21 January 2004, Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive
Bush's State of the Union address was the flattest, pettiest, and most partisan he's delivered, and he clung to the war issue like a political life preserver.
Just watching Donald Rumsfeld and John Ashcroft come in was enough to turn the stomach of many progressives, and seeing Dick Cheney in his appointed chair and Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum cheering throatily must have sent many progressives out for some antacid.
Bush had barely cleared his throat when he mentioned "the war on terror," a topic that took up far more than any other in his address. He must have used the words "war," "threat," "danger," "terror," "terrorists," "mass murder," "thugs," and "killers" more than 25 times. This is a none-too-subtle strategy to scare the American people into thinking that Bush is the only one who can protect them.
As John Kerry says, what else is Bush going to talk about? Jobs? The environment? (Bush did say, "Jobs are on the rise," but the economy gained only 1,000 jobs last month and has lost more jobs over the last three years than anytime since the Great Depression. Bush used all of two words to discuss the environment: "promote conservation," he said, in a sentence on energy supplies.)
On the Iraq War, Bush didn't know enough to be embarrassed. Contrast what he said about Iraq's weapons in this year's speech with what he said in last year's. This year, he said the Kay Report "identified dozens of weapons of mass-destruction-related program activities."
But last year, he wasn't talking about any WMD-related program activities.
He was talking about the weapons themselves. He strongly suggested that Iraq had 38,000 liters of botulinim, 25,000 liters of anthrax, and 500 tons of sarin, all figures Bush cited back then. None of these have materialized.
Not only did Bush re-raise the question of Saddam's weapons, he also brought up his shameless "Mission Accomplished" landing in the Pacific. I don't know why Karen Hughes thought that might help him.
And with Ashcroft clapping away, Bush demanded the renewal of the USA Patriot Act, which even former Republican legislators like Bob Barr and Dick Armey have opposed.
On the economy, while Bush talked about helping workers gain new skills, he proposed nothing for them. He did, however, urge Congress to make the tax cuts permanent. That would be a huge giveaway to the rich, and it would cost $1.8 trillion over the next decade, according to Max Zawicky of the Economic Policy Institute. In Bush's next breath, he said he wanted to cut the deficit!
On health care, Bush mostly slapped himself on the back for the prescription drug law, even though it's a boondoggle for the pharmaceutical companies. He proposed tiny measures that will not address the 43 million Americans who are without health care today. They are not clamoring for an end to what Bush called "wasteful and frivolous medical lawsuits." They are clamoring for coverage.
Stumbling around for any high road to take, Bush denounced steroid use by sports athletes. Do we need a President for that? As John Stewart said, why not come out against instant replay while you're at it?
And do we really need a President to tell us who can marry whom in this country? "If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process," Bush said. "Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage."
Bush himself unwittingly acknowledged that this is a religious issue for him. "The same moral tradition that defines marriage also teaches that each individual has dignity and value in God's sight," he said, trying to appear compassionate. But the establishment clause of the First Amendment should vitiate this argument against gay marriage.
Bush wants to keep taking more bricks out of the wall between church and state. He asked Congress to codify an executive order he issued that requires government agencies to allow religious institutions to compete for social service grants. This was one of only two social service proposals he made. The other dealt with job training for prisoners, but here, too, he insisted on allowing faith-based groups to do some of the work.
Bush's own messianism permeated the speech. We are "a nation called," he said. "We live in a time set apart," he added. "The cause we serve is right because it is the cause of all mankind," he said near the end.
And he closed with a comment that suggests again that he believes the United States is following God's plan.
"The momentum of freedom in our world is unmistakable-and it is not carried forward by our power alone," he said. "We can trust in that greater power who guides the unfolding of the years. And in all that is to come, we can know that His purposes are just and true."
Leaving aside how offensive this is to the citizens of this country who are nonbelievers, this invocation reinforces the sense that Bush believes that he himself is personally carrying out God's will.
We do not hire President's for religious inspiration. We hire them to command the armed forces and to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed.
But Bush is not content to be President. He insists on being the Oracle of Crawford.
