Courtesy of ThinkProgress.org

SOTU: Bush’s Signature Foreign Assistance Program Is Nearly Bankrupt

Bush said: “We hear the call to take on the challenges of hunger, poverty, and disease - and that is precisely what America is doing. … I ask that you fund the Millennium Challenge Account, so that American aid reaches the people who need it, in nations where democracy is on the rise and corruption is in retreat.”

FACT — MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE PROGRAM WILL SOON BE BANKRUPT: “President Bush’s signature foreign-assistance program is likely to run out of money this year, leaving in the lurch several poor countries that have labored to meet its strict eligibility standards, according to aid officials. Mr. Bush introduced the Millennium Challenge program in 2002 as a new approach to fix the perceived failures of overseas-development assistance.” [Wall Street Journal, 1/22/07]

SOTU: Bush’s AIDS Policy Is ‘Basically Unworkable’

Bush said: “We must continue to fight HIV/AIDS, especially on the continent of Africa — and because you funded our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the number of people receiving life-saving drugs has grown from 50,000 to more than 800,000 in 3 short years. I ask you to continue funding our efforts to fight HIV/AIDS.”

FACT — BUSH POLICY HAS LED TO SHORTAGE OF CONDOMS: The U.N. and a number of advocacy groups for AIDS patients have charged that the Bush administration policy had led to a shortage of condoms in Uganda, increasing the risk of infection for many people, particularly married women and adolescents.” Jodi Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Health and Gender Equity in Washington, D.C., said that “there has been a dangerous and profound shift in U.S. donor policy from comprehensive prevention, education and provision of condoms to focus on abstinence only.” [New York Times, 8/30/05]

FACT — GAO REPORT CRITICIZED IMPLEMENTATION OF BUSH AIDS PLAN: An 87-page GAO report criticized the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) because a large part of the funding is going “to promote abstinence and fidelity is causing confusion in many countries and in a few is eroding other prevention efforts, including ones to reduce mother-to-child transmission of the virus.” The abstinence policy “is basically unworkable,” said Paul Zeitz, director of the Global AIDS Alliance. “This shows the problem very clearly and starkly.” [Washington Post, 4/4/06]

SOTU: Bush/Lieberman Terrorism Working Group Lacks Congressional Support

Bush said: “I propose to establish a special advisory council on the war on terror, made up of leaders in Congress from both political parties. We will share ideas for how to position America to meet every challenge that confronts us. And we will show our enemies abroad that we are united in the goal of victory.”

FACT — CONGRESS OPPOSES WORKING GROUP, FAVORS STRUCTURES ALREADY IN PLACE: In a letter addressed to President Bush on Jan. 19, 2007, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) wrote, “We believe that Congress already has bipartisan structures in place, like the committee system and other Congressional working groups such as the Senate’s National Security Working Group, that could produce the result you described in your speech.” [Pelosi/Reid letter, 1/19/07]

SOTU: Bush Stands In Isolation On Escalation Plan

Bush said: “Many in this Chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq — because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far reaching.”

FACT — LAWMAKERS, MILITARY COMMANDERS, AND EXPERTS OPPOSE ESCALATION: Sen. John Warner (R-VA), an influential conservative on military affairs, offered a resolution that opposes President Bush’s escalation plan. “Combined with near-unanimous Democratic opposition to Bush’s war policy, the Republican stands show a broad bipartisan lack of confidence in the president’s course.” Nearly seventy percent of Americans say they oppose Bush’s escalation. Top military leaders, including former Gen. Colin Powell, the current Joint Chiefs, and Gen. John Abizaid, have expressed their opposition to putting more U.S. troops on the ground. The president’s strategy goes against the recommendations of the recently-released Iraq Study Group. One Bush administration official admitted that the escalation plan is “more of a political decision than a military one.” [Seattle Times, 1/23/07; Newsweek, 1/20/07; Office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA); Washington Post, 1/10/07; NBC, 1/2/07; ThinkProgress, 1/3/07]

SOTU: Escalation Has Been Tried And Failed

Bush said: “My fellow citizens, our military commanders and I have carefully weighed the options. We discussed every possible approach. In the end, I chose this course of action because it provides the best chance of success.”

FACT — ESCALATION HAS BEEN A FAILURE: During the last six months, the United States has increased — or “surged” — the number of American troops in Baghdad by 12,000, yet the violence and deaths of Americans and Iraqis has climbed alarmingly, averaging 960 a week since the latest troop increase. This past summer, Bush announced a major effort to secure Baghdad, stating at a news conference that thousands of U.S.-led coalition troops would be moved into the city. Violence intensified throughout the country, and U.S. deaths in Iraq spiked. [AP, 1/9/07; Washington Post, 10/27/06; CNN, 6/14/06]

SOTU: Bush Administration Has Pushed Stability Over Democracy

Bush said: “Free people are not drawn to violent and malignant ideologies — and most will choose a better way when they are given a chance. So we advance our own security interests by helping moderates, reformers, and brave voices for democracy.”

FACT — RICE AVOIDED PUSHING DEMOCRACY IN MIDDLE EAST TRIP: On a recent trip to the Middle East, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice failed to mention Egypt’s poor human rights record. “It was clear that the United States — facing chaos in Iraq, rising Iranian influence and the destabilizing Israeli-Palestinian conflict — had decided that stability, not democracy, was its priority, Egyptian political commentators, political aides and human rights advocates said.” [NYTimes, 1/16/07]

SOTU: For The First Time, Bush Mentions Climate Change In The State Of The Union

Bush said: “For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil. And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments … raise the price of oil … and do great harm to our economy.”

FACT — BUSH’S VOLUNTARY APPROACH HAS FAILED TO CURB EMISSIONS: Carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. have increased by 354 million metric tons since 2001. The Energy Department’s latest analysis projects America’s carbon dioxide emissions will increase by one third from 2005 to 2030. [DOE; SustainableBusiness]

FACT — BUSH STILL DENIES FUNDAMENTAL CLIMATE SCIENCE: Last February, President Bush claimed there is still “a debate over whether [global warming] is man-made or naturally caused.” There is no real scientific debate over this question. Most recently, the National Academy of Sciences has unequivocally stated that natural causes cannot explain the unprecedented warmth over the last 400 years. Rather, “human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming,” the report states. [ThinkProgress; National Academies Press]

SOTU: Bush Has Failed To Deliver On 2006 Energy Promises

Bush said: “It is in our vital interest to diversify America’s energy supply — and the way forward is through technology.”

FACT — BUSH PROMISED TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES LAST YEAR, DIDN’T DELIVER: At last year’s State of the Union, President Bush said the “best way to break this addiction [to oil] is through technology.” Yet his 2007 budget actually proposed to spend less on energy efficiency, conservation, and renewable energy resources in inflation-adjusted dollars than was appropriated in fiscal year 2001 — $1.176 billion in nominal dollars in both 2001 and 2007. [State of the Union, 1/31/06; President’s Budget, FY 2007]

FACT — EMPHASIS ON TECHNOLOGY IS STANDARD RIGHT-WING TALKING POINT: Influential conservative political consultant and wordsmith Frank Luntz has advised politicians to point to the promise of technology in order to delay implementation of mandatory cuts in global warming pollution. “We need to emphasize how voluntary innovation and experimentation are preferable to bureaucratic or international intervention and regulation,” Luntz advises. [Luntz Environment Memo]

SOTU: U.S. Foreign Oil Dependence Has Increased Under Bush

Bush said: “For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil. And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments…raise the price of oil…and do great harm to our economy.”

FACT — DESPITE PAST RHETORIC, FOREIGN OIL DEPENDENCE HAS INCREASED: President Bush has pledged to reduce our energy dependence in every State of the Union he has delivered since taking office. At the same time, the United States has become increasingly dependent on foreign oil, from 58 percent of oil consumed in the U.S. in 2000 to 70 percent in September 2006. U.S. dependence on OPEC nations for oil imports “has risen to its highest level in 15 years.” By focusing on expanding domestic exploration, he perpetuates our dependence on oil. [ThinkProgress, 1/3/07; Department of Energy; Financial Times, 1/2/07]

SOTU: Bush’s Health Savings Accounts Offer Americans No Meaningful Savings

Bush said: “We need to expand Health Savings Accounts … help small businesses through Association Health Plans … reduce costs and medical errors with better information technology … encourage price transparency … and protect good doctors from junk lawsuits by passing medical liability reform. And in all we do, we must remember that the best health care decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors.”

FACT — HSAs DO NOT OFFER MEANINGFUL SAVINGS FOR AMERICANS: “Low- and middle-income uninsured people will gain meager or no tax savings” from health savings accounts, according to a Commonwealth Fund study. Roughly 50 percent of uninsured adults pay no federal income taxes, meaning that “tax incentives for high-deductible health plans would have little impact on uninsured adults.” [Commonwealth Fund, April 2005]

FACT — HSAs PRIMARILY BENEFIT THE RICH: The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found “that the average income of HSA users was $133,000 in 2004, compared to $51,000 for all non-elderly tax filers.” Most low-income individuals “do not face high enough tax liability to benefit in a significant way from tax deductions associated with HSAs.” [CBPP, 12/7/06; Kaiser Familiy Foundation, 10/4/06]

FACT — HSAs WILL NOT DECREASE THE NUMBER OF UNINSURED: HSAs are “not likely to be an important contributor to expanding coverage among uninsured people” because most of uninsured Americans “do not face high-enough marginal tax rates to benefit substantially from the tax deductibility of HSA contributions.” [Commonwealth Fund, April 2005]

FACT — AMERICANS ARE DISSATISFIED WITH HSAs: Just 33-42 percent of enrollees in consumer-driven health plans were satisfied with their health care, compared to 63 percent of those people with traditional coverage. Two-thirds of people prefer an employer-selected set of plans over an employer-funded account and choosing insurance on their own. [Commonwealth Fund, December 2005]

SOTU: Bush Health Care Plan Will Cut Funding For Hospitals

Bush said: “My second proposal is to help the States that are coming up with innovative ways to cover the uninsured. States that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens should receive Federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. I have asked the Secretary of Health and Human Services to work with Congress to take existing Federal funds and use them to create ‘Affordable Choices’ grants.”

FACT — BUSH PLAN WILL CUT $30 BILLION FROM PUBLIC HOSPITALS: Bush’s ‘Affordable Choice’ grants will not involve any new federal money. It will instead “redirect some of the $30 billion the government spends annually to care for people without health insurance who show up at hospitals and emergency rooms. There are about 47 million Americans without health insurance.” [USA Today, , 1/23/07; American Progress, 1/23/07]

SOTU: Individual Health Plans Are Out Of Reach For Millions Of Americans

Bush said: “First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. … [F]or the millions of other Americans who have no health insurance at all, this deduction would help put a basic private health insurance plan within their reach. Changing the tax code is a vital and necessary step to making health care affordable for more Americans.”

FACT — MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WILL BE UNABLE TO AFFORD EXPENSIVE INDIVIDUAL PLANS: Karen Pollitz, a Georgetown University researcher who co-authored a 2001 study on the individual health-insurance market for the Kaiser Family Foundation, found that people who aren’t in perfect health are largely unable to buy individual health insurance. In her study, Pollitz found that “roughly 90% of applicants in what’s known as less-than-perfect health were unable to buy individual policies at standard rates, while 37% were rejected outright.” Individual health insurers may deny coverage to people based on their medial history, or put them in “a high-risk category that it makes health coverage too expensive.” [MSN]

SOTU: Bush Has Used Presidential Earmarks For Political Gain

Bush said: “The time has come to end this practice [of congressional earmarking]. So let us work together to reform the budget process … expose every earmark to the light of day and to a vote in Congress.”

FACT — BUSH HAS ENGAGED IN HIS OWN EARMARKING: Bush has engaged in his own earmarking, using the federal budget process to “reward political supporters, campaign contributors and sometimes members of Congress” for votes on a presidential priority. Unlike with appropriations bills, you have no way to know whether an executive earmark “comes from some agency’s discretionary fund, and they decide to put it in some key district or state” for political gain. [Wall Street Journal, 2/21/06]

SOTU: Bush Has Overseen Skyrocketing Deficits, Slow Economic Growth

Bush said: “A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy — and that is what we have. … This economy is on the move — and our job is to keep it that way, not with more government but with more enterprise.”

FACT — BUSH’S TAX CUTS THE LARGEST CONTRIBUTOR TO BUDGET DEFICITS: Tax cuts “have been the single largest contributor to the reemergence of substantial budget deficits.” “Between 2001 and 2006, the passage of the Bush tax cuts without the offsetting savings have cost $1.2 trillion in lost revenues, or more than 80 percent of the cumulative deficit during this period.” [Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 10/12/06; Center for American Progress analysis, 1/22/07]

FACT — DEFICITS HAVE MUSROOMED UNDER BUSH: Bush has “never proposed a balanced budget since it went into deficit, never vetoed a spending bill when Republicans controlled Congress and offered little sustained objection to earmarks until the issue gained political traction last year.” “The budget outlook for the period 2002 to 2011 deteriorated by $8.5 trillion from 2001 to 2006 and for 2006, it decreased by $753 billion.” [Washington Post, 1/4/07; Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 12/13/06; Center for American Progress analysis, 1/22/07]

FACT — ECONOMIC GROWTH HAS BEEN RELATIVELY SLOW UNDER BUSH: Economic growth fell to 2 percent in the third quarter of last year, following 2.6 percent growth in the second quarter and a surprisingly strong first quarter growth of 5.6 percent. “This was the first time in more than three years that the economy registered two consecutive quarters of growth below three percent.” [CBS News, 12/21/06; Center for Amercan Progress analysis, 12/21/06]

President Bush's national televised address on Iraq on Jan. 10, alongside several recent developments and other statements, indicate that the administration is ever more seriously considering war with Iran.

During his speech, Bush made the starkest accusations yet against Iraq's neighbor, alleging that it was "providing material support for attacks on American troops."

His remarks followed tough comments from other senior US officials. Vice-President Dick Cheney told Fox News, "I think it's pretty well known that Iran is fishing in troubled waters, if you will, inside Iraq," while national security adviser Stephen Hadley said the US was "going to need to deal with what Iran is doing inside Iraq."

Such remarks, following the prospect of "hot pursuit" raids into Iran as raised by Bush in his televized address, have fuelled speculation that the US is softening up the US public for possible action against Tehran.

The increasingly confrontational pose struck by the US is a repudiation of one of the key recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, which called for the start of a dialogue with Iran and Syria in an effort to extricate the US from Iraq.

In his speech, Bush outright rejected the group's recommendations. Rather than talking to Iran and Syria, Bush virtually declared war on these states.

Bush said: "We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq."

Asked whether that meant US troops could be sent across the Iranian border, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that option was on the table. "We have to recognize that Iran is engaging in activities that endanger our troops."

Perhaps the starkest indication of an impending war with Iran is Washington's recent arrest of Iranian diplomats in Iraq. Around the time of Bush's speech, US Special Forces - in blatant violation of diplomatic regulations reminiscent of the hostage taking of US diplomats in Tehran by Iranian students in 1979 - stormed the Iranian consulate in Irbil in northern Iraq, arresting five diplomats.

"What the Americans express is incorrect and hyperbole against Iran in order to justify their actions," said Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Mohammed Ali Hosseini. "The United States should release all five persons, prevent possible similar acts and compensate damages."

According to spokesman Gholamhossein Elham. "This is against all the international immunity laws and political standards and was a terrorist act."

The following recent events have led to widespread suspicions that a US/Israeli attack on Iran is imminent:

Additional aircraft carriers deployed to the Persian Gulf.

US Patriot missiles just deployed to the Persian Gulf.
F16 fighter planes just deployed to the Incirlik base in Turkey.

The F-16's can deliver B61-11 nuclear bunker busters.

Increased number of US nuclear submarines in Persian Gulf.

Admiral Fallon named Centcom commander.

Israeli pilots training for Iran bombing mission.

Increased provocations against Iran, including the arrest of Iranian diplomats in Iraq.

A U.S. attack upon Iran mostly likely would involve the use of "bunker buster" nuclear weapons, directed at purported underground nuclear processing facilitates. Each of these weapons is estimated to be approximately 1/3 as potent as those dropped on Japan at the end of World War 2.

............................................................

Courtesy of TruthOut.org

President Bush is preparing to attack Iran's nuclear facilities before the end of April and the US Air Force's new bases in Bulgaria and Romania would be used as back-up in the onslaught, according to an official report from Sofia.

"American forces could be using their two USAF bases in Bulgaria and one at Romania's Black Sea coast to launch an attack on Iran in April," the Bulgarian news agency Novinite said.

The American build-up along the Black Sea, coupled with the recent positioning of two US aircraft carrier battle groups off the Straits of Hormuz, appears to indicate president Bush has run out of patience with Tehran's nuclear misrepresentation and non-compliance with the UN Security Council's resolution. President Ahmeninejad of Iran has further ratcheted up tension in the region by putting on show his newly purchased state of the art Russian TOR-Ml anti-missile defence system.

Whether the Bulgarian news report is a tactical feint or a strategic event is hard to gauge at this stage. But, in conjunction with the beefing up of America's Italian bases and the acquisition of anti-missile defence bases in the Czech Republic and Poland, the Balkan developments seem to indicate a new phase in Bush's global war on terror.

Sofia's news of advanced war preparations along the Black Sea is backed up by some chilling details. One is the setting up of new refuelling places for US Stealth bombers, which would spearhead an attack on Iran. "The USAF's positioning of vital refuelling facilities for its B-2 bombers in unusual places, including Bulgaria, falls within the perspective of such an attack." Novinite named colonel Sam Gardiner, "a US secret service officer stationed in Bulgaria", as the source of this revelation.

Curiously, the report noted that although Tony Blair, Bush's main ally in the global war on terror, would be leaving office, the president had opted to press on with his attack on Iran in April.