Wednesday, February 2, 2005

State of the Union 2005

"The President shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient."--Article II, Sec. 3, U.S. Constitution.

When any man steps before his colleagues and his fellow citizens as the most powerful democratic leader in the world, it is a historical moment, a moment worth watching. Since I was old enough to understand the historic magnitude of the State of the Union address, I have watched, mesmerized by the executive office and the strong principles of the legislature--both Democratic and Republican. Tonight was no exception.

As I could continue on describing my amazement by the constitutional moment I have just experienced for days, I will give my critical assessment of the 2005 State of the Union address as given by President George W. Bush.

I am simply surprised that the Iraqi elections went as well as they did. I sat with tears in my eyes as the Iraqi woman hugged the mother of a fallen Marine. But in all the emotion, never once (and I just heard that Sen. John Kerry is already mentioning it) was Osama Bin Laden spoke of. Never once was an exit strategy mentioned. We have brought democracy to Iraq, but the regime that brought tragedy to our own soil on 9/11 has not fully been confronted and our troops continue to be compromised on foreign soil.

Social Security being privatized is an issue I'm not yet too educated on. I plan on in the next several weeks addressing this from my side of the political spectrum, but I will say this: Scaring the American public is not the answer to justifying spending or the change of any issue. I do not side with my fellow Democrat Sen. Barbara Boxer often, but on this I stand firmly. Social Security has a much larger future than the President would have us believe. He said before that Social Security would go broke by 1988-- so far I haven't seen that to be true. Social Security will be a key battle for the 109th Congress.

I will certainly say reinstating the Ryan White Act is an excellent move for America. AIDS research and prevention must exhaust our efforts, but AIDS is not only a problem on our home court. If there is one issue that I stand completely with my party on it is AIDS. AIDS and stem-cell research continue to be issues that keep us politically in disagreement, but for the good of our people require our attention.

There is so much yet to be done at home and abroad. There is genocide currently being practiced in the Sudan. There is great unrest in the ancient lands of Israel and Palestine. There is ever growing insecurity in Iran and Syria. There is a terrorist leader still somewhere in the mountains of Pakistan. But despite all that must be done to bring peace to the world, there is much more to be done at home. "We shall be judged more by what we do at home than by what we preach abroad." (President John F. Kennedy, 3rd and final State of the Union address)

6 comments:

Nick Speth said...

I swear to you at three o'clock, as I'm getting ready for work, I'm like "you've got to set your tivo to record the SOTU Address." Yeah, it didn't happen, so I'm stuck reading the paper copy. I'll read it and then respond.

OXEN said...

"never once was Osama Bin Laden spoke of."


"The al Qaeda terror network that attacked our country still has leaders -- but many of its top commanders have been removed. There are still governments that sponsor and harbor terrorists -- but their number has declined. There are still regimes seeking weapons of mass destruction -- but no longer without attention and without consequence. Our country is still the target of terrorists who want to kill many, and intimidate us all -- and we will stay on the offensive against them, until the fight is won."

Maybe not by name, but I include OBL in this part....

--------------------

"Never once was an exit strategy mentioned."

Huh?

"Recently an Iraqi interpreter said to a reporter, "Tell America not to abandon us." He and all Iraqis can be certain: While our military strategy is adapting to circumstances, our commitment remains firm and unchanging. We are standing for the freedom of our Iraqi friends, and freedom in Iraq will make America safer for generations to come. (Applause.) We will not set an artificial timetable for leaving Iraq, because that would embolden the terrorists and make them believe they can wait us out. We are in Iraq to achieve a result: A country that is democratic, representative of all its people, at peace with its neighbors, and able to defend itself. And when that result is achieved, our men and women serving in Iraq will return home with the honor they have earned."

------------------------

Oh, And what did you think of the dems Booing and telling the Pres. "NO" when he said SS is going to go bankrupt?

Talk about rude.........


------------------------

Nick, Go to C-span or the Whitehouse web page. You can watch it over the web from either of those places......

OXEN said...

Social Security Alternative Already Working in Texas
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1335100/posts

Nick Speth said...

I read the thing, and I watched most of the video. It's just that I spend enough time at this computer as it is, and if I can sit on my bed and fire up Tivo #2 (yup that's right Tivo #2), we'll that's a better evening.

Over on my site, I've finally got around to throwing up my disjointed thoughts on the SOTU Address.

As to the bin Laden question, here's the uncomfortable political fact: we don't have him, so he's not something Bush would want to highlight. Yet the work we've done in capturing or killing his subordinates is very positive, and so the president highlighted that.

My prediction, and I try not to predict, but I will today, is this: we'll get bin Laden in '05. I know that's out on a limb, but there you have it. We've been very close on a few occasions. So tune in next year, and you'll hear bin Laden every third paragraph.

But talk about disappointing, what's with this quote, Mr. President? "The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else." What's that stuff you were saying in your inaugural address about then?

OXEN said...

Tara,

Before you go off and drink the dems' kool-aid on how bad it would be to privatize SS, you may want to go back and read what they've said in the recent past, and even what FDR himself had to say.

1998 & 99 OK to put money in private to solve Soc Sec crisis
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1335623/posts


FDR Message to Congress on Social Security (1-17-1935) [wanted private accounts]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1335740/posts

Roland Patrick said...

Tara, SS did 'go broke' in 1983.

It was temporarily 'fixed' by raising taxes on workers paychecks to 12.4%, and cutting benefits to retirees and future retirees. We're headed for exactly the same kind of problem, but worse.

Anyone in their 20s today ought to be seriously concerned about what it's going to cost them to maintain the current system (between 50-60% increase in that 12.4% payroll tax).

In a nutshell, the problem is that prior generations of retirees were given benefits way out of proportion to the taxes they'd paid. Now, future generations will have to pay that bill. Meaning you.