![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think it should be added to the page that Iran was mentioned five times, of those five times... 2 blamed Iran for helping Hezbollah, 2 blamed Iran for helping iraqi insurgents, 1 mentioned the UN sanctions imposed on them.
The discussion page is hereby started. WatchingYouLikeAHawk 02:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Let's make it the most well-documented and detailed Wikipedia article on a state of the union address ever. ~ Rollo44 02:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm recording it on TIVO on ABC, just FYI. I'll be checking this talk page regularly throughout this evening. WatchingYouLikeAHawk 02:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't want to put this up without being sure, but I was watching this with a large group, and we were all positive that at the end, when he went to shake Pelosi's hand at the end, he accidentaly grabbed her boob? Anyone else see this, or were we delusional? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Die Übermenschen (talk • contribs)
Does anyone know which terrorist Bush quoted during the address? It was kind of a dark point in the speech. That should be put in. ~ Rollo44 03:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I recommend we go through the transcript and use it to flesh out his key points in the article. ~ Rollo44 05:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Was it just me, or were multiple Senators sleeping? I swear, I saw Barak Obama and John McCain snoozing in their seats. Ittan 19:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Could someone find the transcript? I know news agencies sometimes get them early from the white house so they know what happens beforehand. Matrixhax0r 03:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
We need to decide whether this article is ready to be on the Main Page. In my opinion, we just need a little tweaking and let the edit conflicts die down before posting it.--Ed ¿Cómo estás?Reviews? 03:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Umm, shouldn't this be on the News section on the main page? It's rather important in my opinion, and while I think that the article could be fine-tuned a little bit, people will start to talk if the State of the Union address isn't on the Main Page. Rumors of an anti-American bias will circulate, and...Arius Maximus 04:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I think we have a pretty decent working version now... should we frontpage it? --Czj 04:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe the fair use pic needs to go. While the White House is going to make images available soon, the fair use image we have is way to large and not needed. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I've seen a lot of pictures come and go here. Make sure to document them all so we know which is the best to choose in the future. ~ Rollo44 05:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
--Interiot 05:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
The whitehouse website just got updated, looks like there's a number of good free images. This is the one I vote for, even if it's a bit tall. --Interiot 06:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Can someone experienced with image usage help me? If you can, see my User:Rollo44 page. Thanks. ~ Rollo44 20:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Im sure this article will become a hotbed for vandalizm, can we save time and have it semiprotected? Xlegiofalco 05:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Once again, request for semi-protection. Vandalism is no longer a future event for this article. There are more vandal edits than contributions to the article, and a whole section was missing for a period of time. We would only need the semi-protection for a few days as soon as attention dies down. ~ Rollo44 17:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
wasnt judge Ginsburg present but in formal clothes? or was it someone that looks like her? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.105.255.245 (talk) 05:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
So what was the final answer from the democrats? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.116.254.100 (talk) 05:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
Are you sure about the final -e in "Madame Speaker"? See the official transcript and the article on Madam. <KF> 05:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I am not sure about the Robert Byrd assertion. Google returns nothing relevant, and my guess is that he was on the rostrum during a joint session of Congress, but not a SotU. Nationalparks 17:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
The first thing in the article should not be attendance. This is trivial in comparison to the substance of the speech itself. -Lissa —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.222.248.123 (talk) 19:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
What is "football is cool?" - Windex
Several of the SOU article use ((year)) State of the Union Address and some use ((year)) State of the Union address as the article title. Can we perhaps agree on a proper naming convention and have the article which don't fit that be renamed? Thoughts? Address as per Whitehouse.gov --Daysleeper47 20:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I am a middle school teacher and I am stumped by a question from one of my 8th grade US history students. Can anyone help? The question is this: on the rostrum, there is the President, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House. Just below the rostrum, directly in front of it but closer than the front row of seats, there is a stenographer (I only saw one but I believe there were two). On either side of the stenographer(s), there were four people seated, essentially at the base of the rostrum. Who are these 8 people? They are not the cabinet or any other definable group that I could identify. Any help will be greatly appreciated! Please respond to sfrankel@hcsd.k12.ca.us or post on this site. Thanks!Msfrankel12 21:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)S.Frankel, California
More detail on this (not sure how to include this in main article without turning this clause in the doesmtic issues into an entire paragraph) Bush is proposing that everyone with health insurance, weather they bought it from work or not, be given a a new tax exemption ($4500 if I recall correctly for a single with no dependants) similar to the existing personal exemption for taxes (weather or not you itemize) but this would apply to the payroll tax in addition to the income tax. It wouldn't matter if the person's insurance premium was $60 a month or $200 month got it from the employer or not, the person would get the same amount. However, the existing health insurance tax break on payroll & income tax to employees health insurance preimums and the portion (if any) paid by the employer of the actual dollars would be eliminated. (As would the Self Employed health insurance adjument.) Winners would be anyone getting health insurance from someone other than employer and anyone whose insurance preimum is less than the credit. Losers would be anyone whose work provided health insurance preimum is more than the credit. Jon 22:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I think it should be added to the page the things he said about Iran, and how he said
"We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009, and met that goal three years ahead of schedule."
This is not true as the deficit has gone nowhere but up in the past 5-7 years. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.85.170.136 (talk) 01:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC).
Be bold and make your changes if they are apolitical and contribute to the totality of the article. ~ Rollo44 05:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
I think that the wording in the line "Bush advocated saving the people affected by the Darfur conflict" could be tweaked. "Saving" seems a little strong for the bland and impersonal rest of the sentence. CrashCart9 04:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Is the Libertarian response even realivent to the article? I can't remember the last time federal congressman or senator was elected under the Libertarian party banner. I also note that the 2006 state of the union article does not mention the Libertarians. What's worse is the sentence that is here requires knoweldge of the Libertarian party platform to figure out what exactly his criticisms of the doesmetic portion of the agenda are. (Which would be exactly the opposite as the cricism coming from the Democrats.) Jon 17:49, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
There's been a lot of notable analysis written in newspapers since the speech. Thursday's Wall Street Journal has an entire article (page A8) about how conservatives were upset with the speech, and quoted someone from the American Conservative Union saying that "the president left a lot of conservatives shaking their heads". //// Pacific PanDeist * 05:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
The full transcript of the speech was added to this article. I don't believe that it is appropriate for an encyclopedic article and is rather cumbersome. We can certainly link to the transcript, and it should go on Wikisource if it isn't already (my guess is that it is), but it shouldn't be in the Wikipedia article itself, which should cover the background, facts, and implications of the speech in general. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 18:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 2007 State of the Union Address. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:33, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 2007 State of the Union Address. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:12, 17 June 2017 (UTC)