SOTU Commentary ‘06
On North Korea, President Bush said very little: “The demands of justice require their freedom as well [specifically naming the people of North Korea, Syria, Burma, and Zimbabwe, among others].”
The rhetoric was no more soaring, and certainly no more specific, than anything I’ve heard him say before. I can live without soaring rhetoric for public diplomacy’s sake, but what I can’t forgive is that this president has frittered away six years without forming a forceful or even a particularly coherent policy. He has very little time left to do anything at this point.
If you care about my reactions to the rest of it . . .
**
Fred Barnes will get letters from my relatives for putting Israel in the Axis of Evil instead of Iran. Ouch.
As he enters the room, POTUS kisses the Secretary of State on the cheek. No, she’s not unattractive, but doesn’t that seem wierd? It does to me.
Sheila Jackson-Lee: please sit down. And who let Prince Charles and Cindy Sheehan in? Have we no standards?
Opening with Coretta Scott-King: classy.
The appeal to civility may have been appropriate, but it was misplaced at the very beginning and fell somewhat flat, and vaguely partisan. Still, the audience is probably keeping score of who’s been flouting Godwin’s Law.
We seek the end of tyranny in our world. Some think that goal is misplaced and idealistic. In reality, the future of our country depends on it. . . . Democracies replace resentment with hope. . . . Every step toward freedom makes our nation safer, so we will act boldly in freedom’s cause.
Good quotes on the history of democracy advancing.
Terrorists: We must take their declared intentions seriously. They aim to seize power in Iraq and use it as a base for attacks against America. Invokes Beslan and London, clearly suggesting that it could happen here.
If we leave these vicious attackers alone, they will not leave us alone. They would simply move the battle to our own shores. There is no peace in retreat, and there is no honor in retreat.
“The United States will not retreat from the world, and we will never surrender to evil.” Charles Rangel and didn’t applaud, and from my glance at Kerry, he didn’t, either! What in that statement is objectionable to any American?
Iraq: He’s telling me what I already know. I’m confident, yada, yada. “We are winning.” On the battlefield, perhaps, but we could lose in the American pressrooms. Can you show us a chart telling us how Iraqi readiness and numbers are increasing, versus coalition forces? Give the doubters an image that shows tangible progress. Also, I’d have cited the split in the insurgency.
Distinguishes “responsible counsel” from defeatism. “Second guessing is not a strategy.” Good! FINALLY talks about the consequences of premature withdrawal, but not graphically enough. Tell us about the millions of Iraqi refugees, the full-fledged civil war, Iran and Turkey fighting for Kirkuk and Mosul–possibly (in Iran’s case) with nukes–and the slaughter that would result. But he did mention that the terrorists would be emboldened to come here. Now tell us about bombs in shopping malls and schools.
Letter from sergeant who was KIA in Iraq: Great. What a way to honor this man’s cause. I’d have liked to hear more. Much more. Plenty of the soldiers and Marines have had some very eloquent things to say about why they volunteered for duty there.
Citing the imperfect elections in Egypt, Hamas win in Palestine, halting Saudi reforms. Just the right tone. “Liberty is the right and hope of all humanity.” Iran: will he encourage the people to rise? “The nations of the world must not allow the Iranian regime to gain nyoocyoolar weapons.” Nice and emphatic. Message to citizens of Iran: you have a right to win your own freedom. We hope to be the closest of friends of a free and democratic Iran. Good. Does this signal a U.S. policy shift away from cultivating the regime’s alleged moderates, toward a policy of encouraging dissent and resistance? It’s not entirely clear. As with North Korea, I really see no other option, and believe that even this will take considerable time while we use our navies and our economic leverage to isolate both countries as much as possible.
My expectations of Bush’s speaking abilities are so low that I’m almost always impressed that he’s not as terrible as he was in the first Bush-Kerry debate.
Defense of telephone eavesdropping: I still have no clear idea of what his statutory basis for this is. I’m convinced that it’s necessary, but I’m not convinced that it’s legal. I think a nation of laws deals honestly with such things by putting them into the statute books. “We will not wait to get hit again.” Great applause line; Hillary Clinton sat there with a smarmy look on her face and reminded me that she’s not really the hawk she wants us to think she is.
Economy and taxes. Yes, I like low taxes. That eventually means you’ll have to spend less. Medicare reform? I’m not quite dead. If you polled voters my age, I image most would want to abolish the entire expensive enterprise and invest the savings in a stable mix of large-caps and T-bonds.
Earmark reform. Hmmm. Line-item veto. An old Reagan idea that I liked then and now. Entitlements. Dream on. Not when you’re a lame duck. Start by proposing less spending.
Hat tip to Bill Clinton: more of Hillary’s icy smirk in spite of that. My God, how I despise the sight of her, and I suspect most people who were watching reacted the same way. No wonder Bill cheated. If I had a wife like her, I’d pray nightly that the sweet release of death would be swift and merciful. Or maybe I’d just bag the interns.
Medicare. Health care. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
[OFK goes to fridge to quaff some delicious san-sa-joo.]
The energy stuff is always exciting until I remember that I’ve been hearing this 45 minutes into SOTU speeches since Jimmy Carter was in office. And I have yet to see any of those schemes come to pass. But yes, the thought of transforming Saudi Arabia into a sea of sand, burned-out car bodies, flapping canvas tents, and rusting tin shacks is deeply appealing to me. As if.
Social stuff: Impressive stats on drug use, crime, and pregnancy, but delivered like Jimmy Kimmel’s impression of Carl Malone. Abortion, gay marriage, stem cells, judicial activism: he sounded like he was tossing out a chicken leg to every snapping croc. Me, I’m no fan of judicial activism and in my own work always give the law my most rigorous interpretation as I think Congress intended. But to those who say that liberals have a monopoly on that concept, I have three words: Judge Roy Moore. Fortunately, I don’t think Roberts or Alito approach Moore’s line of thinking even distantly, but I’m not as sure what Harriet Myers might have done.
Good closer: “History is written in courage.” “We will lead freedom’s advance.” “[O]ptimistic about our country.” “Confident of the victories to come.”
He didn’t really knock it out of the park, but he never does. A solid GWB speech. Like every SOTU, a laundry list. He emphasized the things that he needed to emphasize. And he still revels in his inability to say “nuclear.”
And now for the Dem response . . . .
What a dweeb. All I can think of how awful his opponent must have been. Someone grab a rope and tie down that left eyebrow! But at least he’s not Harry Reid.
What’s sad is that I can’t even think of a single Dem of national prominence or any substantial tenure worth putting on television. Barack Obama? A first-termer, and how many times can they reuse him? Joe Lieberman? Barely even a Democrat anymore. Biden? Not after making a pompous ass of himself during two successive confirmation battles, which left him much less loved by members of both parties. The Ice Woman? I suppose the best answer I can give is Harold Ford, a young Tennessee congressman, who is still in the woodshed for challenging the shrill and unappealing Nancy Pelosi. How sad.
On the war: we support the troops but mid-war, we humbly suggest questioning the entire basis for going in and questioning the decision itself. What’s wrong with that argument? The calendar. And they’re cutting VA benefits! I have absolutely no idea what he thinks we should do, probably because his party has absolutely no agreement on it. The Democratic Party can no longer afford to offend Kos or Eric Alterman.