02 February 2005
S.O.T.U. - A mixed bag?
DISCLAIMER NOTE: I had some other committments tonight so I missed the live SOTU address by the Pres. So listening to Hannity and Colmes, et al, and reading the blow-by-blow blog reports from SDP, and Powerline , and hearing the usual assortments of sound bite clips was my SOTU experience this time.
The Social Security deal is something that really needs doing, the sooner the better.
The war on terror stuff is great (and I consider that Iraq is most assuredly a major part of that effort).
I would have liked to have seen a stronger position on serious tax reform/reorganization. He kind of paid some lip service there, but danced around it with that commission bit. A serious side-step there.
Kind of a (positive) backpeddle on the Marriage Amendment - a few weeks back I thought he said the amendment wasn't really needed at this time - tonight it sounded like a (most welcome) endorsement of the idea. The "culture of life" spiel sounded pretty good. It should drive a lot of lefties crazy.
On the negative - talking about simultaneously controlling borders and allowing de-facto free crossing passes boggles the mind, and undermines the totality of the effort to achieve anything resembling a realistic state of "homeland security" .
Another big negative to me was the implicit (and in some of the recomendations explicit) and automatic underlying assumption that big government is OK, as long as it's big in OUR way, and not the way of those other dastardly guys who oppose us. What's wrong with saying the gov't is just too darned BIG, and we shouldn't be having any expansion of it at all? If that theme in the SOTU sounds familiar again, and like it's somehow been done before, remember it may be only appropriate to the occasion - Groundhog Day, all over again!
The Social Security deal is something that really needs doing, the sooner the better.
The war on terror stuff is great (and I consider that Iraq is most assuredly a major part of that effort).
I would have liked to have seen a stronger position on serious tax reform/reorganization. He kind of paid some lip service there, but danced around it with that commission bit. A serious side-step there.
Kind of a (positive) backpeddle on the Marriage Amendment - a few weeks back I thought he said the amendment wasn't really needed at this time - tonight it sounded like a (most welcome) endorsement of the idea. The "culture of life" spiel sounded pretty good. It should drive a lot of lefties crazy.
On the negative - talking about simultaneously controlling borders and allowing de-facto free crossing passes boggles the mind, and undermines the totality of the effort to achieve anything resembling a realistic state of "homeland security" .
Another big negative to me was the implicit (and in some of the recomendations explicit) and automatic underlying assumption that big government is OK, as long as it's big in OUR way, and not the way of those other dastardly guys who oppose us. What's wrong with saying the gov't is just too darned BIG, and we shouldn't be having any expansion of it at all? If that theme in the SOTU sounds familiar again, and like it's somehow been done before, remember it may be only appropriate to the occasion - Groundhog Day, all over again!
