After a first term in office that can only be described in aggregate as "poor" - in spite of a few moments of excellence - and a squeak-through victory to his second term, George W. Bush is doomed.

"Doomed to what?" you might ask. I would reply "Doomed to having everything he does cross-checked, reexamined and second-guessed by everyone else." He's got his first term's history to live down - or live up to, if you're a neo-con freak - and he is now a slave to it.

(And before everyone starts crying "liberal media!" we should remember that this always happens with second term Presidents. Clinton had to live with it, as did Reagan, and shame on Bush & co. for making me nostalgic for both of them.)

Since everyone else will be expecting "better," predicting "worse," or just sitting there, munching the popcorn and waiting for the inevitable whoopsies, I might as well join in. And let me start off by saying that, for a second term that's supposed to be more "diplomatic," we're getting off to a bad start.

Case in point: the State of the Union, where Bush was strangely soft on Iran, Syria and North Korea (the new Axis of Evil?) and made questionable comments about our allies in the region, instead - most notably Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Maybe the speechwriter decided to spread the "love" all around the world, this time?

Both countries were miffed at the President's potshots, which may have been encouragements but came across as insults. Of course, Bush was just speaking the truth out loud, which is often the greatest insult of all - diplomatically speaking, anyway.

The truth? Egypt's "democracy" is stagnant at best, with Mubarak cast as Pharaoh and his son waiting in the wings. And Saudi's democracy is, for want of a better word, a joke.

But these comments were nothing that couldn't have been said in private, behind closed doors. You know... diplomatically?

Put bluntly, there was no need to say these things in the speech. There was enough there to chew on already, and listing what everyone else in the region is doing just smacks of filler.

(Of course, "filler" tends to be synonymous with the State of the Union. If it was a hot dog, it would not be Oscar Meyer.)

Will this little whoopsie mean that both countries will turn their backs on us in a huff, and leave us with no Arab allies in the region? Probably not - for better or worse, they like being on the "good" side of our sheet.

But it doesn't do for Bush to call out and embarrass the people he needs to make his agenda a reality. You never badmouth the people you need - ever.

And this goes double, right now: the Saudis are trying to make a regional effort to combat terrorism in their own backyard, and Egypt is trying to mediate in the Israel/Palestine conflict.

Whether these efforts will bear any fruit is questionable, but we need to be pulling together on these matters - something that's hard to do once you've called someone out on television.

Any diplomat could have told the President this. Are there any in the White House for this term, or is this a taste of treats to come in the post-Powell Bush II Administration?