Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

State of the Union, Sliced and Diced

Think Progress. Posted February 1, 2006.


A guide to the truth behind the lies and fabrications in George Bush's State of the Union speech to Congress.
Advertisement

Note: The following is a list of corrections to false and fabricated claims in President Bush's State of the Union speech from Think Progress.

On Katrina:

Bush said: "As we recover from a disaster, let us also work for the day when all Americans are protected by justice, equal in hope and rich in opportunity."

Fact -- White House stonewalling Katrina investigations: Congressional investigations into the administration's inadequate response to Katrina have stalled because the "Bush White House is now refusing to turn over Hurricane Katrina-related documents or make senior officials available for testimony." (MSNBC, 1/26/06)

Bush said: "In New Orleans and in other places, many of our fellow citizens have felt excluded from the promise of our country."

Fact -- Poverty rates have increased under Bush: The poverty rate has risen each year since 2001, with 12.7 percent of the population now living in poverty. African-American poverty has risen from 22.7 percent in 2001 to 24.7 percent in 2004, and child poverty has gone from 16.3 percent in 2001 to 17.8 percent (1.3 million children under the age of 18). (U.S. Census Bureau, Aug. 2005, Tables B-1 and B-2)

Fact -- Bush tax cuts targeted at high-income households: The tax bills enacted since 2001 "have helped high-income households far more than other households," according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. Households with incomes exceeding $1 million have received average tax cuts of $103,000, "an increase of 5.4 percent in their after-tax income." But in 2005, the bottom fifth of households "will receive an average combined tax cut of $18 from these bills, raising their after-tax income by 0.3 percent." (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 10/17/05)

On Energy:

Bush said: "The best way to break this addiction is through technology. Since 2001, we have spent nearly 10 billion dollars to develop cleaner, cheaper, more reliable alternative energy sources -- and we are on the threshold of incredible advances."

Fact -- Bush pushed for renewable energy cuts in latest budget: President Bush's FY06 budget request for the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) energy efficiency and renewable energy programs envisioned "reductions totaling nearly $50 million -- an overall cut of roughly four percent." (Renewable Energy Access, 2/28/05)

Fact -- Bush rejected bipartisan plan to set goals for renewable energy: Last year, President Bush "oppose[d] efforts to include a national renewable energy requirement for utilities in Congress's broad energy legislation." According to the Union of Concerned Scientists it "is a cost-effective, market-based policy that requires electric utilities to gradually increase their use of renewable energy resources such as wind, solar, and bioenergy," to between 10 percent and 20 percent by 2020. A 10 percent standard "would have virtually no impact on electricity prices and could save consumers as much as $13.2 billion." (Reuters, 2/10/05; Union of Concerned Scientists; Union of Concerned Scientists)


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
This is a joke
Posted by: navistic50 on Feb 1, 2006 12:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have become so disgusted that I refuse to watch or listen to President Bush's speeches. Are far as I am concerned, if his lips are moving, he is lying. I am glad that you deciphered his speech for in doing so, it allows me to get a more realistic picture of why I just can't stand this president..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This is a joke Posted by: John-A
When listening to Bush speak...
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Feb 1, 2006 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All I hear is that segment from Martial Law, the one with all the sound clips from the 2004 Repug convention. "Terror, terrorism, war on terror, terror, weapons of mass destruction, terror, the evil terrorists, terrorists, terror, blah blah blah ad infinum." The whole segment is like 3 minutes long with nothing but sound clips of this brainwashing propaganda bs. Why do people eat this stuff up?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A silver lining....
Posted by: Jasonix on Feb 1, 2006 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The American health care system is going to collapse because Bush and the powers-that-be refuse to do anything about it. But that's good news - most of this country's problems are caused by an over-abundance of baby boomers. A bunch of 50-somethings and 60-somethings who have already paid off their mortgages and settled into the twilight of their careers now run the country. They care more about whether or not gay people can get married (pro or con) than they do about the dire circumstances faced by younger people. They'll be the first to go if the healthcare system collapses. Once they're in the ground, leadership will pass to Generation X - a group of people who don't take themselves and their ideas too seriously, who base their beliefs on evidence rather than ideology, and who are respectful of different opinions. I say, let healthcare collapse! It's the best way to get rid of the current leadership in our society.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: notinKansas
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: BeeGee
» RE: Vote for who? Posted by: Jasonix
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: crusaderrabbit
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: Jasonix
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: mazur
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: DaBear
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: Jasonix
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: zuuqyn
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: renarich
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: xs10shal
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: Jasonix
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: A silver lining.... Posted by: jwilson
Great Speech! (reprinted)
Posted by: Robba29 on Feb 1, 2006 5:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yeah--one of his best, only 4 fumbles that I heard, and about as many times where you could tell he could care less about what he was saying. So here's my tally--he mentioned (or clearly alluded to):
Sept. 11: 3 times
WMDs: 3
Terrorist/ism: 10
Freedom: 15 (buzzword for the night)
Bin Laden: 1
Evil: 1
Hurrican Katrina: 3 (mentioned twice as 'natural disaster' and once by name)
Gay marriage: 1 (while talking about activist judges and the moral fiber of America)

Other highilights:
Okay, so I guess we're fighting the "terrorists" in Iraq because they're hell-bent on destroying America, then two sentences later he says that they lack a military capable of hurting the US (I guess this is where the hypothetical WMDs would come in).
While talking about the non-democratic countries that rule their people through tyranny, he failed to mention Saudi Arabia and China (no surprise, really).
He kept on trying to make a connection between those "terrorists" in Iraq and our freedom over here--I still haven't gotten that one. Maybe I'm slow, I don't know. Could someone please explain?
Oh, the connection between bringing a "modern economy" to the Middle East and freedom. Last time I checked the ass-backward Saudis were pretty damned capitalistic. Again, maybe I'm slow--could someone explain?
The lies about history--I mean, he literally re-wrote history before our eyes! Starting with:
Lincoln--despite what Bush said, Lincoln would have allowed slavery to continue so that Union could be preserved. He didn't give a shit about the slaves until the first shots were fired.
Wilson--saying he wasn't an isolationist is a blatant lie! He won in 1916 on the slogan "He kept us out of war!" He made every attempt to stay out of WWI and didn't get involved until the US got the Zimmerman note. Not to mention that Wilson is a piss-poor example of freedom since he was a huge KKK supporter.
Roosevelt and WWII--again, the US wanted to stay out and didn't want to get involved to prevent tyranny or any other crap. They got involved once their business interests were at stake and Japan provided an excuse.
Half-truth: The US was not the first to liberate the Nazi death camps. The Russians were the first to get to Auschwitz and report what they saw (confirming what the world knew but didn't act on).
Okay, later!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I noticed that too.. Posted by: sln70
Funny New Cartoon about Exxon's Greed
Posted by: GinnyS22 on Feb 1, 2006 6:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Check out this funny new flash cartoon: http://www.ExxposeExxon.com/movie

Today Exxon announced that it made a net profit of $36.1 BILLION DOLLARS in 2005!!


While Americans were suffering through hurricanes Katrina and Rita and sky-high spikes in oil prices last year, ExxonMobil was busy pulling down the largest profit in the history of corporate America!!

The flash cartoon was put out by the Exxpose Exxon coalition to try to pressure Exxon to stop sabotaging efforts to fight global warming, quit lobbying to open the Arctic Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, and get the company to use some of their huge profits to invest in renewable energy like wind and solar.

ExxonMobil is such a huge company. I think we should all post this (http://www.ExxposeExxon.com/movie) on our own blogs and websites to show our support for the fight!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nixon goes to China, my eye!
Posted by: BenjamminH on Feb 1, 2006 6:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many of the talking heads are falling over themselves to point out Bush's bold stance on alternative energy, since he was/is a Texas oil man. For a minute, let's ignore the fact that he has never backed up his rhetoric in this department. As evidenced in the above article, he has consistently proposed cuts in such programs.
What no one is mentioning about his "Nixon goes to China" take on energy is that all of those proposals are a boondoggle to the exisiting energy industry. His first idea on alternative energy? "Clean" coal! Guess who's going to make all that ethanol he mentioned? Big oil. Nuclear power, etc.
If we were to be truly impressed by Bush's energy plan, he would have had to propose conservation, increased funding of public transportation, solar panels on new builds that feed back into the grid (what many on this site have called "democratic energy")

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Line-Item Future?
Posted by: TheySayImUnamerican on Feb 1, 2006 8:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm concerned that everyone seems to be overlooking his call for passage of the line-item veto (deceptively offered in a "getting rid of the pork" context). His signing statements aren't enough to keep him happy anymore; now he wants the ability to fine-tune and tweak new legislation to suit his ends. And the Repubs last night seemed to think that was a grand idea.

We can't just call this guy on the obvious Orwellian stuff. It's the sneakyshort "mentioned in passing" bits that set him up for future power grabs, and I don't even want to imagine a line-item veto in this guy's hands. Unfortunately, now that he said it I have to.

"Hmmmm, don't think I like this-here McCain amendment... whadda you think, Rummy?"

NOT cool at all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't jump on the sound-byte wagon
Posted by: m92tiger on Feb 1, 2006 8:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would just like to clarify for the person who wrote this article when they state in regards to Iran's leadership being rabidly "anti-semitic"...is quote the misnomer. If you look up the word semitic in your dictionary, you will probably find something along the lines of...language of semitic origin, including Hebrew and Arabic. I would argue then that while the Iranian leader may be anti-Israel...he is not anti-semitic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That is a canard Posted by: brunowe
» RE: That is a canard Posted by: m92tiger
One Good Thing
Posted by: gonzoskismet on Feb 1, 2006 8:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One good thing about the SOTU Speech. I had to work last night so I didn't have to throw beer bottles at the television. This made the wife VERY, VERY happy. Which usually makes me VERY, VERY happy!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

well stated...
Posted by: mindvsbody on Feb 1, 2006 8:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You broke down the state of the union speech very well,by seperating his views and facts, we all know his poll numbers are poor, his tax cuts benefitting the rich and hurting the poor, the poverty rates have gone up in his presidency,he had to admit to the pre war intelligence being false, the lack of help in the gulf, the national savings rate going negative, first time in history for that, also the wiretapping fiasco, that he cant weasle his way out of, like when he was asked at Kansas State University about Educational programs being cut and he had "problems" hearing the question...it can only get worse from here on out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

clinker
Posted by: cottontail on Feb 1, 2006 9:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why the crazed simian gets away with murder.........(from an article by Paul Craig Roberts)
"Two recent polls, a LA Times/Bloomberg poll and a NYTimes/CBS News poll indicate why Bush is getting away with impeachable offenses. Half of the U.S. population is incapable of acquiring, processing and understanding information." That, of course, does not include the good folks who comment on AlterNet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Deconstructing Bush's speech
Posted by: Democritus on Feb 1, 2006 10:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It really doesn't matter what Bush says. He's going to do what he thinks convenient at the time. You could say he's a liar, but I think it's far worse than that. He's actually convinced himself that God is speaking through him and will somehow make what he says come to pass. Being delusional and completely out of touch with reality is worse than lying, because the liar at least has the wits to tell truth from falsehood.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Time to go Bushie
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Feb 1, 2006 10:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This president has proven time and time again that him and the congress are unfit for the job. Sure there are a few 'token' objections on the Dem side but that's only 'Window Dressing'. If they had real courage there would
be bills and appointments that would only pass with the repub's vote. Sure the crap would still pass,but with ALL the Dems opposing them it would send a better message to the American People that they 'are' different. But thank God they did'nt because the truth about them stands taller than their actions.
Every person I know,plus the folks I meet on the street are 'FED UP'. We've been lied to, made poorer,and our Country is seen in the World as the second cousin of Conan the Destroyer. The Poeple's State of the Union is this;
End the War. Give us Healthcare. Make Social Security always funded. Give us Clean Air,clean water, clean energy.
Give us truth,we can take it. Give us Peace,we'll accept it.
Until they do,they don't deserve the time it takes to go to the polls. They don't deserve our tax money. They don't deserve our children's lives. They only deserve a sound and
total 'TARRING AND FEATHERING'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Time to go Bushie Posted by: benzene
But it Makes NO Difference
Posted by: kk33deg on Feb 1, 2006 11:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
George W. Bush can lie as much as he wants on any topic and get away with it. Why?

1. Because the Loyal Opposition (aka the Democtratic Party"leadership") are a bunch of wimps and idiots who believe that pandering to a small group of socially liberal-to-moderate / fiscally conservative upper-middle class white suburbanites will win them elections, so they won't do or say ANYTHING that might POSSIBLY offend this group. Thus the rolling over on Alito, the support for the War in Iraq, the shying away from the Abramoff scandal and the refusal to say that Bush is not only lying every time he opens his mouth but that he's also the worst President in US history. Never has an opposition party done so little with so much. Howard Dean is the titular head of the Party, but John Kerry, Hilary Clinton, Joe Leiberman and other such centrist, "business-friendly" vermin are really running the Party.

2. The allegedly liberal mainstream media, which is nothing but entertainment and knows it's bad for ratings with their target markets to offend anybody. So instead of telling the truth about the criminal incompetance of the Cheney Regime and the dereliction of duty by the Dems, they saturate us with the latest stories about Brad and Jen or kidnapped tourists or molested children or crashing airplanes. Except of course for the Ministry of Propaganda, Fox News, which cheerleads for the Criminal-In-Chief 24/7. Oh, and of course, one of the lies the media saturate us with is that there is no choice other than between ultra-right candidates and pro-business centerist candidates.

All of this is so vile, all of this is so tragic. Yet the problem really lies with the US electorate, which accepts this constant parade of lies, falsehoods and outright theft of what is rightfully theirs and votes accordingly. Whatever happens to the US, we who live here richly deserve it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The circus clown is killing the children!
Posted by: bodhi99 on Feb 1, 2006 11:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with "what a joke". I only made it 20 minutes in before I just couldn't stand my own mental rebuttal. What I found even more offensive - if not surprising was the way the media just acts like they are commenting on the Macy's day Parade. If CNN or Fox was screaming "The clowns have gone into the crowd and are killing the children" as a metaphor for sending our kids to war. People would be reacting very differently. That won't happen as if you read books like "when news lies" www.wmdthefilm.com. You realize that at least for now, we are very alone when it comes to the keeping the truth in perspective.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BUSH join RAN!
Posted by: teknozen on Feb 1, 2006 11:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it would appear from his "state of the union" that George Bush has joined Rainforest Action Network's campaign FREEDOM FROM OIL

Bush of all people now tells us "America is addicted to oil" and "the best way to break this addiction is through technology."

Bush says he wants us to "dramatically improve our environment," (is this why he is trashing most of the progress we have made in the last 30 years?) ... "move beyond a petroleum-based economy," (now that he's made his fortune) ... "and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past," (so, the Iraq war will soon end?).

i'm sure he is very saddened by the fact that ExxonMobil, reaped record profits of over $10 billion in 2005.

so now not oly do we have a government that is led by people who mistrust intellectuals, who keep secrets in a custom befitting dictatorships and police states, and who prevaricate more than most administrations, but now-- they are telling us exactly what Al Gore was telling us a few years ago. all this while he tries to stop NASA's top climate scientist from speaking out on the need for prompt action on global warming.

he promises more research for electric and hybrid vehicles, but ignores the solutions already road-ready like the 100 mpg Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles-- fizzling out due to lack of federal support. meanwhile we trade American lives for the remaining oil in Iraq. who is Bush kidding?

it seems like an opportune time to reread Orwell.

but dont google "1984" unless you want to tip off Homelandt Zecurity that yer a troublemaker.

“When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.”- Thomas Jefferson

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NO NEED FOR 12 STEPS
Posted by: chanceny on Feb 1, 2006 12:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
HE STANDS AT THE PODIUM, DRUNK WITH POWER, HIS ADORING PROTECTORATE THOWING LAURELS AT HIS FEET. HE'S BEEN WELL SCHOOLED, KINDA MANCHURIAN-LIKE, AND HAS BECOME A TRUE BELIEVER IN ALL HE SAYS. SO HE SPEAKS, OFFERING HIS LOYAL OPPOSITION AN OLIVE BRANCH OF BIPARTISANSHIP WHILE IMPLYING THEY WERE COWARDS WHO ONLY WANT TO CUT AND RUN. HE LOOKS IN THE MIROR WITH COMPLETE SELF DELUSION, AIDED & ABETTED BY HIS ENTOURAGE OF WORSHIPERS, AND PROJECTS HIS PROFESSIONALLY PRACTICED LEADERSHIP QUALITIES AS IF PRANCING BEFORE MOM & DAD AS THEY PRIDEFULLY WATCHED. HIS FIERCELY FANATICAL FOLLOWERS, PUPPETS HE GLEEFULLY MANIPULATES WITH HIS EASY CHARM, RISE TO THEIR FEET, CHEERING HIM ALONG WHILE HE SPEWS HIS STAFF WRITTEN MENDACIOUS CRAPOLA FROM HIS PODIUM OF POWER. NO ONE WILL EVER PENETRATE HIS OMNIPOTENT VISION OF HIMSELF. HE COULDN'T COPE WITH THE TINIEST DOSE OF REALITY. HE SPOKE WITHOUT HIS USUAL TICKS - THE SNEERING, SNICKERING, BLINKING, WINKING. PROZAC???? WHO KNOWS? THIS DRY DRUNK, BORN AGAIN SO HE COULD COMPLETELY NULLIFY THE OLD GWB, IS IN CHARGE. AIN'T THAT A KICK IN THE GUT?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is what I got of it
Posted by: condenser on Feb 1, 2006 12:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It was a disgusting admission that the way to lead is to preemptively destroy anything that stands in the way, as if peace was as simple as becoming CEO or president. Killing is evil when it is done to you, but it is the right thing to do when it is done to your enemy. The meaning of the word freedom was extensively perverted. The wonderful attributes of freedom are continuously being transfered as attributes of American society. Isn't it admitting that there is not much fredom left at all if we MUST do things as vile as killing people preemptively, spying, controlling the press and accepting that no law is binding? It sounded a lot like there is no turning back either.
As for the economic and environmental propaganda, look to the actions and not the words. It assumes a lot also. It assumes that throwing research money at the problems will solve them, and solve them very quickly. Good luck with that. That future is very uncertain. There are some things that money can't buy and that brute force can't fix.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why wasn't there a challenge to Bush's speech !!!!
Posted by: threedfm on Feb 2, 2006 4:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Dem's should have had someone , anyone challenge the President's facts on inadequate information and exaggerated fabricated programs he spoke of , in his State of the Union Dream .
Shame on the Democrat's for not having a better responce .
I wish they would get a backbone , get mad ,just do or say something , fight back. I for one will not vote for such namby , pamby politicsians that won't stand up for themselfs or
the Anerican People , when they can see what's going on right in front of their eyes . GOD BLESS AMERICA and lets get our shit together and whip those $#@!&^%

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

unveiling my soapbox
Posted by: constantreader on Feb 6, 2006 10:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After much reading and thought, including reading the views of others who want to scrap our system of government for a parliamentary system, I believe one little change could set off a chain of positive events.
My proposed change? Campaign for an absolute ban on private financing for all politcal campaigns. Any candidate caught using additional private funding would be summarily disqualified (setting all the candidates to spying on each other, thereby keeping everyone honest). Money corrupts-if all candidates were listed and given a sum to use on their campaigns, we could break the two party system in short order. There may be a natural move toward porportional representatation and coalition government in Congress. Let all the parties participate, including the nuts and berries-if nothing else, politics would be much more entertaining. How we go about it? Maybe local referendums, spreading on upward to a national movement. As I said, it's my own personal kooky idea.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

dwest
Posted by: dwest on Feb 7, 2006 10:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just have one observation. You should'nt promulgate a policy you can't pronounce: nuclear, not nucular!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]