped and did NOT appear on CNN; however, a picture with an eerie resemblance DID appear on CNN and was purportedly supposed to be a "poster" which appeared at one of the parties. Again, this picture does not appear on The Smoking Gun, while the rest of the offensive picture's from the CNN story appear to have come from The Smoking Gun.

I am postulating that CNN either knowingly, or unknowingly, placed a fake picture on television that was generated in photoshop and used as the emphasis for one of their headline news items. I can't prove it because I don't have a screenshot or clip of the story.

UPDATE!!!!
It seems that CNN may not be to blame for this (again, I am only postulating that the picture of MLK was fake and had nothing to do with the party).



I noticed that CNN Headline News was running the story again, so I ran to the VCR and taped what I could of the segment. Here is a screen shot of the picture:

CNN Capture

I noticed in the corner of the pic the call letters WHNS. So I went to WHNS.com and low and behold I found the origins of this story....



a FOX news affiliate in North Carolina, and a reporter by the name of Jennifer Phillips. They also have the exact video which I appeared also on CNN Headline News. The story was basically a transcript of the video:

Jennifer Phillips reporting

CLEMSON, S.C.-- As students at Clemson University head to class. Some are taking a break to talk about what they call "disturbing pictures." Those pictures were taken at an off-campus party.

One guy in the photos painted his body black, and other students showed up gripping bottles of 40 ounce malt liquor with their hands duct taped to the bottles.

LeRone Smalls, a senior at the school says it is very offensive. "They acted out of ignorance," Smalls said. The theme was a "Living the Dream" party held on the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. "It promotes a negative image of black people- the race of people," said Smalls.

There are more pictures which show a girl showing off some gold teeth and wearing a t-shirt that shows someone smiling with a gold grill. Another picture shows a girl with her pants stuffed to enlarge her "behind," and there are several people sporting gold chains, jerseys and baggy clothes.

However, some say the most offensive thing is a poster which shows Dr. King with the words "drink more" coming out of his mouth. Adedoyin Salami went to the party. "It went from making fun of a cultural phenomenon, to making fun of a culture of people. At that point it became offensive, and a lot of people left the party," said Salami.

Adedoyin says he left too, but originally came dressed in business attire. He says he went hoping to change minds. "There are difference among people, and we have to learn to work with each other in a way we're not always stereotyping people," said Salami.

We decided to show the pictures to other students on campus to see what they thought.

"It seems almost racist," said one student.

Some students couldn't believe it, like Ashley York. "This doesn't represent Clemson, and I think this is a poor judgment on their part," said York.

Justin Griffith, a Sophomore at Clemson, says it didn't offend him at all. "These kind of theme parties, I mean there are even lingerie parties, those are popping up a lot more often too. So, I mean this is pretty commonplace to tell you the truth. You see you got white and black people here so its' not really defining anybody," said Griffith.

However, we had to point out that the picture he was looking at was a white guy painted in black face.

Now there are students who say they want to teach others a lesson- one of respect.

I've contacted Jennifer Phillips to inquire as to the origins of the MLK "Drink More" photo. My inquiry centers around a few interesting facts:

1) Where did the picture of the poster of MLK which said "Drink More" come from? It wasn't among the other pictures from Clemson reported elsewhere.

2) Nothing in the picture suggests it was actually at the party.

3) It doesn't look like a poster.

4) It looks like the first image that appears when you type "Martin Luther King" into a google image search.

5) It was obviously Photoshopped.

6) It could have been at the party, having been photoshopped, developed, and put up by one of the party goers, but why wouldn't the picture appear different (having been printed and photographed at the party you would expect variances in lighting from the party, flash, etc) and why is it cropped such that there is no evidence at all to suggest that it was ever at the party?

Take a good look at the picture:


And this picture:

(granted the resolution is better on the second image, but I could easily manipulate it by lowering the resolution and blurring to make it look identical)

Aside from the clearer resolution, there is basically no difference between the pics. Nothing suggests that the image provided in Phillips's story was printed and then photographed at a party (you would expect variances in hue/lighting) and you would expect to see more of the picture, not less (the first photo is a slightly cropped from the original... but you don't see any more of the photo... for instance a thumbtack attaching it to a board, or tape to keep it attached to a wall. You don't see the photo as appearing on a desk or a sofa. All you see is a photo that is not in the traditional shape of a poster.)

I believe the photo is a fake. I am awaiting a response from Phillips.

UPDATE 2
I emailed Ms. Phillips a few times asking about the origins of the photo. She was kind enough to respond, saying, "We were told that this came from a flyer promoting the party. I called it a poster, so you won't see it in any of the pictures."

This is clearly NOT a photo of a flyer, but COULD have been used in a promotional flyer. (evidence that this is not a true representation of a reproduction of the photo is this: Why color print promotional pictures of a black and white photo? AND if this were a promotional flyer, why don't we see anything promoting the party? Ex. Location, Theme, Cover Charge, etc.)

It COULD have been used to promote the party online. This would explain why there is just the one clearly photoshopped picture; however, if that were the case, why not just show a link to the source?

The only other way this photo could be authentic is if Ms. Phillips acquired it directly from one of the party organizers. She didn't name her source except to say, "We we told that this came from a flyer promoting the party."

I am trying to track down some of the party goers to see if I can authenticate the pic.

Thoughts on '08: Democrats: Barack Obama

The next Democratic front-runner is a short, formerly Muslim, half-black, Senator with notably large ears: Barack Obama. I think he has a MUCH better chance of getting the Democratic nod than Hillary; however, I do NOT think he can win in '08.

I know a lot of people on the left will strongly disagree with this idea; however, I can honestly say that I do not personally know a single racist Republican. I do know a LOT of racist Democrats.

I live in a Democrat stronghold. I live in a city that has been decaying for decades, under corrupt leadership, and immense poverty. I live in a city that used to be a really, really nice place to live. Sadly, blacks have been used as a scapegoat by MANY of the Democrats who live in this area. I blame the Democrats for holding this position, because all the people who have expressed that position to me are Democrats. I've not met a single Republican who ever shared that sentiment. Ever.

The position held by the Democrats where I live is this: "Everything was perfect before the blacks moved in; but after they moved in, property values plummeted, crime increased exponentially, and all the decent people had to move out of the city. Since the whites lest, the city has done nothing but rot and waste potential ever since."

I know that is disgusting. I agree. But that sentiment hasn't been coming from the Right, at least not where I live.

I live in a union stronghold. The unions have basically run every business out of town. No business would want to come to where I live because the union mentality is so pervasive. Along with the unions this area has a long sad tradition of organized crime. Between the union crooks and the mob, no big corporation would even consider wanting to do business where I live. Because jobs are scarce where I live, MOST intelligent, well educated, ambitious youth move as far away from this city as possible.

Local politicians have a history of being owned by the mob and the union interests. The leadership in this area have been corrupt for generations. In recent years, the federal government has been cracking down on the organized crime and political crooks. Some of those who were sent to jail said matter-of-factly, "It's just the way things are done around here."

Amazingly, the Democrats in this area don't see the organized crime and the corrupt unions as the problem with this area. Where I live, Democrats know who is really to blame.

This kind of thinking is disgusting. I do not hold those beliefs at all. Not at all. It just isn't how I was brought up. BUT, I do know that racism does still exist. The conservatives and Republicans in this area tend NOT to hold those sorts of beliefs.

A well-educated, capable black has a better chance of being elected as a Republican in this town than as a Democrat. That is the sad reality of race-politics in many cities in America.

On his skin color alone, I do not believe Obama can win. I'm not racist for thinking this, I am intellectually honest. It is because I truly believe that Democrats, as a whole, do not want to see a black President: that is why I think Obama cannot win.

I do think that a Colin Powell type figure COULD win. (With regards to Mr. Powell, I think his work for Bush in the lead up to the war has damaged his image politically to the point that he probably could not win in '08, but he is a great example of the type of candidate that the Republicans could put forward and who actually could win). I also think the first black President will be a Republican, which would be fitting for the party of Lincoln.

It will happen, it is just a matter of time, but it is not going to happen in '08.

Now, one could easily argue that the race issue (even if I am right) is not the only reason that Obama will not win in '08.

He is too young. He is too politically inexperienced. He has converted his religion from Islam - not the best fact to have on one's resume when running for the position of commander in chief during a war against radical Islam. His political views are too uncertain - I know that conservatives are putting out the image that he is as far left as Clinton, Pelosi, et al; however, I'm not so sure that this is the case.

All these things said, my mother thinks he would be a good president. (And my mother is a good judge of character). I don't know enough about Obama to say whether he would make a good president, but I know enough about America to say that he won't win the Democratic nod, let alone the White House.

(It is probably important to note that I did not focus on Obama much at all. I didn't give much in the way of reasons not to vote for him. I simply stated why he won't win and why)

Thoughts on '08: Democrats: Hillary Clinton

There is a tremendous amount of attention being given to the 2008 Presidential Elections. I believe '08 will be the most vicious, divisive, ridiculous election yet. I've been writing a series on the '08 elections, Thoughts of '08.

Originally, I planned on making this all one post, however, my ambition sometimes gets the better of me. There is no way I could talk about the Democrats, Republicans, and all of the front runners, and keep it down to just one post. It seems every day a few more Presidential hopefuls throw their hat into the race, and I just can't keep up. Instead of trying to do one comprehensive post, it makes a lot more sense to look at all of the elements individually, one at a time. This post will focus on one Democrat front-runner who in considered by many to have a lock on the '08 election.

This post will focus on the shrill, middle-aged, socialist, woman who has already spent 8 years in the White House with her perjuring, philandering husband: Hillary Clinton. This woman has more baggage and skeleton's in her closet than perhaps any other candidate. That she is considered a front runner for the '08 Elections is a marvel.

Even if Hillary were everything her supporters claim she is, she still must overcome the fact that she is a woman running for a position traditionally held exclusively by men. It doesn't make you a chauvinist to point this out.It does not make one a chauvinist to point out that not all of America is going to be on board with the idea of a woman President.

America is a "melting pot" full of sometimes goopy, sometimes chunky, sometimes slimy, mixing, melting, melding "stuff". In this melting pot we find: Ethnic groups with long traditions of gender defined roles and positions in society; Elderly voters who will typically tend to have a more traditional approach to gender roles; ethnic groups that will vote along party lines, haters: actual bonafide chauvinists, bigots, and the like. Hillary will not get these votes. Not in the primaries. Not in the general election.

America will not elect a woman as president in '08. Not yet, not during a time of war, and certainly not if the woman running is Hillary Clinton.

Even if Hillary gets the Democratic nod, she is going to need help to win the White House. Republican women will not cross party lines just to make a "gender vote."

The Democrats I know are largely union members who have strong negative feelings towards minorities in general, strong negative feelings towards gays, and strong negative feelings about women in positions of power. Those Democrats, who seem to be in the strong majority where I live, are NOT going to vote for Hillary. (They won't vote for Obama either, for that matter)

The fact that she is a woman aside, Hillary is one of the most polarizing figures in America. The Clintons are hated and vilified on the right. I am a former Clinton supporter. In my youth, I bought into the MTV image of Bill Clinton with the saxophone. As I matured, as I paid closer attention to politics and current events, as I became educated and gained a degree in Political Science, I started to see the Clintons for what they really are: Narcissists who want nothing more than money, power, and fame... and they will stop at nothing to get these thing. They will stop at nothing.

Conservatives tend to see the Clintons for what they are. If any candidate would be capable of lighting a fire under conservative America, it is Hillary. Even if she could win the Democratic Primary (I don't think she can), she will NOT win the general election. It will never happen.

On another note, I don't believe Hillary will win American Idol this year, either.

Next time she sings the National Anthem, she should make sure she knows all the words.

Stealing a line from Sean Hannity, "Let your heart not be troubled," Hillary can't win. Despite the all the warnings from the likes of Dick Morris, Sean Hannity, and the stop Hillary crowd, I do not believe Hillary can win. She is unelectable.

The Democrats aren't stupid, so they probably already know all of this. I predict a white male gets the Democratic nod. Likewise on the Republican side. I think America does want the privilege of a woman president and a minority president. I doubt very much that when it happens it will be a Democrat, but I believe it will happen in my lifetime. I just don't believe it is going to happen in this election cycle.

Next time on Thoughts on '08, Barack Obama. As you can tell from above, I don't think he as much of a chance, and I'll tel you why.

Giant Duck of Peace

I saw this on LGF today and got a good laugh out of it


An outraged anti-war protester writes about our post on the Moronic Convergence in Washington DC:

You might want to correct your subtitle for the anti-war protest duck.

It is a PEACE DOVE! I know, I was there.

Also, the sign that says “Just Poop” is a nice way of saying “Sh-t or get off the Pot” in regards to doing something about ending the war/occupation.

I would have posted my comments but your sight seems to be overwhelmed. I can’t register. I hope this info gets added somehow though. You’ve got some pretty ignorant readers out there.

Sue, Philadelphia, PA

Sorry, Sue, but to me this will always be the Giant Duck of Peace.
Giant Duck of Peace

Aaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!! Giant Duck of Peace. heheheh.

I share Sue's shame... I can't get registered at lgf either.

Sunday, January 28, 2007

Mohammad Khatami's Comments at World Economic Forum in Davos

I decided to post Khatami's comments seperate from the Kerry post. Here is the partial transcript I transcribed from the webcast.

Mohammad Khatami, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran (1997-2005): "I think the most important problem of the middle east and Iraq ... is because of the intervention of other countries, adding to these conflicts among the ethnic groups. And sectarian violence is promoted by them. And they think that with pressure and power they are in the position to solve the problem in Iraq, which is not true.

You know extremicism is getting expanded and the reformists and the ones who are in favor of peace they are getting deserted and they don't have any position anymore. We were wishing to have a stable Iraq. Of course the overthrowing of Taliban and Saddam Hussein was really good, great fortune for us. But the intervention by the foreign countries, even from the countries in the region, would add to the crisis, terrorism, and violence in Iraq.

And I am of the opinion that there are some powers that - they would like to promote the conflicts and the sectarian conflicts and clashes, it's in their favor to do so that is why they are promoting it - and they do not want to see developments in the countries of the region. We have one destiny and we have to be together, hand in hand, without any intervention of anybody from other parts of the world.

We were annoyed by Saddam, all of us, and we were pretty much upset for that dictatorship. We wanted to solve the problem ourselves. In Afghanistan we did it and it was a bit successful I can say. And of course we, but of course we worked with the Bush administration in Afghanistan, but in return, as a reward, they called us the axis of evil.

And Koffi Annon accepted the idea, but the American administration said that no I will do it alone, they occupied Iraq and the occupation of Iraq led to insecurity, terrorism, extremicism in Iraq, and the whole region, and the globe.

Kerry and Khatami at World Economic Forum in Davos

John Kerry was a speaker at the 2007 World Economic Forum in Davos. While in attendance, Kerry made several harsh comments about the current US Administration, US diplomacy and foreign policy, the US Military, and the American people. His comments have drawn a lot of criticism.

Below is a partial transcript of the event at which Kerry spoke. It was a panel discussion on the Future of the Middle East. The panel was chaired by David Ignatius, Associate Editor and Columnist, The Washington Post. Also speaking were: Adil Abd al-Mahdi, Vice-President of Iraq; Abdullah Gül, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkey; Mohammad Khatami, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran (1997-2005); John F. Kerry, Senator from Massachusetts; and Ahmed Mahmoud Nazif, Prime Minister of Egypt.

I have decided to post Khatami's speech separately.

PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT (gathered from webcast by yours truly)

John Kerry: I, I think, uh I happen to- uh look I am speaking as a Democrat also, and it is no secret through the last Presidential race that I have deep, abiding differences with this administration and its approach. I agree with Amre Moussa that we have opened Pandora's Box - I'm not sure I'd call it "gates of hell" but what we did was - and, and Prime Minister uh Nazif said it would be good if we didn't think of this and define ourselves in the context of the sectarian, the Shia and Sunni and so forth.

But the truth is we have to - deal with the reality that is on the table. The fundamental differences between these sects and those interests are not being addressed. And I think that uhm ehm uhm Mr. Vice President (Adil Abh al-Mahdi), you would agree with me.

What I hear is that both sides believe they can win, and as long as both sides believe they can win and the United states is providing a kind of security blanket against a full explosion they are going to exploit that situation and that's what they are doing.

And so the oil revenues issue has been on the table for three years. We are no clo- it is not resolved. The fundamentals of the Constitution with respect to federalism are not resolved. And unless those issues can be compromised and resolved, I don't care how many troops are put in. Iraq is not going to be pacified.

Now we are currently responsible. Uh. The absence of lilugitimate diplomacy is a disgrace. Quick flights in by a Secrtary of State are not diplomacy. There should be a special envoy. Maybe a joint, bi-partisan, special envoy. Why not a President Clinton together with a Republican of high abiluh-ability, and bring them together and and and really work the processes. Because I think you have to have a new security arrangement for the middle east. I think you ought to reduce the American troop presence as fast as possible because I think its exacerbating the situation. And we have to address, obviously, the middle east peace processes.

***END PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT***

After each panel member addressed the future of the Middle East, apparently questions were asked from the audience (unfortunately not available on webcast, and I can't find a transcript).

It has been widely reported that Senator Kerry continued his tirade of negative comments saying the Bush administration has caused the United States to become "a sort of international pariah."

Kerry is reported as saying "When we walk away from global warming, Kyoto, when we are irresponsibly slow in moving toward AIDS in Africa, when we don't advance and live up to our own rhetoric and standards, we set a terrible message of duplicity and hypocrisy,"

and

"So we have a crisis of confidence in the Middle East — in the world, really. I've never seen our country as isolated, as much as a sort of international pariah for a number of reasons as it is today"

and

"We need to do a better job of protecting our interests, because after all, that's what diplomacy is about," ... "But you have to do it in a context of the reality, not your lens but the reality of those other cultures and histories." Kerry criticized what he called the "unfortunate habit" of Americans to see the world "exclusively through an American lens."
Source.

Update: (all text in this color not part of original article) I have posted a few video's below of Kerry's comments. These quotes are a little more complete than the ones above:

Kerry: "Americans have an unfortunate habit of seeing the world and other people exclusively through an American lens, and judging their aspirations through that lens."

Kerry: "We should engage. We should have been more supportive in other ways. We should be less engaged in this neocon rhetoric of regime change and more involved in uh building relationships and living up to our own values so that people make a different judgement about us."

This is causing quite a response in the blogosphere. Pictures of Kerry and Khatami are circulating around.

Found Initially on little green footballs
Kerry recently announced he would not be seeking the Democrat nomination in the 2008 presidential election. Between these recent comments and comments he made about US troops a few months back, it seems clear why he is staying out of the race.

Kerry's comments about the troops/botched joke from a few months back:


Kerry's recent comments, condensed:
"we have opened Pandora's Box"

"unless those (2 domestic Iraqi) issues can be compromised and resolved, I don't care how many troops are put in. Iraq is not going to be pacified."

"we are currently responsible... The absence of (legitimate) diplomacy is a disgrace. Quick flights in by a Secretary of State are not diplomacy."

"I think you ought to reduce the American troop presence as fast as possible because I think it(American troop's presence)'s exacerbating the situation."

Bush Administration has caused U.S. to become "a sort of international pariah."

"we don't advance and live up to our own rhetoric and standards"

"we set a terrible message of duplicity and hypocrisy"

Americans see world "exclusively through an American lens."

Update:
For slow connections:



For faster connections (or more patient people)

Thoughts on '08: Democrats

As is a growing trend, I am breaking up this post into segments because it is running long and so I can work on the segments at my leisure

Can you believe how much talk there is about '08? I think the 2008 Presidential Elections will be the most vicious, divisive, ridiculous election yet. The Democrats, coming off of a strong 2006 election season are trying to keep their momentum going through 2008. Unfortunately for them, they will likely repeat the same mistakes they made in '04: the dems will pick a loser.

Here is what I mean: in 2004, the two front runners going into the primaries were a flip-flopping, waffling, whatever-the-consensus-is-at-the-time, poll watching hack who had an extremely weak record on defense (mainly because after Vietnam he slandered his fellow soldiers, repeatedly making accusations which either made him an admitted war criminal OR a liar) and who was largely considered to be "very liberal," John Kerry. His opponent was the relatively unknown candidate who appeared even weaker on defense. This candidate literally blew his own chances with a resounding YeeeHaaaw!!! The even more liberal, antiwar candidate: Howard Dean.

Neither candidate was a particularly good choice to unseat a relatively popular (at the time), strong on defense, wartime incumbent president. Democrats might point out that the election was still, very, very close; however, the Republicans won across the board. For Democrats, '04 was another step back and a loosing grip on the throat of the American taxpayer.

But then came '06. The lies about Iraq and one-sided reporting, after years of failing to get real traction, finally took hold. The left succeeded in turning the American public against the war effort (otherwise known as the effort to kill terrorists and keep America safe). With public discontent on one of the biggest national issues, and a fair dose of discontent with a Republican congress that failed to keep promises and lost sight of its conservative values, the democrats were able to win enough seats in the House and Senate to turn the political tide in D.C.

Believing they have a "mandate" from the people, the Democrats have begun down a path of self-destruction. From "symbolic resolutions" to threats of impeachment, the Dems are pursuing an extremely risky approach to governance. With only razor thin margins in the House and Senate, the Democrats must walk a fine line. Unfortunately for Democrats, they don't know where that line is, and they continue to cross it.

Speaking of crossing the line, Kerry did it.. again.

Updates: As I continue to update my thoughts on '08: Democrats, I will post new links here:
Hillary Clinton.

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

State of the Union + Commentary

I'd like to add some commentary to the official transcript. I will preface by saying that it was a good State of the Union. Not Bush's best delivery, not his worst. There are some interesting proposals and shifts in policy. There was also some interesting full standing ovations. On to the speech:

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. And tonight, I have a high privilege and distinct honor of my own -- as the first President to begin the State of the Union message with these words: Madam Speaker. (Applause.)

In his day, the late Congressman Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr. from Baltimore, Maryland, saw Presidents Roosevelt and Truman at this rostrum. But nothing could compare with the sight of his only daughter, Nancy, presiding tonight as Speaker of the House of Representatives. (Applause.) Congratulations, Madam Speaker. (Applause.)

I'm not sure how necessary this kowtowing was. I know the Dems seemed to enjoy it. It is probably more a reflection of Bush's high character and civility than groveling at the new powers that be in the the House and Senate.
Two members of the House and Senate are not with us tonight, and we pray for the recovery and speedy return of Senator Tim Johnson and Congressman Charlie Norwood. (Applause.)

Madam Speaker, Vice President Cheney, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens:

The rite of custom brings us together at a defining hour -- when decisions are hard and courage is needed. We enter the year 2007 with large endeavors underway, and others that are ours to begin. In all of this, much is asked of us. We must have the will to face difficult challenges and determined enemies -- and the wisdom to face them together.

I think this was an important message to the Democrats who have been lambasting the President's war strategy. The president said it pretty well, we are all in this together and we must have the wisdom to face our enemies with a united front.
Some in this chamber are new to the House and the Senate -- and I congratulate the Democrat majority.

More kowtowing. Unnecessary. While flipping through the channels after the speech to hear the spindoctors at work, I heard some moonbat on Anderson Cooper 360 say that the President repeatedly made reference to the Democrat majority and Democrat Congress, and that this was a an incendiary, inflammatory, and derogatory remark. I don't even know how to begin to respond to that lunatic. Now, at least when President Bush says it, the word Democrat is a pejorative term. Who knew.

(Applause.) Congress has changed, but not our responsibilities. Each of us is guided by our own convictions -- and to these we must stay faithful. Yet we're all held to the same standards, and called to serve the same good purposes: To extend this nation's prosperity; to spend the people's money wisely; to solve problems, not leave them to future generations; to guard America against all evil; and to keep faith with those we have sent forth to defend us. (Applause.)

We're not the first to come here with a government divided and uncertainty in the air. Like many before us, we can work through our differences, and achieve big things for the American people. Our citizens don't much care which side of the aisle we sit on -- as long as we're willing to cross that aisle when there is work to be done. (Applause.) Our job is to make life better for our fellow Americans, and to help them to build a future of hope and opportunity -- and this is the business before us tonight.

A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy -- and that is what we have. We're now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth, in a recovery that has created 7.2 million new jobs -- so far. Unemployment is low, inflation is low, and wages are rising. This economy is on the move, and our job is to keep it that way, not with more government, but with more enterprise. (Applause.)

Hurray! I will always support a President who calls for less government and more enterprise!

Next week, I'll deliver a full report on the state of our economy. Tonight, I want to discuss three economic reforms that deserve to be priorities for this Congress.

First, we must balance the federal budget. (Applause.) We can do so without raising taxes. (Applause.)
I was half looking at the TV and half looking at the computer screen during the State of the Union; however, I *think* this received a full standing ovation, implying that the Dem's are on board with the idea of not raising taxes while attempting to balance the budget. This was mind boggling. I don't think for a moment they have any intention whatsoever of NOT raising taxes on the rich. They ran on that platform in '06 and now control the House and Senate. I don't think for one second the Dem's are on board, but it sure looked like they gave a standing ovation when this was said.

What we need is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009, and met that goal three years ahead of schedule. (Applause.) Now let us take the next step. In the coming weeks, I will submit a budget that eliminates the federal deficit within the next five years. (Applause.) I ask you to make the same commitment. Together, we can restrain the spending appetite of the federal government, and we can balance the federal budget. (Applause.)

Next, there is the matter of earmarks. These special interest items are often slipped into bills at the last hour -- when not even C-SPAN is watching. (Laughter.) In 2005 alone, the number of earmarks grew to over 13,000 and totaled nearly $18 billion. Even worse, over 90 percent of earmarks never make it to the floor of the House and Senate -- they are dropped into committee reports that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk. You didn't vote them into law. I didn't sign them into law. Yet, they're treated as if they have the force of law. The time has come to end this practice. So let us work together to reform the budget process, expose every earmark to the light of day and to a vote in Congress, and cut the number and cost of earmarks at least in half by the end of this session. (Applause.)

I laughed so hard when I heard this. I'm not sure if this was meant to be funny, but I thought it was hilarious. The Republicans had full control of Congress, and the President barely vetoed anything during that time. Conservative Republicans were VERY upset with the Republican leadership because the Republicans were proving every bit as bad as the Democrats when it came to spending, increasing the size of the government, and "ear marks." I think it is hilarious that in the preceding 6 years, earmarks were not an important enough issue to bring up, let alone in the State of the Union, but now that the Dems are in control, Bush wants congress to crack down on the process. The message is clear: The Republicans were throwing too much pork onto important legislation, but now that it is the Dem's turn, it is a problem that needs addressing. This is funny because the process is NOT gonna stop, no matter WHO is in control, but now that the Dem's have the ability to decide where the Pork goes, the President thinks he can shed light on the "problem." I love president Bush, I really do, but I think he has really opened himself, and the Republican party, up to criticism on this one.

And, finally, to keep this economy strong we must take on the challenge of entitlements. Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are commitments of conscience, and so it is our duty to keep them permanently sound. Yet, we're failing in that duty. And this failure will one day leave our children with three bad options: huge tax increases, huge deficits, or huge and immediate cuts in benefits. Everyone in this chamber knows this to be true -- yet somehow we have not found it in ourselves to act. So let us work together and do it now. With enough good sense and goodwill, you and I can fix Medicare and Medicaid -- and save Social Security. (Applause.)

Same ole, Same ole. "Save social security". They talk every year about doing it, but what do they ever get accomplished?

Spreading opportunity and hope in America also requires public schools that give children the knowledge and character they need in life. Five years ago, we rose above partisan differences to pass the No Child Left Behind Act, preserving local control, raising standards, and holding those schools accountable for results. And because we acted, students are performing better in reading and math, and minority students are closing the achievement gap.

Now the task is to build on the success, without watering down standards, without taking control from local communities, and without backsliding and calling it reform. We can lift student achievement even higher by giving local leaders flexibility to turn around failing schools, and by giving families with children stuck in failing schools the right to choose someplace better. (Applause.) We must increase funds for students who struggle -- and make sure these children get the special help they need. (Applause.) And we can make sure our children are prepared for the jobs of the future and our country is more competitive by strengthening math and science skills. The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America's children -- and I ask Congress to reauthorize this good law. (Applause.)

How do you increase funding for "students who struggle" (think reward failure) without "watering down standards" and "holding schools accountable for success". These concepts are at odds with each other.

A future of hope and opportunity requires that all our citizens have affordable and available health care(Applause.) .

This sounds an awful lot like universal health care. Ewwww.

When it comes to health care, government has an obligation to care for the elderly, the disabled, and poor children.

Ahhh. Qualified: Government is only OBLIGED to care for elderly, disabled, and poor children. OK. I think we can all agree on that. Better than Universal Entitlement.
And we will meet those responsibilities. For all other Americans, private health insurance is the best way to meet their needs. (Applause.)

Excellent! Put the nail in that coffin of the idea of Universal Entitlement. Shape the debate by expressing alternatives. This is conservatism at it's finest.

But many Americans cannot afford a health insurance policy.

And so tonight, I propose two new initiatives to help more Americans afford their own insurance. First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income on payroll tax -- or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income. With this reform, more than 100 million men, women, and children who are now covered by employer-provided insurance will benefit from lower tax bills. At the same time, this reform will level the playing field for those who do not get health insurance through their job. For Americans who now purchase health insurance on their own, this proposal would mean a substantial tax savings -- $4,500 for a family of four making $60,000 a year. And for the millions of other Americans who have no health insurance at all, this deduction would help put a basic private health insurance plan within their reach. Changing the tax code is a vital and necessary step to making health care affordable for more Americans. (Applause.)

Hallelujah! What conservative isn't gonna live this plan! CUT TAXES to put more money in people's pockets so they can afford to take the initiative to purchase their own health care! YES!!!

My second proposal is to help the states that are coming up with innovative ways to cover the uninsured. States that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens should receive federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. I have asked the Secretary of Health and Human Services to work with Congress to take existing federal funds and use them to create "Affordable Choices" grants. These grants would give our nation's governors more money and more flexibility to get private health insurance to those most in need.
This was VERY interesting. I think this too is a brilliant idea (where were all these ideas when the Republicans were in control?). Perhaps motivated by fear of a new Federalized Universal Entitlement: Hillary Care or worse, the President appears to be taking proactive measures to nip a Federal plan in the bud. By rewarding States who attempt Universal Entitlement programs, it encourages the states to give it a try, and in doing so saves the nation from a Federal program. This keeps the federal government small, and leaves it to the States to decide whether they want "health care for all." Another great idea for conservatism. Keep it up to the states to decide, prevent the federal government from expanding, reward states for attempting to deal with the problem instead of allowing the socialists a major victory. Brilliant idea, and I mean it sincerely.

There are many other ways that Congress can help. We need to expand Health Savings Accounts. (Applause.) We need to help small businesses through Association Health Plans. (Applause.) We need to reduce costs and medical errors with better information technology. (Applause.)

I might be wrong on this, but I *think* the President may be referring to an idea he brought up before, which basically entailed medical databases and more easily accessible information of patients medical histories. I *think*. If so, I am strongly opposed to this. Big brother has enough information, we don't need our medical information in large databases, even if it will cut back on medical errors.

We will encourage price transparency. And to protect good doctors from junk lawsuits, we passing medical liability reform. (Applause.) In all we do, we must remember that the best health care decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors. (Applause.)

Good luck with medical liability reform. The trial lawyers will never let that come to pass.

Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America -- with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we're doubling the size of the Border Patrol, and funding new infrastructure and technology.

Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border -- and that requires a temporary worker program.

Boooo. Even with low unemployment numbers, we ought to keep jobs open for Americans. Period. Besides, how will this keep the illegals out? We are talking about bringing more in. They will come in on a temporary pass, then stay illegally. All we would do is create a new way for them to come in and stay.

We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis. As a result, they won't have to try to sneak in, and that will leave Border Agents free to chase down drug smugglers and criminals and terrorists. (Applause.) We'll enforce our immigration laws at the work site and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers, so there's no excuse left for violating the law. (Applause.)

Good luck with that last part. The ACLU et al will NEVER let businesses prevent illegals from working. I know farmers who have been nearly shut down by lawyers for even daring to ask to see papers. When papers are provided, if they look fake and he so much as says so, again, lawyers to the rescue with threats of law suits. I'd like to see the government fix this problem, but the government is gonna have an uphill battle on this one. Even suggesting that a Latino may be illegal is considered racial discrimination.

We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals. (Applause.) We need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty. (Applause.)

This represents a HUGE change in policy from the White House. All we have heard for the last 6 years is amnesty. Now, it seems, Amnesty is off the table. This is GOOD news for America.

Convictions run deep in this Capitol when it comes to immigration. Let us have a serious, civil, and conclusive debate, so that you can pass, and I can sign, comprehensive immigration reform into law. (Applause.)

Extending hope and opportunity depends on a stable supply of energy that keeps America's economy running and America's environment clean. For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil. And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists -- who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments, and raise the price of oil, and do great harm to our economy.

It's in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply -- the way forward is through technology. We must continue changing the way America generates electric power, by even greater use of clean coal technology, solar and wind energy, and clean, safe nuclear power. (Applause.) We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and bio diesel fuel. (Applause.) We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol -- (applause) -- using everything from wood chips to grasses, to agricultural wastes.

I am a fan of government grants for evolving technology. It is good for everyone, so long as we are spending the money responsibly.

We made a lot of progress, thanks to good policies here in Washington and the strong response of the market. And now even more dramatic advances are within reach. Tonight, I ask Congress to join me in pursuing a great goal. Let us build on the work we've done and reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent in the next 10 years. (Applause.) When we do that we will have cut our total imports by the equivalent of three-quarters of all the oil we now import from the Middle East.

This is a novel idea. 10 years is an eternity in D.C., especially when Bush has so little time left on his watch. If we cut back consumption, though, we could in theory reduce our dependence on foreign oil... but I don't think it will work that way. As long as they are willing to sell it, we are going to buy it. The more suppliers, the cheaper the price. The only way we can really reduce reliance on Middle East oil is to impose tarrifs on middle east oil. If it is more expensive to buy oil from the middle east, American won't buy it form the middle east, but what would likely happen then is that we would be buying middle east oil from "middlemen" set up in countries outside the middle east.

To reach this goal, we must increase the supply of alternative fuels, by setting a mandatory fuels standard to require 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017 -- and that is nearly five times the current target. (Applause.) At the same time, we need to reform and modernize fuel economy standards for cars the way we did for light trucks -- and conserve up to 8.5 billion more gallons of gasoline by 2017.

I like this idea. Congress regulates everything to death, but why not make American car makers designe more fuel efficient vehicles? My favorite vehicle is probably the VW Diesel Jetta. 50MPG. I want one, but they are scarce and expensive. I would love to buy a car from GM that gets 50MPG. If they make it happen, and make it affordable, I will buy one - and I suspect people would line up for them.

Achieving these ambitious goals will dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but it's not going to eliminate it. And so as we continue to diversify our fuel supply, we must step up domestic oil production in environmentally sensitive ways. (Applause.) And to further protect America against severe disruptions to our oil supply, I ask Congress to double the current capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. (Applause.)

America is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that will enable us to live our lives less dependent on oil. And these technologies will help us be better stewards of the environment, and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change. (Applause.)

It is only one phrase, throw onto a discussion about technology breakthroughs and oil dependence, but it is enough to have the global warming crazies pleased as punch. They see this as recognition (at last) that the Republican leadership finally is getting on board with the problems we all face with global warming. Global warming is a theory. Apparently the vast majority of scientists in Academia have signed onto this theory. A concensus (which is apparently a term of art) has been reached: global warming is real, man is causing (or at least HEAVILY contributing to) it. Here is what I think: as long as Global Warming is believed to be real, the scientists who claim it is real will be distinguished and receive enormous amounts of grants. If Global Warming is proven wrong, the grants dry up and the proponents are exposed as nut jobs. The fact proponents champion is that there is a concensus (meaning "scholarly journals" primarily publish peer reviewed articles in favor of global warming as the cause of climate change). Here is what I think: Peer reviewed scholarly journals are relatively new, in the history of man, but science is very, very old. In the history of man, there were times when all scientists basically agreed on the same concepts. Here are a few: The earth is the center of the universe. The earth is flat. The earth is the center of the solar system. Just because top scientists are in agreement on something, doesn't make it right.

A future of hope and opportunity requires a fair, impartial system of justice. The lives of our citizens across our nation are affected by the outcome of cases pending in our federal courts. We have a shared obligation to ensure that the federal courts have enough judges to hear those cases and deliver timely rulings. As President, I have a duty to nominate qualified men and women to vacancies on the federal bench. And the United States Senate has a duty, as well, to give those nominees a fair hearing, and a prompt up-or-down vote on the Senate floor. (Applause.)

For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger. Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that the terrorists can cause. We've had time to take stock of our situation. We've added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us -- unless we stop them.

With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflict and the course we have followed. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled: that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy. (Applause.)

I think this received a full standing ovation. Odd. I took this to mean this: Hey, it's ok for guys to second guess me publicly in the house and senate, but lest you forget, America is at war. My strategy is take the fight to the enemy, and not let the enemy take the fight to us. We all agreed that Iraq was the next step in the war on terror, so debate it all you want, but I am going to lead our troops, and I am going to decide the course of this war.

From the start, America and our allies have protected our people by staying on the offense. The enemy knows that the days of comfortable sanctuary, easy movement, steady financing, and free flowing communications are long over. For the terrorists, life since 9/11 has never been the same.

Translation: So we are not going to pull out, and we are not going to go on defense. I'm sending over more troops to win this war.

Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented, but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an al Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coast. We broke up a Southeast Asian terror cell grooming operatives for attacks inside the United States. We uncovered an al Qaeda cell developing anthrax to be used in attacks against America. And just last August, British authorities uncovered a plot to blow up passenger planes bound for America over the Atlantic Ocean. For each life saved, we owe a debt of gratitude to the brave public servants who devote their lives to finding the terrorists and stopping them. (Applause.)

Every success against the terrorists is a reminder of the shoreless ambitions of this enemy. The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at work in the world. And so long as that's the case, America is still a nation at war.

In the mind of the terrorist, this war began well before September the 11th, and will not end until their radical vision is fulfilled. And these past five years have given us a much clearer view of the nature of this enemy. Al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremists, possessed by hatred and commanded by a harsh and narrow ideology. Take almost any principle of civilization, and their goal is the opposite. They preach with threats, instruct with bullets and bombs, and promise paradise for the murder of the innocent.

Our enemies are quite explicit about their intentions. They want to overthrow moderate governments, and establish safe havens from which to plan and carry out new attacks on our country. By killing and terrorizing Americans, they want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideology. Listen to this warning from the late terrorist Zarqawi: "We will sacrifice our blood and bodies to put an end to your dreams, and what is coming is even worse." Osama bin Laden declared: "Death is better than living on this Earth with the unbelievers among us."

These men are not given to idle words, and they are just one camp in the Islamist radical movement. In recent times, it has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremists who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah -- a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken.

So on the one hand we have Sunni's and Al Qaeda, who want to destroy America. On the other hand we have Shia (and Iran), who want to destroy America. Hmmm...

The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat. Whatever slogans they chant, when they slaughter the innocent they have the same wicked purposes. They want to kill Americans, kill democracy in the Middle East, and gain the weapons to kill on an even more horrific scale.

In the sixth year since our nation was attacked, I wish I could report to you that the dangers had ended. They have not. And so it remains the policy of this government to use every lawful and proper tool of intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, and military action to do our duty, to find these enemies, and to protect the American people. (Applause.)

This war is more than a clash of arms -- it is a decisive ideological struggle, and the security of our nation is in the balance. To prevail, we must remove the conditions that inspire blind hatred, and drove 19 men to get onto airplanes and to come and kill us. What every terrorist fears most is human freedom

-- societies where men and women make their own choices, answer to their own conscience, and live by their hopes instead of their resentments. Free people are not drawn to violent and malignant ideologies -- and most will choose a better way when they're given a chance. So we advance our own security interests by helping moderates and reformers and brave voices for democracy. The great question of our day is whether America will help men and women in the Middle East to build free societies and share in the rights of all humanity. And I say, for the sake of our own security, we must. (Applause.)

I sure hope Bush is right. On one side we have a bunch of esxtremists who hate us, and on the other side we have a bunch of extremists who hate us. The theory is that the introduction of freedom will eliminate the threat. I really hope democracy and freedom is the solution.

In the last two years, we've seen the desire for liberty in the broader Middle East -- and we have been sobered by the enemy's fierce reaction. In 2005, the world watched as the citizens of Lebanon raised the banner of the Cedar Revolution, they drove out the Syrian occupiers and chose new leaders in free elections. In 2005, the people of Afghanistan defied the terrorists and elected a democratic legislature. And in 2005, the Iraqi people held three national elections, choosing a transitional government, adopting the most progressive, democratic constitution in the Arab world, and then electing a government under that constitution. Despite endless threats from the killers in their midst, nearly 12 million Iraqi citizens came out to vote in a show of hope and solidarity that we should never forget. (Applause.)

A thinking enemy watched all of these scenes, adjusted their tactics, and in 2006 they struck back. In Lebanon, assassins took the life of Pierre Gemayel, a prominent participant in the Cedar Revolution. Hezbollah terrorists, with support from Syria and Iran, sowed conflict in the region and are seeking to undermine Lebanon's legitimately elected government. In Afghanistan, Taliban and al Qaeda fighters tried to regain power by regrouping and engaging Afghan and NATO forces. In Iraq, al Qaeda and other Sunni extremists blew up one of the most sacred places in Shia Islam -- the Golden Mosque of Samarra. This atrocity, directed at a Muslim house of prayer, was designed to provoke retaliation from Iraqi Shia -- and it succeeded. Radical Shia elements, some of whom receive support from Iran, formed death squads. The result was a tragic escalation of sectarian rage and reprisal that continues to this day.

This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we're in. Every one of us wishes this war were over and won. Yet it would not be like us to leave our promises unkept, our friends abandoned, and our own security at risk. (Applause.) Ladies and gentlemen: On this day, at this hour, it is still within our power to shape the outcome of this battle. Let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory. (Applause.)

Translation: We are not pulling out of Iraq.

We're carrying out a new strategy in Iraq -- a plan that demands more from Iraq's elected government, and gives our forces in Iraq the reinforcements they need to complete their mission. Our goal is a democratic Iraq that upholds the rule of law, respects the rights of its people, provides them security, and is an ally in the war on terror.

In order to make progress toward this goal, the Iraqi government must stop the sectarian violence in its capital. But the Iraqis are not yet ready to do this on their own. So we're deploying reinforcements of more than 20,000 additional soldiers and Marines to Iraq. The vast majority will go to Baghdad, where they will help Iraqi forces to clear and secure neighborhoods, and serve as advisers embedded in Iraqi Army units. With Iraqis in the lead, our forces will help secure the city by chasing down the terrorists, insurgents, and the roaming death squads. And in Anbar Province, where al Qaeda terrorists have gathered and local forces have begun showing a willingness to fight them, we're sending an additional 4,000 United States Marines, with orders to find the terrorists and clear them out. (Applause.) We didn't drive al Qaeda out of their safe haven in Afghanistan only to let them set up a new safe haven in a free Iraq.

The people of Iraq want to live in peace, and now it's time for their government to act. Iraq's leaders know that our commitment is not open-ended. They have promised to deploy more of their own troops to secure Baghdad -- and they must do so. They pledged that they will confront violent radicals of any faction or political party -- and they need to follow through, and lift needless restrictions on Iraqi and coalition forces, so these troops can achieve their mission of bringing security to all of the people of Baghdad. Iraq's leaders have committed themselves to a series of benchmarks -- to achieve reconciliation, to share oil revenues among all of Iraq's citizens, to put the wealth of Iraq into the rebuilding of Iraq, to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's civic life, to hold local elections, and to take responsibility for security in every Iraqi province. But for all of this to happen, Baghdad must be secure. And our plan will help the Iraqi government take back its capital and make good on its commitments.

My fellow citizens, our military commanders and I have carefully weighed the options. We discussed every possible approach. In the end, I chose this course of action because it provides the best chance for success. Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq, because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far-reaching.

Translation: We are not pulling out of Iraq.

If American forces step back before Baghdad is secure, the Iraqi government would be overrun by extremists on all sides. We could expect an epic battle between Shia extremists backed by Iran, and Sunni extremists aided by al Qaeda and supporters of the old regime. A contagion of violence could spill out across the country -- and in time, the entire region could be drawn into the conflict.

For America, this is a nightmare scenario. For the enemy, this is the objective. Chaos is the greatest ally -- their greatest ally in this struggle. And out of chaos in Iraq would emerge an emboldened enemy with new safe havens, new recruits, new resources, and an even greater determination to harm America. To allow this to happen would be to ignore the lessons of September the 11th and invite tragedy. Ladies and gentlemen, nothing is more important at this moment in our history than for America to succeed in the Middle East, to succeed in Iraq and to spare the American people from this danger. (Applause.)

Translation: We are not pulling out of Iraq.

This is where matters stand tonight, in the here and now. I have spoken with many of you in person. I respect you and the arguments you've made. We went into this largely united, in our assumptions and in our convictions. And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure.

Translation: We are not pulling out of Iraq.

Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq, and I ask you to give it a chance to work. And I ask you to support our troops in the field, and those on their way. (Applause.)

Translation: We are not pulling out of Iraq, and I AM CALLING THE SHOTS.

The war on terror we fight today is a generational struggle that will continue long after you and I have turned our duties over to others. And that's why it's important to work together so our nation can see this great effort through. Both parties and both branches should work in close consultation. It's why I propose to establish a special advisory council on the war on terror, made up of leaders in Congress from both political parties. We will share ideas for how to position America to meet every challenge that confronts us. We'll show our enemies abroad that we are united in the goal of victory.

Translation: We are not pulling out of Iraq.

And one of the first steps we can take together is to add to the ranks of our military so that the American Armed Forces are ready for all the challenges ahead. (Applause.) Tonight I ask the Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. (Applause.)

This is something the conservatives can be on-board for: more defense, more defense spending.

A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer Civilian Reserve Corps.

This is VERY interesting

Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them. It would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.

Americans can have confidence in the outcome of this struggle because we're not in this struggle alone. We have a diplomatic strategy that is rallying the world to join in the fight against extremism. In Iraq, multinational forces are operating under a mandate from the United Nations. We're working with Jordan and Saudi Arabia and Egypt and the Gulf States to increase support for Iraq's government.

The United Nations has imposed sanctions on Iran, and made it clear that the world will not allow the regime in Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons. (Applause.) With the other members of the Quartet -- the U.N., the European Union, and Russia -- we're pursuing diplomacy to help bring peace to the Holy Land, and pursuing the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security. (Applause.) In Afghanistan, NATO has taken the lead in turning back the Taliban and al Qaeda offensive -- the first time the Alliance has deployed forces outside the North Atlantic area. Together with our partners in China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea, we're pursuing intensive diplomacy to achieve a Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

We will continue to speak out for the cause of freedom in places like Cuba, Belarus, and Burma -- and continue to awaken the conscience of the world to save the people of Darfur. (Applause.)

American foreign policy is more than a matter of war and diplomacy. Our work in the world is also based on a timeless truth: To whom much is given, much is required. We hear the call to take on the challenges of hunger and poverty and disease -- and that is precisely what America is doing. We must continue to fight HIV/AIDS, especially on the continent of Africa. (Applause.) Because you funded our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the number of people receiving life-saving drugs has grown from 50,000 to more than 800,000 in three short years. I ask you to continue funding our efforts to fight HIV/AIDS. I ask you to provide $1.2 billion over five years so we can combat malaria in 15 African countries. (Applause.)

It is just me, or are conservatives rallying behind international aid and the Dems opposing the idea (I have heard so many complaints on the left in favor of isolationism and domestic spending as opposed to being involved internationally in all fronts.)?

I ask that you fund the Millennium Challenge Account, so that American aid reaches the people who need it, in nations where democracy is on the rise and corruption is in retreat. And let us continue to support the expanded trade and debt relief that are the best hope for lifting lives and eliminating poverty. (Applause.)

When America serves others in this way, we show the strength and generosity of our country. These deeds reflect the character of our people. The greatest strength we have is the heroic kindness, courage, and self-sacrifice of the American people. You see this spirit often if you know where to look -- and tonight we need only look above to the gallery.

This is good. Very Regan like. Talk about how good America is and why.

Dikembe Mutombo grew up in Africa, amid great poverty and disease. He came to Georgetown University on a scholarship to study medicine -- but Coach John Thompson got a look at Dikembe and had a different idea. (Laughter.) Dikembe became a star in the NBA, and a citizen of the United States. But he never forgot the land of his birth, or the duty to share his blessings with others. He built a brand new hospital in his old hometown. A friend has said of this good-hearted man: "Mutombo believes that God has given him this opportunity to do great things." And we are proud to call this son of the Congo a citizen of the United States of America. (Applause.)

After her daughter was born, Julie Aigner-Clark searched for ways to share her love of music and art with her child. So she borrowed some equipment, and began filming children's videos in her basement. The Baby Einstein Company was born, and in just five years her business grew to more than $20 million in sales. In November 2001, Julie sold Baby Einstein to the Walt Disney Company, and with her help Baby Einstein has grown into a $200 million business. Julie represents the great enterprising spirit of America. And she is using her success to help others -- producing child safety videos with John Walsh of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Julie says of her new project: "I believe it's the most important thing that I have ever done. I believe that children have the right to live in a world that is safe." And so tonight, we are pleased to welcome this talented business entrepreneur and generous social entrepreneur -- Julie Aigner-Clark. (Applause.)

Three weeks ago, Wesley Autrey was waiting at a Harlem subway station with his two little girls, when he saw a man fall into the path of a train. With seconds to act, Wesley jumped onto the tracks, pulled the man into the space between the rails, and held him as the train passed right above their heads. He insists he's not a hero. He says: "We got guys and girls overseas dying for us to have our freedoms. We have got to show each other some love." There is something wonderful about a country that produces a brave and humble man like Wesley Autrey. (Applause.)

Tommy Rieman was a teenager pumping gas in Independence, Kentucky, when he enlisted in the United States Army. In December 2003, he was on a reconnaissance mission in Iraq when his team came under heavy enemy fire. From his Humvee, Sergeant Rieman returned fire; he used his body as a shield to protect his gunner. He was shot in the chest and arm, and received shrapnel wounds to his legs -- yet he refused medical attention, and stayed in the fight. He helped to repel a second attack, firing grenades at the enemy's position. For his exceptional courage, Sergeant Rieman was awarded the Silver Star. And like so many other Americans who have volunteered to defend us, he has earned the respect and the gratitude of our entire country. (Applause.)

In such courage and compassion, ladies and gentlemen, we see the spirit and character of America -- and these qualities are not in short supply. This is a decent and honorable country -- and resilient, too. We've been through a lot together. We've met challenges and faced dangers, and we know that more lie ahead. Yet we can go forward with confidence -- because the State of our Union is strong, our cause in the world is right, and tonight that cause goes on. God bless. (Applause.)

See you next year. Thank you for your prayers.

I liked that finish. I think the President should spend at least 25% of his time talking about why America is great. If the President doesn't feel that way, he shouldn't be President. There is too much negativity in politics. We need a more positive light. We need more discussion about the American dream and what makes America great.

State of the Union 2007 Official Transcript

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. And tonight, I have a high privilege and distinct honor of my own -- as the first President to begin the State of the Union message with these words: Madam Speaker. (Applause.)

In his day, the late Congressman Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr. from Baltimore, Maryland, saw Presidents Roosevelt and Truman at this rostrum. But nothing could compare with the sight of his only daughter, Nancy, presiding tonight as Speaker of the House of Representatives. (Applause.) Congratulations, Madam Speaker. (Applause.)

Two members of the House and Senate are not with us tonight, and we pray for the recovery and speedy return of Senator Tim Johnson and Congressman Charlie Norwood. (Applause.)

Madam Speaker, Vice President Cheney, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens:

The rite of custom brings us together at a defining hour -- when decisions are hard and courage is needed. We enter the year 2007 with large endeavors underway, and others that are ours to begin. In all of this, much is asked of us. We must have the will to face difficult challenges and determined enemies -- and the wisdom to face them together.

Some in this chamber are new to the House and the Senate -- and I congratulate the Democrat majority. (Applause.) Congress has changed, but not our responsibilities. Each of us is guided by our own convictions -- and to these we must stay faithful. Yet we're all held to the same standards, and called to serve the same good purposes: To extend this nation's prosperity; to spend the people's money wisely; to solve problems, not leave them to future generations; to guard America against all evil; and to keep faith with those we have sent forth to defend us. (Applause.)

We're not the first to come here with a government divided and uncertainty in the air. Like many before us, we can work through our differences, and achieve big things for the American people. Our citizens don't much care which side of the aisle we sit on -- as long as we're willing to cross that aisle when there is work to be done. (Applause.) Our job is to make life better for our fellow Americans, and to help them to build a future of hope and opportunity -- and this is the business before us tonight.

A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy -- and that is what we have. We're now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth, in a recovery that has created 7.2 million new jobs -- so far. Unemployment is low, inflation is low, and wages are rising. This economy is on the move, and our job is to keep it that way, not with more government, but with more enterprise. (Applause.)

Next week, I'll deliver a full report on the state of our economy. Tonight, I want to discuss three economic reforms that deserve to be priorities for this Congress.

First, we must balance the federal budget. (Applause.) We can do so without raising taxes. (Applause.) What we need is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009, and met that goal three years ahead of schedule. (Applause.) Now let us take the next step. In the coming weeks, I will submit a budget that eliminates the federal deficit within the next five years. (Applause.) I ask you to make the same commitment. Together, we can restrain the spending appetite of the federal government, and we can balance the federal budget. (Applause.)

Next, there is the matter of earmarks. These special interest items are often slipped into bills at the last hour -- when not even C-SPAN is watching. (Laughter.) In 2005 alone, the number of earmarks grew to over 13,000 and totaled nearly $18 billion. Even worse, over 90 percent of earmarks never make it to the floor of the House and Senate -- they are dropped into committee reports that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk. You didn't vote them into law. I didn't sign them into law. Yet, they're treated as if they have the force of law. The time has come to end this practice. So let us work together to reform the budget process, expose every earmark to the light of day and to a vote in Congress, and cut the number and cost of earmarks at least in half by the end of this session. (Applause.)

And, finally, to keep this economy strong we must take on the challenge of entitlements. Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are commitments of conscience, and so it is our duty to keep them permanently sound. Yet, we're failing in that duty. And this failure will one day leave our children with three bad options: huge tax increases, huge deficits, or huge and immediate cuts in benefits. Everyone in this chamber knows this to be true -- yet somehow we have not found it in ourselves to act. So let us work together and do it now. With enough good sense and goodwill, you and I can fix Medicare and Medicaid -- and save Social Security. (Applause.)

Spreading opportunity and hope in America also requires public schools that give children the knowledge and character they need in life. Five years ago, we rose above partisan differences to pass the No Child Left Behind Act, preserving local control, raising standards, and holding those schools accountable for results. And because we acted, students are performing better in reading and math, and minority students are closing the achievement gap.

Now the task is to build on the success, without watering down standards, without taking control from local communities, and without backsliding and calling it reform. We can lift student achievement even higher by giving local leaders flexibility to turn around failing schools, and by giving families with children stuck in failing schools the right to choose someplace better. (Applause.) We must increase funds for students who struggle -- and make sure these children get the special help they need. (Applause.) And we can make sure our children are prepared for the jobs of the future and our country is more competitive by strengthening math and science skills. The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America's children -- and I ask Congress to reauthorize this good law. (Applause.)

A future of hope and opportunity requires that all our citizens have affordable and available health care. (Applause.) When it comes to health care, government has an obligation to care for the elderly, the disabled, and poor children. And we will meet those responsibilities. For all other Americans, private health insurance is the best way to meet their needs. (Applause.) But many Americans cannot afford a health insurance policy.

And so tonight, I propose two new initiatives to help more Americans afford their own insurance. First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income on payroll tax -- or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income. With this reform, more than 100 million men, women, and children who are now covered by employer-provided insurance will benefit from lower tax bills. At the same time, this reform will level the playing field for those who do not get health insurance through their job. For Americans who now purchase health insurance on their own, this proposal would mean a substantial tax savings -- $4,500 for a family of four making $60,000 a year. And for the millions of other Americans who have no health insurance at all, this deduction would help put a basic private health insurance plan within their reach. Changing the tax code is a vital and necessary step to making health care affordable for more Americans. (Applause.)

My second proposal is to help the states that are coming up with innovative ways to cover the uninsured. States that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens should receive federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. I have asked the Secretary of Health and Human Services to work with Congress to take existing federal funds and use them to create "Affordable Choices" grants. These grants would give our nation's governors more money and more flexibility to get private health insurance to those most in need.

There are many other ways that Congress can help. We need to expand Health Savings Accounts. (Applause.) We need to help small businesses through Association Health Plans. (Applause.) We need to reduce costs and medical errors with better information technology. (Applause.) We will encourage price transparency. And to protect good doctors from junk lawsuits, we passing medical liability reform. (Applause.) In all we do, we must remember that the best health care decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors. (Applause.)

Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America -- with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we're doubling the size of the Border Patrol, and funding new infrastructure and technology.

Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border -- and that requires a temporary worker program. We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis. As a result, they won't have to try to sneak in, and that will leave Border Agents free to chase down drug smugglers and criminals and terrorists. (Applause.) We'll enforce our immigration laws at the work site and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers, so there's no excuse left for violating the law. (Applause.)

We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals. (Applause.) We need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty. (Applause.) Convictions run deep in this Capitol when it comes to immigration. Let us have a serious, civil, and conclusive debate, so that you can pass, and I can sign, comprehensive immigration reform into law. (Applause.)

Extending hope and opportunity depends on a stable supply of energy that keeps America's economy running and America's environment clean. For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil. And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists -- who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments, and raise the price of oil, and do great harm to our economy.

It's in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply -- the way forward is through technology. We must continue changing the way America generates electric power, by even greater use of clean coal technology, solar and wind energy, and clean, safe nuclear power. (Applause.) We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel. (Applause.) We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol -- (applause) -- using everything from wood chips to grasses, to agricultural wastes.

We made a lot of progress, thanks to good policies here in Washington and the strong response of the market. And now even more dramatic advances are within reach. Tonight, I ask Congress to join me in pursuing a great goal. Let us build on the work we've done and reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent in the next 10 years. (Applause.) When we do that we will have cut our total imports by the equivalent of three-quarters of all the oil we now import from the Middle East.

To reach this goal, we must increase the supply of alternative fuels, by setting a mandatory fuels standard to require 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017 -- and that is nearly five times the current target. (Applause.) At the same time, we need to reform and modernize fuel economy standards for cars the way we did for light trucks -- and conserve up to 8.5 billion more gallons of gasoline by 2017.

Achieving these ambitious goals will dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but it's not going to eliminate it. And so as we continue to diversify our fuel supply, we must step up domestic oil production in environmentally sensitive ways. (Applause.) And to further protect America against severe disruptions to our oil supply, I ask Congress to double the current capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. (Applause.)

America is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that will enable us to live our lives less dependent on oil. And these technologies will help us be better stewards of the environment, and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change. (Applause.)

A future of hope and opportunity requires a fair, impartial system of justice. The lives of our citizens across our nation are affected by the outcome of cases pending in our federal courts. We have a shared obligation to ensure that the federal courts have enough judges to hear those cases and deliver timely rulings. As President, I have a duty to nominate qualified men and women to vacancies on the federal bench. And the United States Senate has a duty, as well, to give those nominees a fair hearing, and a prompt up-or-down vote on the Senate floor. (Applause.)

For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger. Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that the terrorists can cause. We've had time to take stock of our situation. We've added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us -- unless we stop them.

With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflict and the course we have followed. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled: that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy. (Applause.)

From the start, America and our allies have protected our people by staying on the offense. The enemy knows that the days of comfortable sanctuary, easy movement, steady financing, and free flowing communications are long over. For the terrorists, life since 9/11 has never been the same.

Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented, but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an al Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coast. We broke up a Southeast Asian terror cell grooming operatives for attacks inside the United States. We uncovered an al Qaeda cell developing anthrax to be used in attacks against America. And just last August, British authorities uncovered a plot to blow up passenger planes bound for America over the Atlantic Ocean. For each life saved, we owe a debt of gratitude to the brave public servants who devote their lives to finding the terrorists and stopping them. (Applause.)

Every success against the terrorists is a reminder of the shoreless ambitions of this enemy. The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at work in the world. And so long as that's the case, America is still a nation at war.

In the mind of the terrorist, this war began well before September the 11th, and will not end until their radical vision is fulfilled. And these past five years have given us a much clearer view of the nature of this enemy. Al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremists, possessed by hatred and commanded by a harsh and narrow ideology. Take almost any principle of civilization, and their goal is the opposite. They preach with threats, instruct with bullets and bombs, and promise paradise for the murder of the innocent.

Our enemies are quite explicit about their intentions. They want to overthrow moderate governments, and establish safe havens from which to plan and carry out new attacks on our country. By killing and terrorizing Americans, they want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideology. Listen to this warning from the late terrorist Zarqawi: "We will sacrifice our blood and bodies to put an end to your dreams, and what is coming is even worse." Osama bin Laden declared: "Death is better than living on this Earth with the unbelievers among us."

These men are not given to idle words, and they are just one camp in the Islamist radical movement. In recent times, it has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremists who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah -- a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken.

The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat. Whatever slogans they chant, when they slaughter the innocent they have the same wicked purposes. They want to kill Americans, kill democracy in the Middle East, and gain the weapons to kill on an even more horrific scale.

In the sixth year since our nation was attacked, I wish I could report to you that the dangers had ended. They have not. And so it remains the policy of this government to use every lawful and proper tool of intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, and military action to do our duty, to find these enemies, and to protect the American people. (Applause.)

This war is more than a clash of arms -- it is a decisive ideological struggle, and the security of our nation is in the balance. To prevail, we must remove the conditions that inspire blind hatred, and drove 19 men to get onto airplanes and to come and kill us. What every terrorist fears most is human freedom

-- societies where men and women make their own choices, answer to their own conscience, and live by their hopes instead of their resentments. Free people are not drawn to violent and malignant ideologies -- and most will choose a better way when they're given a chance. So we advance our own security interests by helping moderates and reformers and brave voices for democracy. The great question of our day is whether America will help men and women in the Middle East to build free societies and share in the rights of all humanity. And I say, for the sake of our own security, we must. (Applause.)

In the last two years, we've seen the desire for liberty in the broader Middle East -- and we have been sobered by the enemy's fierce reaction. In 2005, the world watched as the citizens of Lebanon raised the banner of the Cedar Revolution, they drove out the Syrian occupiers and chose new leaders in free elections. In 2005, the people of Afghanistan defied the terrorists and elected a democratic legislature. And in 2005, the Iraqi people held three national elections, choosing a transitional government, adopting the most progressive, democratic constitution in the Arab world, and then electing a government under that constitution. Despite endless threats from the killers in their midst, nearly 12 million Iraqi citizens came out to vote in a show of hope and solidarity that we should never forget. (Applause.)

A thinking enemy watched all of these scenes, adjusted their tactics, and in 2006 they struck back. In Lebanon, assassins took the life of Pierre Gemayel, a prominent participant in the Cedar Revolution. Hezbollah terrorists, with support from Syria and Iran, sowed conflict in the region and are seeking to undermine Lebanon's legitimately elected government. In Afghanistan, Taliban and al Qaeda fighters tried to regain power by regrouping and engaging Afghan and NATO forces. In Iraq, al Qaeda and other Sunni extremists blew up one of the most sacred places in Shia Islam -- the Golden Mosque of Samarra. This atrocity, directed at a Muslim house of prayer, was designed to provoke retaliation from Iraqi Shia -- and it succeeded. Radical Shia elements, some of whom receive support from Iran, formed death squads. The result was a tragic escalation of sectarian rage and reprisal that continues to this day.

This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we're in. Every one of us wishes this war were over and won. Yet it would not be like us to leave our promises unkept, our friends abandoned, and our own security at risk. (Applause.) Ladies and gentlemen: On this day, at this hour, it is still within our power to shape the outcome of this battle. Let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory. (Applause.)

We're carrying out a new strategy in Iraq -- a plan that demands more from Iraq's elected government, and gives our forces in Iraq the reinforcements they need to complete their mission. Our goal is a democratic Iraq that upholds the rule of law, respects the rights of its people, provides them security, and is an ally in the war on terror.

In order to make progress toward this goal, the Iraqi government must stop the sectarian violence in its capital. But the Iraqis are not yet ready to do this on their own. So we're deploying reinforcements of more than 20,000 additional soldiers and Marines to Iraq. The vast majority will go to Baghdad, where they will help Iraqi forces to clear and secure neighborhoods, and serve as advisers embedded in Iraqi Army units. With Iraqis in the lead, our forces will help secure the city by chasing down the terrorists, insurgents, and the roaming death squads. And in Anbar Province, where al Qaeda terrorists have gathered and local forces have begun showing a willingness to fight them, we're sending an additional 4,000 United States Marines, with orders to find the terrorists and clear them out. (Applause.) We didn't drive al Qaeda out of their safe haven in Afghanistan only to let them set up a new safe haven in a free Iraq.

The people of Iraq want to live in peace, and now it's time for their government to act. Iraq's leaders know that our commitment is not open-ended. They have promised to deploy more of their own troops to secure Baghdad -- and they must do so. They pledged that they will confront violent radicals of any faction or political party -- and they need to follow through, and lift needless restrictions on Iraqi and coalition forces, so these troops can achieve their mission of bringing security to all of the people of Baghdad. Iraq's leaders have committed themselves to a series of benchmarks -- to achieve reconciliation, to share oil revenues among all of Iraq's citizens, to put the wealth of Iraq into the rebuilding of Iraq, to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's civic life, to hold local elections, and to take responsibility for security in every Iraqi province. But for all of this to happen, Baghdad must be secure. And our plan will help the Iraqi government take back its capital and make good on its commitments.

My fellow citizens, our military commanders and I have carefully weighed the options. We discussed every possible approach. In the end, I chose this course of action because it provides the best chance for success. Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq, because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far-reaching.

If American forces step back before Baghdad is secure, the Iraqi government would be overrun by extremists on all sides. We could expect an epic battle between Shia extremists backed by Iran, and Sunni extremists aided by al Qaeda and supporters of the old regime. A contagion of violence could spill out across the country -- and in time, the entire region could be drawn into the conflict.

For America, this is a nightmare scenario. For the enemy, this is the objective. Chaos is the greatest ally -- their greatest ally in this struggle. And out of chaos in Iraq would emerge an emboldened enemy with new safe havens, new recruits, new resources, and an even greater determination to harm America. To allow this to happen would be to ignore the lessons of September the 11th and invite tragedy. Ladies and gentlemen, nothing is more important at this moment in our history than for America to succeed in the Middle East, to succeed in Iraq and to spare the American people from this danger. (Applause.)

This is where matters stand tonight, in the here and now. I have spoken with many of you in person. I respect you and the arguments you've made. We went into this largely united, in our assumptions and in our convictions. And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure. Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq, and I ask you to give it a chance to work. And I ask you to support our troops in the field, and those on their way. (Applause.)

The war on terror we fight today is a generational struggle that will continue long after you and I have turned our duties over to others. And that's why it's important to work together so our nation can see this great effort through. Both parties and both branches should work in close consultation. It's why I propose to establish a special advisory council on the war on terror, made up of leaders in Congress from both political parties. We will share ideas for how to position America to meet every challenge that confronts us. We'll show our enemies abroad that we are united in the goal of victory.

And one of the first steps we can take together is to add to the ranks of our military so that the American Armed Forces are ready for all the challenges ahead. (Applause.) Tonight I ask the Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. (Applause.) A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer Civilian Reserve Corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them. It would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.

Americans can have confidence in the outcome of this struggle because we're not in this struggle alone. We have a diplomatic strategy that is rallying the world to join in the fight against extremism. In Iraq, multinational forces are operating under a mandate from the United Nations. We're working with Jordan and Saudi Arabia and Egypt and the Gulf States to increase support for Iraq's government.

The United Nations has imposed sanctions on Iran, and made it clear that the world will not allow the regime in Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons. (Applause.) With the other members of the Quartet -- the U.N., the European Union, and Russia -- we're pursuing diplomacy to help bring peace to the Holy Land, and pursuing the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security. (Applause.) In Afghanistan, NATO has taken the lead in turning back the Taliban and al Qaeda offensive -- the first time the Alliance has deployed forces outside the North Atlantic area. Together with our partners in China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea, we're pursuing intensive diplomacy to achieve a Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

We will continue to speak out for the cause of freedom in places like Cuba, Belarus, and Burma -- and continue to awaken the conscience of the world to save the people of Darfur. (Applause.)

American foreign policy is more than a matter of war and diplomacy. Our work in the world is also based on a timeless truth: To whom much is given, much is required. We hear the call to take on the challenges of hunger and poverty and disease -- and that is precisely what America is doing. We must continue to fight HIV/AIDS, especially on the continent of Africa. (Applause.) Because you funded our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the number of people receiving life-saving drugs has grown from 50,000 to more than 800,000 in three short years. I ask you to continue funding our efforts to fight HIV/AIDS. I ask you to provide $1.2 billion over five years so we can combat malaria in 15 African countries. (Applause.)

I ask that you fund the Millennium Challenge Account, so that American aid reaches the people who need it, in nations where democracy is on the rise and corruption is in retreat. And let us continue to support the expanded trade and debt relief that are the best hope for lifting lives and eliminating poverty. (Applause.)

When America serves others in this way, we show the strength and generosity of our country. These deeds reflect the character of our people. The greatest strength we have is the heroic kindness, courage, and self-sacrifice of the American people. You see this spirit often if you know where to look -- and tonight we need only look above to the gallery.

Dikembe Mutombo grew up in Africa, amid great poverty and disease. He came to Georgetown University on a scholarship to study medicine -- but Coach John Thompson got a look at Dikembe and had a different idea. (Laughter.) Dikembe became a star in the NBA, and a citizen of the United States. But he never forgot the land of his birth, or the duty to share his blessings with others. He built a brand new hospital in his old hometown. A friend has said of this good-hearted man: "Mutombo believes that God has given him this opportunity to do great things." And we are proud to call this son of the Congo a citizen of the United States of America. (Applause.)

After her daughter was born, Julie Aigner-Clark searched for ways to share her love of music and art with her child. So she borrowed some equipment, and began filming children's videos in her basement. The Baby Einstein Company was born, and in just five years her business grew to more than $20 million in sales. In November 2001, Julie sold Baby Einstein to the Walt Disney Company, and with her help Baby Einstein has grown into a $200 million business. Julie represents the great enterprising spirit of America. And she is using her success to help others -- producing child safety videos with John Walsh of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Julie says of her new project: "I believe it's the most important thing that I have ever done. I believe that children have the right to live in a world that is safe." And so tonight, we are pleased to welcome this talented business entrepreneur and generous social entrepreneur -- Julie Aigner-Clark. (Applause.)

Three weeks ago, Wesley Autrey was waiting at a Harlem subway station with his two little girls, when he saw a man fall into the path of a train. With seconds to act, Wesley jumped onto the tracks, pulled the man into the space between the rails, and held him as the train passed right above their heads. He insists he's not a hero. He says: "We got guys and girls overseas dying for us to have our freedoms. We have got to show each other some love." There is something wonderful about a country that produces a brave and humble man like Wesley Autrey. (Applause.)

Tommy Rieman was a teenager pumping gas in Independence, Kentucky, when he enlisted in the United States Army. In December 2003, he was on a reconnaissance mission in Iraq when his team came under heavy enemy fire. From his Humvee, Sergeant Rieman returned fire; he used his body as a shield to protect his gunner. He was shot in the chest and arm, and received shrapnel wounds to his legs -- yet he refused medical attention, and stayed in the fight. He helped to repel a second attack, firing grenades at the enemy's position. For his exceptional courage, Sergeant Rieman was awarded the Silver Star. And like so many other Americans who have volunteered to defend us, he has earned the respect and the gratitude of our entire country. (Applause.)

In such courage and compassion, ladies and gentlemen, we see the spirit and character of America -- and these qualities are not in short supply. This is a decent and honorable country -- and resilient, too. We've been through a lot together. We've met challenges and faced dangers, and we know that more lie ahead. Yet we can go forward with confidence -- because the State of our Union is strong, our cause in the world is right, and tonight that cause goes on. God bless. (Applause.)

See you next year. Thank you for your prayers.