Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fact Sheet: Key Initiatives in the President's State of the Union Message
The White House ^ | 28 January 2003 | President George W. Bush

Posted on 01/29/2003 8:31:33 AM PST by PhiKapMom

For Immediate Release
January 28, 2003

Fact Sheet: Key Initiatives in the President's State of the Union Message



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: initiatives; presbush; stateofunion
Posted for your informantion and dissemination!

Thanks!

1 posted on 01/29/2003 8:31:34 AM PST by PhiKapMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Bump for our brave and resolute President! Bookmarked!
2 posted on 01/29/2003 8:35:52 AM PST by Wait4Truth (I HATE THE MEDIA!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

3 posted on 01/29/2003 8:37:00 AM PST by Joe Brower (http://www.joebrower.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I only have problems with one area, the Aids for Africa program. We're not the Aids police, and while we should do something to help, I find this to be above and beyound our fairshare!
4 posted on 01/29/2003 8:39:38 AM PST by D. Miles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
Bump for our wonderful President. Does anyone else wonder why the press hasn't asked Daschle why he approved a resolution in October for use of force in Iraq but opposes force now?
5 posted on 01/29/2003 8:41:33 AM PST by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brandonmark; Alex P. Keaton; MeeknMing; JohnHuang2; Dog Gone; Dog; isthisnickcool; OKSooner; VOA; ..
Posted for your use in countering DemocRAT attacks and spin.

What I thought was going to be low volume ping list until closer to the election has turned out not to be true. If you wish to stay on this ping list, the following will be covered:

* President Bush and VP Cheney and members of the Cabinet (Including Defense/State/Intelligence/Homeland Security)

* Republican National Committee plus RNC Research

* National Repubican Senatorial Committee and Senate

* National Republican Congressional Committee and House

* Any other items deemed of importance such as the recent Blix Transcript to the UN and the one from the Nuclear spokesman.

I tried to split out these ping lists but there were so many duplicates that I am going to try going with one ping list now called Bush 2004!

My goal is to give all of us the tools and facts to help make Free Republic the #1 site for news and opinion on the Internet. We have to be able to counter the DemocRATs and their friends in the media with their spin and lies.

If you have any questions or want on or off this ping list, please contact me. Also if any of you have any suggestions or would like to help in getting the facts out, please let me know!

Thanks,

Sharon

6 posted on 01/29/2003 8:42:51 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
What a neat bump! Thanks much!
7 posted on 01/29/2003 8:44:14 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: PhiKapMom
thanks
9 posted on 01/29/2003 8:48:57 AM PST by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
COMING SOON TO A THEATRE IN IRAQ!

RERUNS WILL BE SEEN IN IRAN, SYRIA, AND NORTH KOREA IF THEIR DICTATORS ARE STILL IN POWER!

ANY QUESTIONS?

10 posted on 01/29/2003 8:51:31 AM PST by Grampa Dave (Stop future Freepathons! Become a monthly donor! Only you can prevent Freepathons!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
LOL!!! I love it!
11 posted on 01/29/2003 8:52:32 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Does anyone else wonder why the press hasn't asked Daschle why he approved a resolution in October for use of force in Iraq but opposes force now?

No wonder there. The leftmedia is the propaganda arm of the DNC. The presstitutes are not about to ask their Maximum Leaders any embarrassing questions.

Republicans, of course, are fair game, for which anything goes.


12 posted on 01/29/2003 8:59:49 AM PST by Joe Brower (http://www.joebrower.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MRAR15Guy56; PhiKapMom
So much for limited, Constitutional governement.
Good God.

I'm sure it's nothing but part of a secret plan to get back control of Congress. You know Bush can't do anything until we have a majority in BOTH houses.

13 posted on 01/29/2003 9:00:44 AM PST by exodus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
The Terrorist Threat Integration Center will permanently eliminate the seam between foreign and domestic intelligence on terrorism.

Specifically, it will:
* Optimize use of terrorist threat-related information, expertise, and capabilities to conduct threat analysis and inform collection strategies.
* Create a structure that ensures information sharing across agency lines in a way consistent with our national values of privacy and civil liberties.
* Integrate terrorist-related information collected domestically and abroad in order to form the most comprehensive possible threat picture.
* Be responsible and accountable for providing terrorist threat assessments for our national leadership.

* In other words, it creates a NATIONAL police force, that has authority over every law enforcement organization in our nation, whether a local force charged with traffic enforcement, or an organization like the CIA, charged with defending us against foreign spies.

There isn't anything "Local" anymore. Not even "State." Every policeman you see, from now on," permanently," is a member of our national police force.

14 posted on 01/29/2003 9:45:30 AM PST by exodus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
fyi
16 posted on 01/29/2003 9:58:32 AM PST by Free the USA (Stooge for the Rich)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Hi, Got several coworkers who are looking favorably on Bush presidency tho they voted for Gore in 2000. There is hope with them. they were asking me specifics on the tax cuts proposed by Bush--such as single income, no kids will they get a cut in taxes. Another comment was that the rebate of last year was a loan and not money given back to the person as one person said H&R block said this and took back the rebate on the tax form.

What I need is simple explanation of the tax code as Bush is now proposing. Anybody know where to go or anybody have it simplified form. I don't want the lawyer talking points.

This will help us in helping Bush agenda. Thanks in advance.
17 posted on 01/29/2003 10:36:48 AM PST by olliemb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MRAR15Guy56
There seem to be no constintuancy for governmental limits.
18 posted on 01/29/2003 10:39:12 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Of two evils, choose the prettier. - Carolyn Wells)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Freedom Fuel: Because the greatest environmental progress will come about through technology and innovation, the President proposed $1.2 billion in research funding so that America can lead the world in developing clean, hydrogen-powered automobiles. This new national commitment will open the possibility that the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free.

I would love to see the above come to pass. We are giving terrorists money with the fuel we put in our cars.

But my vote for George Bush in 2004 hinges on whether he supports the renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994.

19 posted on 01/29/2003 11:51:06 AM PST by 2nd_Amendment_Defender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: D. Miles
I only have problems with one area, the Aids for Africa program.

The 400 billion expansion of socialist Medicare program complete with a new entitlement for prescription drugs is a conservative goal? In lieu of opposing it, as in the past, Republicans now embrace it and propose it's expansion.

20 posted on 01/29/2003 12:03:18 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LuvMyNick
About spending our money on Americans first?

That would not make it constitutional or moral.

21 posted on 01/29/2003 12:04:57 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
There seem to be no constituency for governmental limits.

Those could be the words on the tombstone of a constitutional republic, unfortunately.

22 posted on 01/29/2003 12:06:19 PM PST by EternalVigilance (abort NARAL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: exodus
I'm sure it's nothing but part of a secret plan to get back control of Congress. You know Bush can't do anything until we have a majority in BOTH houses.

The Republicans now are in the majority in all three branches of government. (both the house and senate in the legislative branch).

No more excuses. They offer bigger government and an expansion of unconstitutional federal programs.

23 posted on 01/29/2003 12:08:33 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Thanks for posting this, it is a good source of info.

A short thread so far, who knows, maybe it's embarrassing to many.

24 posted on 01/29/2003 12:36:33 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
GWB Is The Man!

Be Well - Be Armed - Be Safe - Molon Labe!
25 posted on 01/29/2003 1:36:55 PM PST by blackie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: exodus
"In other words, it creates a NATIONAL police force, that has authority over every law enforcement organization in our nation..."

The TTIC info you've posted does not warrant this conclusion. It says nothing about transfer of authority. It speaks only to information collection and sharing.

26 posted on 01/29/2003 2:29:08 PM PST by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ThomasJefferson
"The Republicans now are in the majority..."

That "majority" includes so-called Republicans like Chaffee, Snowe and Specter in the Senate, and like Morella, Boehlert and Houghton in the House. Also, some votes require a 2/3 super-majority for passage.

27 posted on 01/29/2003 2:37:42 PM PST by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: olliemb
What I need is simple explanation of the tax code as Bush is now proposing. Anybody know where to go or anybody have it simplified form. I don't want the lawyer talking points.

The tax code, as such, is not being changed. The rates would be lower under Bush's proposal - 10% 15% 25% 28% 33% 35%, effective retroactively to 01/03 - and the marraige "penalty" would be eliminated. Also under this plan, President Bush would increase the Child Tax Credit, end double taxation on dividends, and allow small businesses to increase their expense write-offs.

...single income, no kids will they get a cut in taxes.

Yes, because of the reduction in tax rates. More here.

But hey, if you're proposing a complete overhaul of the tax code, I'm with ya. Let's scrap it and start over.

28 posted on 01/29/2003 3:04:21 PM PST by .30Carbine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
My husband and I were discussing The Filibuster.

We understand that this term applies to Sen. KKK Byrd holding up proceedings in the chamber by talking for 48 hours straight - the dictionary even confirms this. What we don't understand is what the R's and D's mean when they speak of The Filibuster in reference to the judicial nominees. I heard it mentioned that in the event of The Filibuster being brought to bear in the Senate, the R's will need 60 votes to overcome The Filibuster by the D's.

Webster's tells us that The Filibuster refers to any obstructionist tactic in a legislative body. Okay, then. What, specifically, will the D's do in The Filibuster to prevent the passing of judicial nominees through the Senate?

29 posted on 01/29/2003 3:20:20 PM PST by .30Carbine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
Some Democrats vote like Republicans as well. It's easy for people to cross over, on most issues they only differ on scope and detail, but not fundamental philosophy.

I'm sorry they don't have enough for an absolute strangle hold on everything. But they are in control, and we saw what they proposed, (not acquiesced to) so it's kinda easy to predict the future.

30 posted on 01/29/2003 3:53:33 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ThomasJefferson
No more excuses. They offer bigger government and an expansion of unconstitutional federal programs.

I am starting to figure out the definition of "Compassionate Conservative."

It is a Social Conservative/Fiscal Liberal who believes in the Reagan model of tax cuts to stimulate the economy, but does not believe, as Reagan did, in smaller government.

I love and pray for President Bush. He has the character and the charisma of Reagan, but lacks his fiscal restraint. Reagan ended the Cold War without instituting one new federal agency, regulation, or program that I am aware of.

Reagan understood that faith without works is dead, but good works by government enforcement are no good works at all. Robin Hood was no Christian; he was a Socialist.

I understand that 9/11 changed a lot of things, but one thing it didn't change was the Constitution, nor the difference between right and wrong. It is wrong to raid the wallets of Americans to aid Africans, as merciful as that aid may be. It is even wrong to raid Americans to aid other Americans. Charity is a noble virtue; it incorporates the idea of a willing surrender of one's time, talent, or treasure for the benefit of another out of love. Once the giving is forced, it is no longer charity; it is then extortion. Charity begins at home, not in Washington.

I was disheartened to hear that President Bush used his executive priviledge to sign into law his Faith Based Initiative. Anyone who will accept money collected by garnering wages to continue volunteer work doesn't know the meaning of volunteerism.

I am afraid of the unintended consequences of President Bush's good intentions. Now that billions in American taxpayer dollars will be going to do good works in Africa, when any Christian organization asks for donations, Americans will reply, "But I am already giving, through the government!" It may mean the end of many good works, not the beginning of them.

31 posted on 01/29/2003 4:06:42 PM PST by .30Carbine (God help America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine
I am afraid of the unintended consequences of President Bush's good intentions.

Altruism, at gunpoint.

32 posted on 01/29/2003 4:14:10 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine
Thank you so much for that information. it will help at work when we get to talking about taxes.
And you are right, I meant tax cuts proposed not tax code. But I agree with you time to change the code.
33 posted on 01/29/2003 4:40:45 PM PST by olliemb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I will definitely save this...and print it out for fellow conservatives at work.
This kind of documentation will come in handy when the Dems try to twist Bush's words in the future. (as they always do)
Thanks!
34 posted on 01/29/2003 5:20:24 PM PST by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
Your Welcome! These facts sheets really do come in handy -- I print them out so I don't have to try and find them again!
35 posted on 01/29/2003 6:14:26 PM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I've actually been archiving News articles, OpEds, polls etc. and fact sheets like yours ever since I joined FreeRepublic back in Nov of 2000.

FR must have the largest membership of political research and documentation experts on the planet...and I have really taken advantage of it.

To date I have well over 5,000 FR files burned onto CDs, all organized by topics and dates.

It makes a great reference data base when it comes to discussing or debating almost any subject relating to the Bush adminstration, politics,the liberal left, the world etc.
Free Republic is truly a wealth of information.

36 posted on 01/29/2003 7:03:39 PM PST by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
That is fantastic! I know I learned my lesson when my computer crashed from a virus. I save everything I need to CD now to make sure I don't have to go through that again.

Fortunately they were able to save what I needed but it was a hazzle and items saved as one big group which made them hard to find!
37 posted on 01/29/2003 7:14:16 PM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Great speech.

His eyes delivering "you support America and America supports you" were the most impressive countenance ever.

Re the "national"/"foreign" intelligence seamlessness:

Clinton destroyed the FBI counterintelligence role with Freeh's complicity.

You recall Goss' COS John Millis (CIA veteran) calling Deutch the "worst DCI for counterintelligence" and Clinton the "worst president for counterintelligence"--to restore any domestic intelligence capability in CONUS will be a plus--anybody remember 9/11?

The fuel cell thing is cutting edge--it's the buzz of the Los Alamos people here. Very cool.

38 posted on 01/29/2003 7:48:19 PM PST by PhilDragoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo
Clinton also did a good job of destroying our military readiness as well, but we are coming back strong!

I wondered what was being said about the hydrogen battery. I figured some scientists were extremely happy last night!
39 posted on 01/29/2003 7:52:57 PM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine
That's right. Sixty votes required to end a filibuster in the Senate. That said, there are lots of ways the Republican majority can cause extreme agony for the Senate democrats -- if they want to. For example, they can simply starve the democrats' states -- no pork of any kind. To put this figuratively, how long can you keep your composure while somebody is grinding her spike heel into the top of your shoe?
40 posted on 01/29/2003 8:38:00 PM PST by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte; PhiKapMom
Thank you for that link. The article has lots of info on D's conducting filibusters, but still did not explain *what* a filibuster is! So I did a google and found the following at the C-SPAN Congressional Glossary:

A Filibuster is the term used for an extended debate in the Senate which has the effect of preventing a vote. Senate rules contain no motion to force a vote. A vote occurs only once debate ends.

Therefore I conclude that the D's will attempt to continue debate on judicial nominees, ad infinitum, unless the R's can garner 60 supporting members to vote for an end to the debate? However, as the definition above says, "Senate rules contain no motion to force a vote." So I guess I am still a bit confused. Can 60 votes end debate and force a vote on a judicial nominee, or can the debate continue until doomsday?

In my most recent hard-copy issue of Human Events, in the Capital Briefs section, I read that "Hatch announced last week that he would drop the requirement that both senators from a given state submit positive reviews - or 'blue slips' - for a nominee to receive committee consideration.....if committee Republicans go along with Hatch, Democrats will have only the filibuster as a recourse against conservative judges."

The first part of this info is easy to understand - that denying 'blue slips' to nominees is a form of filibuster (obstructionism). The short quip does not, however, go into detail about the one final filibuster left to the D's. Is it prolonged debate without a vote?

PhiKapMom, I would guess that a thread devoted exclusively to getting out the word about a Democrat filibuster of judicial nominees in the Senate, complete with definitions!, would be useful. What do you think? Maybe you have already done that, and I just missed the thread. President Bush's judicial nominations are the most important function of his career in the White House. I believe America's future hangs in the balance on these nominees alone. I wish it were not so, but who can deny it after witnessing so much judicial activism?

41 posted on 01/30/2003 3:39:08 AM PST by .30Carbine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine
Thanks for posting this. I think you have a great idea about putting up a thread on filibusters because I have seen a lot of misinformation about them.

Ping me and I will use the new Bush 2004 ping list I have put together as this would be very worthwhile background information for all of us to keep handy.

Thanks again!

42 posted on 01/30/2003 6:56:44 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine
Here you go. It's called "cloture" and has been around since 1917. As I said before, the way to head off or stop a filibuster (which is now procedural, not spoken) is to threaten the filibustering party with dire consequences that a simple majority can inflict on them. At least, that's what a majority party with any cojones will do. If the majority leadership is weak, as it was under Lott, they will offer inducements instead.
43 posted on 01/30/2003 2:11:15 PM PST by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom; Bonaparte
Found this quote in the Washington Times:

"Judicial nominees have rarely been subjected to a filibuster, which is when senators speak at length on the Senate floor to prevent a measure from receiving a vote. To break a filibuster in the Senate, 60 votes are necessary."

November 24, 2002

44 posted on 01/30/2003 2:44:47 PM PST by .30Carbine (Well THAT settles THAT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
Thank you! That is a fantastic link.
45 posted on 01/30/2003 2:58:52 PM PST by .30Carbine (FReepers are the greatest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ThomasJefferson
"But they [Republicans] are in control..."

Six Republican Turncoats Defect On ANWAR Drilling.

Didn't notice any democrats crossing the aisle on this matter.

46 posted on 01/31/2003 8:34:42 PM PST by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
They crossed on a lot of others. But hey, it would never be enough would it? And then there would be some other excuse.
47 posted on 01/31/2003 9:00:10 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson