Note: Originally posted on January 24, 2007. The colorization scheme is slightly out of date; however, overall it’s a close enough match to my current practice as to be worth saving.
Following is the second half of a transcript of US President George W. Bush’s State of the Union address for 2007, including Whole Writing markup. The Whole Writing method employs Kronology, a holistic model of human nature and development based on the AQAL Integral Framework. The text of the address is displayed in the default color; Whole Writing markup is displayed in multiple colors; and my commentary is displayed in turquoise. This post is part 2 of 2 (with an analysis of the Democratic Response to follow).
As we have seen, the first half of the president’s speech held a center of gravity at achievement-oriented, capitalist valuesl/9, L/4, slightly above the approximate average rhetorical basel/9, L/3.5 of the Republican party. As his speech turns to the topic of the war on terror, the president begins a concerted effort to focus on the values of national defense and using violent and coercisive means to stop terrorl/9, L/2. As he does so, he occasionally references rhetorical “hot spots” at amber, orange, and green … but overall the tone of his speech moves lower from orange toward amber.
War on terrorQ/3, Q/4
For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from dangerl/9, L/2. Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that terrorists can cause. We have had time to take stock of our situation. We have added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us — unless we stop them.
With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflictl/9, L/4 and the course we have followedl/9, L/2. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled — that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy.
From the start, America and our allies have protected our people by staying on the offensel/9, L/2. The enemy knows that the days of comfortable sanctuaryl/9, L/3, easy movementl/9, L/4, steady financingl/9, L/4, and free flowing communicationsl/9, L/5 are long over. For the terrorists, life since 9/11 has never been the same.
Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented — but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an al Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coastl/9, L/2. We broke up a Southeast Asian terrorist cell grooming operatives for attacks inside the United Statesl/9, L/2. We uncovered an al Qaeda cell developing anthrax to be used in attacks against Americal/9, L/2. And just last August, British authorities uncovered a plot to blow up passenger planes bound for America over the Atlantic Oceanl/9, L/2. For each life saved, we owe a debt of gratitude to the brave public servants who devote their lives to finding the terrorists and stopping them.
Every success against the terrorists is a reminder of the shoreless ambitions of this enemy. The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at work in the world. And so long as that is the case, America is still a nation at war.
In the minds of the terrorists, this war began well before September 11th, and will not end until their radical vision is fulfilled. And these past five years have given us a much clearer view of the nature of this enemy. Al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremistsl/B, L/2, possessed by hatredl/3, L/2 and commanded by a harsh and narrow ideologyl/9, L/3. Take almost any principle of civilizationl/9, L/4, and their goal is the opposite. They preach with threats … instruct with bullets and bombs … and promise paradise for the murder of the innocentl/9, L/2.
Our enemies are quite explicit about their intentions. They want to overthrowl/9, L/2 moderate governmentsl/9, L/4, and establish safe havens from which to plan and carry out new attacks on our countryl/9, L/3. By killing and terrorizing Americans, they want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideologyl/9, L/2. Listen to this warning from the late terrorist Zarqawi: “We will sacrifice our blood and bodies to put an end to your dreams, and what is coming is even worse.” And Osama bin Laden declared: “Death is better than living on this Earth with the unbelievers among us.”
These men are not given to idle words, and they are just one camp in the Islamist radical movement. In recent times, it has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremistsl/B, L/2 who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah — a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken.
The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat. But whatever slogans they chant, when they slaughter the innocent, they have the same wicked purposes. They want to kill Americans, kill democracy in the Middle East and gain the weapons to kill on an even more horrific scalel/9, L/2.
In the sixth year since our nation was attacked, I wish I could report to you that the dangers have ended. They have not. And so it remains the policy of this government to use every lawful and proper tool of intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, and military action to do our duty, to find these enemies, and to protect the American peoplel/9, L/3.
This war is more than a clash of arms — it is a decisive ideological struggle, and the security of our nation is in the balance. To prevail, we must remove the conditions that inspire blind hatredl/9, L/6, and drove 19 men to get onto airplanes and come to kill us. What every terrorist fears most is human freedom — societies where men and women make their own choices, answer to their own conscience, and live by their hopes instead of their resentmentsl/9, L/4. 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 democracyl/9, L/3. The great question of our day is whether America will help men and women in the Middle East to build free societies and share in the rights of all humanityl/9, L/4. And I say, for the sake of our own security — we must.
In the last two years, we have seen the desire for liberty in the broader Middle East — and we have been sobered by the enemy’s fierce reaction. In 2005, the world watched as the citizens of Lebanon raised the banner of the Cedar Revolution, drove out the Syrian occupiers and chose new leaders in free elections. In 2005, the people of Afghanistan defied the terrorists and elected a democratic legislaturel/9, L/4. And in 2005, the Iraqi people held three national electionsl/9, L/4 — choosing a transitional government, adopting the most progressive, democratic constitution in the Arab world and then electing a government under that constitution. Despite endless threats from the killers in their midst, nearly 12 million Iraqi citizens came out to votel/9, L/4 in a show of hope and solidarity we should never forget.
A thinking enemy watched all of these scenes, adjusted their tactics, and in 2006 they struck back. In Lebanon, assassins took the life of Pierre Gemayel, a prominent participant in the Cedar Revolution. And Hezbollah terrorists, with support from Syria and Iran, sowed conflict in the region and are seeking to undermine Lebanon’s legitimately elected government. In Afghanistan, Taliban and al Qaeda fighters tried to regain power by regrouping and engaging Afghan and NATO forces. In Iraq, al Qaeda and other Sunni extremistsl/B, l/2 blew up one of the most sacred places in Shia Islam — the Golden Mosque of SamarraQ/4, l/B, L/1. This atrocity, directed at a Muslim house of prayer, was designed to provoke retaliation from Iraqi Shia — and it succeeded. Radical Shia elements, some of whom receive support from Iran, formed death squads. The result was a tragic escalation of sectarian rage and reprisal that continues to this day.
This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we are inl/9, L/2. Every one of us wishes that this war were over and won. Yet it would not be like us to leave our promises unkept, our friends abandoned, and our own security at risk. Ladies and gentlemen: On this day, at this hour, it is still within our power to shape the outcome of this battle. So let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory.
The State of the Union address turns from the war on terror to the war on Iraq. The president’s most predominant rhetorical tone is law-and-order and advancing stabilityl/9, L/3, with occasional nods to lower and higher ideals in the spectrum of values. Although Bush’s proposal for a special advisory council for the war on terrorQ/4, l/9, L/9 hints at indigo-level thinking, he unrealistically expects a high degree of wisdom from mainstream political leadersQ/4, l/9, L/4.5 with a center of gravity at around orange or yellow.
IraqQ/3, Q/4
We are carrying out a new strategy in Iraq — a plan that demands more from Iraq’s elected governmentl/9, L/3, and gives our forces in Iraq the reinforcements they need to complete their missionl/9, L/2. Our goal is a democratic Iraq that upholds the rule of lawl/9, L/3, respects the rights of its peoplel/9, L/4, provides them security, and is an ally in the war on terrorl/9, L/2.
In order to make progress toward this goal, the Iraqi government must stop the sectarian violence in its capital. But the Iraqis are not yet ready to do this on their own. So we are deploying reinforcements of more than 20,000 additional soldiers and Marines to Iraq. The vast majority will go to Baghdad, where they will help Iraqi forces to clear and secure neighborhoods, and serve as advisers embedded in Iraqi Army unitsl/9, L/3. With Iraqis in the lead, our forces will help secure the city by chasing down terrorists, insurgents, and roaming death squads. And in Anbar province — where al Qaeda terrorists have gathered and local forces have begun showing a willingness to fight them — we are sending an additional 4,000 United States Marines, with orders to find the terrorists and clear them outl/9, L/2. We did not drive al Qaeda out of their safe haven in Afghanistan only to let them set up a new safe haven in a free Iraq.
The people of Iraq want to live in peace, and now is the time for their government to act. Iraq’s leaders know that our commitment is not open ended. They have promised to deploy more of their own troops to secure Baghdad — and they must do so. They have pledged that they will confront violent radicals of any faction or political party. They need to follow through, and lift needless restrictions on Iraqi and Coalition forces, so these troops can achieve their mission of bringing security to all of the people of Baghdadl/9, L/3. Iraq’s leaders have committed themselves to a series of benchmarks to achieve reconciliation — to share oil revenues among all of Iraq’s citizensl/9, L/6 … to put the wealth of Iraq into the rebuilding of Iraql/9, L/4 … to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation’s civic lifel/9, L/3 … to hold local electionsl/9, L/4 … and to take responsibility for security in every Iraqi provincel/9, L/3. But for all of this to happen, Baghdad must be securedl/9, L/2. And our plan will help the Iraqi government take back its capital and make good on its commitments.
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. 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.
If American forces step back before Baghdad is secure, the Iraqi government would be overrun by extremists on all sides. We could expect an epic battle between Shia extremists backed by Iran, and Sunni extremists aided by al Qaeda and supporters of the old regime. A contagion of violence could spill out across the country — and in time the entire region could be drawn into the conflictl/9, L/2.
For America, this is a nightmare scenario. For the enemy, this is the objective. Chaosl/9, L/0 is their greatest ally in this struggle. And out of chaos in Iraq, would emerge an emboldened enemyl/9, L/2 with new safe havens… new recruits … new resources … and an even greater determination to harm America. To allow this to happen would be to ignore the lessons of September 11th and invite tragedy. And ladies and gentlemen, nothing is more important at this moment in our history than for America to succeed in the Middle East … to succeed in Iraq … and to spare the American people from this danger.
This is where matters stand tonight, in the here and now. I have spoken with many of you in person. I respect you and the arguments you have made. We went into this largely united — in our assumptions, and in our convictions. And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure. Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq — and I ask you to give it a chance to work. And I ask you to support our troops in the field — and those on their wayl/9, L/3.
The war on terror we fight today is a generational struggle that will continue long after you and I have turned our duties over to others. That is why it is important to work together so our Nation can see this great effort through. Both parties and both branches should work in close consultation. And this is why I propose to establish a special advisory councilQ/4, l/9, L/9 on the war on terror, made up of leaders in Congress from both political partiesQ/4, l/9, L/4.5. 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.
One of the first steps we can take together is to add to the ranks of our military — so that the American Armed Forces are ready for all the challenges aheadl/9, L/3. Tonight I ask the Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer Civilian Reserve Corpsl/9, L/3. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them. And it would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.
Americans can have confidence in the outcome of this struggle — because we are not in this struggle alone. We have a diplomatic strategyl/9, L/6 that is rallying the world to join in the fight against extremism. In Iraq, multinational forces are operating under a mandate from the United NationsQ/4, l/9, L/5 — and we are working with Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the Gulf states to increase support for Iraq’s government. The United Nations has imposed sanctions on Iran, and made it clear that the world will not allow the regime in Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons. With the other members of the Quartet — the UN, the European Union, and Russia — we are pursuing diplomacy to help bring peace to the Holy Land, and pursuing the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security.
In Afghanistan, NATO has taken the lead in turning back the Taliban and al Qaeda offensive — the first time the Alliance has deployed forces outside the North Atlantic area. Together with our partners in China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea, we are pursuing intensive diplomacyl/9, L/6 to achieve a Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons. And we will continue to speak out for the cause of freedoml/9, L/4 in places like Cuba, Belarus, and Burma — and continue to awaken the conscience of the world to save the people of Darfurl/9, L/7.
The State of the Union address concludes with a look at other foreign policy concerns, especially the US’s commitment to providing foreign aidl/9, L/5 to AIDS-striken and impoverished countries. President Bush also provides a handful of examples of individualistic heroisml/9, L/2, holding up as role models several individuals whose behavior reflects primarily amber, orange, and yellow values.
AIDS/AfricaQ/3, Q/4
American foreign policy is more than a matter of warl/9, L/2 and diplomacyl/9, L/6. Our work in the world is also based on a timeless truth: To whom much is given, much is required. We hear the call to take on the challenges of hunger, poverty, and disease — and that is precisely what America is doingl/9, L/5 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 three short years. I ask you to continue funding our efforts to fight HIV/AIDS. I ask you to provide $1.2 billion over five years so we can combat malaria in 15 African countries. 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. And let us continue to support the expanded tradel/9, L/4 and debt reliefl/9, L/5 that are the best hope for lifting lives and eliminating poverty.
When America serves others in this way, we show the strength and generosity of our country. These deeds reflect the character of our people. The greatest strength we have is the heroic kindness, courage, and self sacrifice of the American peoplel/9, L/3. You see this spirit often if you know where to look — and tonight we need only look above to the gallery.
Dikembe Mutombo grew up in Africa, amid great poverty and disease. He came to Georgetown University on a scholarship to study medicine — but Coach John Thompson got a look at Dikembe and had a different idea. Dikembe became a star in the NBA, and a citizen of the United States. But he never forgot the land of his birth — or the duty to share his blessings with others. He has built a brand new hospital in his hometownl/9, L/5. A friend has said of this good hearted man: “Mutombo believes that God has given him this opportunity to do great things.” And we are proud to call this son of the Congo our fellow American.
After her daughter was born, Julie Aigner-Clark searched for ways to share her love of music and art with her child. So she borrowed some equipment, and began filming children’s videos in her basement. The Baby Einstein Company was born — and in just five years her business grew to more than $20 million in sales. In November 2001, Julie sold Baby Einstein to the Walt Disney Company, and with her help Baby Einstein has grown into a $200 million business. Julie represents the great enterprising spirit of Americal/9, L/4. And she is using her success to help others — producing child safety videos with John Walsh of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Childrenl/9, L/5. Julie says of her new project: “I believe it’s the most important thing that I’ve ever done. I believe that children have the right to live in a world that is safe.” So tonight, we are pleased to welcome this talented business entrepreneur and generous social entrepreneur — Julie Aigner-Clark.
Three weeks ago, Wesley Autrey was waiting at a Harlem subway station with his two little girls, when he saw a man fall into the path of a train. With seconds to act, Wesley jumped onto the tracksl/9, L/1 … pulled the man into a space between the rails … and held him as the train passed right above their headsl/9, L/2. He insists he’s not a hero. Wesley says: “We got guys and girls overseas dying for us to have our freedoms. We got to show each other some love.” There is something wonderful about a country that produces a brave and humble man like Wesley Autrey.
Tommy Rieman was a teenager pumping gas in Independence, Kentucky, when he enlisted in the United States Army. In December 2003, he was on a reconnaissance mission in Iraq when his team came under heavy enemy fire. From his Humvee, Sgt. Rieman returned fire — and used his body as a shield to protect his gunner. He was shot in the chest and arm, and received shrapnel wounds to his legs — yet he refused medical attention, and stayed in the fight. He helped to repel a second attack, firing grenades at the enemy’s positionl/9, L/2. For his exceptional courage, Sgt. Rieman was awarded the Silver Star. And like so many other Americans who have volunteered to defend us, he has earned the respect and gratitude of our whole country.
In such courage and compassion, ladies and gentlemen, we see the spirit and character of America — and these qualities are not in short supply. This is a decent and honorable country — and resilient, too. We have been through a lot together. We have met challenges and faced dangers, and we know that more lie ahead. Yet we can go forward with confidence — because the State of our Union is strong … our cause in the world is right … and tonight that cause goes on.
God Bless.
In conclusion, the president’s State of the Union demonstrates a concentration of values at approximately the orange altitude, with significant appeal to red, amber, and yellow values. Domestic policy concerns frequently reveal yellow-level approaches framed to appeal to an audience at amber/orange values; other policies are clearly dominated both by amber/orange approaches and framing rhetoric. In discussing the war on terror, president Bush’s rhetoric grows strongly red (highlighting the need for an aggressive defensive response); however in speaking about the war on Iraq the rhetoric turns amber (highlighting the need to build order and structure in Iraqi society while following through on America’s duties and responsibilities).
Overall, the speech gives evidence for the president’s predominant concerns with Station 2, Station 3, Station 4, and Station 5 with an average center of gravity at approximately Station 3.75. This values framework is slightly higher than the overall average framework of the Republican party which probably resides at approximately Station 3.5. By positioning the rhetoric of the speech slightly higher than the Republican base but lower than the Democratic base, Bush shows evidence of attempting to “appeal to both sides of the aisle,” (including “independents”) with his nods to Democratic-friendly Station 5 approaches framed in terms of the Republican-friendly values orientation of Station 3 and Station 4.
Sphere: Related Content
Technorati Tags: Bush, politics, writing
Joe Perez is a writer striving to take Integral approaches to issues in ordinary life, culture, politics, sexuality, and spirituality. A graduate of Harvard University and The Divinity School at the University of Chicago, his books are 
(Integral Books, 2007) and 
(Lulu, 2006). 
My doctor says I can induce laughter even if I don’t feel happy or joyful or want to laugh. Even if nothing’s funny. Then we sat for a while and did the hee-hee-ha-ha-ho-hos in the office. She showed me that it’s possible to make my body go through the motions of laughter, and begin to change my state conscioussly.
is characterized as masculine, Ascending, and fixed. 
is seen as feminine, Ascending, and mutable. Both political parties share a common orientation towards bringing values and principles to bear in raising the national character (Ascending type). Republicans tend to be more focused on the maintenance of the status quo (i.e., fixed type) whereas Democrats tend to seek more flexible and balanced solutions to problems (i.e., mutable type). Another key type difference is one of agency v. communion. Seen from this angle, party differences are largely a Mars/Venus, male/female thing. The Republican type tends to focus largely on masculine or agentic styles of achieving its goals; however, the Democratic type speaks in a more feminine and communanitarian voice.
Next week, I will deliver a full report on the state of our economy. Tonight, I want to discuss three economic reforms that deserve to be priorities for this Congress.