was the "anthrax scare" even mentioned in the SOTU?

[welshTerrier2]

i didn't watch, listen to or read the SOTU but i know some of you did ...

my question is: was the "anthrax scare" mentioned at all ???

because if it wasn't, and if this was supposed the most recent example or terrorism in the U.S., it certainly calls into question the whole credibility of terrorism as an issue ...

without getting into the entire 9/11 lihop/mihop discussion, i would only ask why it is that Democrats still seem to overwhelmingly support the idea that we are, and should be, at war with terrorism all over the world ??? if the left, or perhaps even the "activist center" of the Party, does not agree with a globe-wide war on terrorism, it well past the time to have a more open dialog among the Party's grassroots, Democratic officeholders and the American people ... let's not just be blind followers of bush's eternal war ...

Democrats call for alternative energy strategies, they call for war as a last resort, they call for more involvement of the global community in addressing problems in the Middle East ... I agree with these approaches as alternatives to war and invasion ... but it seems to me the Democrats are "on board" 100% with the "war on terrorism" and see the above strategies as additions to the use of the American military rather than substitutes for its use ...

[rwenos]

1. Of Course It Wasn't

The government is pretending the anthrax thing never happened. The logical inference is it was one of their guys . . .

[welshTerrier2]

2. well, there you go ...

my point is that it is troubling that the Democrats choose not to make an issue of such hypocrisy ... we're handed what very clearly was a manufactured crisis, and it was exploited to drum up support for the "war on terrorism", and now ... POOF !!!

"move along, people ... nothing to see here ..."

if bush's credibility is gone on the "anthrax scare", why won't Democrats question his credibility on the war on terrorism too??? no WMD, no Al Qaeda "terrorists" working with Saddam, no anthrax, no bin Laden ...

does "Al Qaeda" and bin Laden even exist? what exactly is it that elected Democrats believe we're fighting against?

if people in Muslim countries hate the U.S., does sending our military all over the world seem like an effective remedy? Democrats need to start pushing things like alternative energy not just as good energy policy but as an alternative to the war on terrorism ... do they really believe the insanity of bush's eternal war?

[rwenos]

3. It's Hard to Investigate from Congress

When the Dem's are in the minority. That means no subpoena power.

Also, they look like they're scare of Bushie Boy. No cojones. They didn't do much about Dick Cheney's moondance with Big Oil during the transition in 2000, did they?

Maybe they just don't have the power, without a majority in one house of Cognress.