Replies

All right, let's try to make the argument that Mr. Bush's supporters should have made, even though I thought this was the wrong war, in the wrong place, and at the wrong time.

What I find fascinating with this stuff about the STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS is the implied argument being set forth by those scandalizing this one sentence in that speech. This implied argument is as follows:

1. Somehow, erroneous information in a STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS should make us all act like stereotypical ladies gardening clubs when a mouse suddenly makes an appearance. We are all supposed to shriek, hike up our skirts, and jump up on our chairs. These people get "the vapors" over the possibility that Bush put something in the STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS that might have been in error. The implication is that the STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS is NOT ALLOWED to contain any errors, and that it is some kind of "holy writ" that must be 100% pure of any errors. On what basis is that argument made? I think I know, and it has something to do with PERJURY on the part of a former Chief Executive.

2. Somehow, a LIE, if Bush lied, is something horrific only if it appears in THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS. I would like to know what makes that speech any more immune from politicians lying, exaggerating, or fudging. I watched some cluck on MSNBC constantly making the distinction of the STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS being infiltrated by either errors or lies, as if, somehow, that was against one of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, when most of these commentators think the TEN COMMANDMENTS are optional.

This attempt to elevate the STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS to some kind of "Holy Grail" is so contrived that is has to be some kind of political spin. Let these people show that ALL OTHER STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESSES have been devoid of erroneous information, lies, exaggerations, etc., then they can start talking about the STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS being something of an INFALLIBLE SPEECH, not unlike the Pope's pronouncements on faith and morals to Roman Catholics.

Your post was right on. I have a question for you, or anyone else, and while I admit I haven't caught up yet on the entire thread today so this may have been discussed. In light of the State of The Union Addresses perhaps having contained lies, fudges, half truths etc. in the past, was it during the SOTU address where Clinton stood up and said "There are no missiles pointed at our children tonight" or something like that, Which was clearly a lie, and of course he knew better?