More Active Posts
Front Page
Bush’s last stand
 |
 26 Comments |
Did you catch President Bush’s final State of the Union address? If not, you can review the highlights here, which focused on fiscal responsibility, the economy, and national security.
“We have unfinished business before us, and the American people expect us to get it done,” Mr. Bush said.
“Let us show them that Republicans and Democrats can compete for votes and cooperate for results at the same time,” he said in one of the few moments that prompted applause from both Democrats and Republicans in the packed chamber.
What did you think of Bush’s last State of the Union?
 |
Topic: WorldMagBlog |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
Pathetic tradeoff
Excellent, but it doesn’t matter, the newsmedia lackeys for the Dem party will continue to pound him into the dirt. The speech was probably the first time most of the country has heard that the Iraq war is going well now.
Fiscal responsibility? Now he thinks about that?
Ok. Now I confess that I didn’t hear the address, and haven’t even read it. But that has to be one of most stupid things I’ve heard…. Talking about fiscal responsibility in the final year of his presidency, after spending, spending, spending, and never getting the veto pen out for even the most irresponsible programs (NCLB anyone?). He should never have tried to appease the Democrats, because they’ll always hate him.
Did anyone notice that the Dems did not stand up for making the tax cuts permanent?
You don’t think they want more money, do you?
Here we are telling them we don’t want to pay for new programs, and they keep ‘em coming. One can only hope that the Republican candidate reviews that speech and reminds everyone just what the Dems weren’t in favor of last night. And the tax cuts weren’t the only thing for which they did not stand up. They didn’t stand up when Bush mentioned that scientists had turned adult cells into embryonic stem cells either. Guess the Dems don’t like science if it doesn’t further their anti-life cause.
Bush seemed to be enjoying himself enormously. Hillary seemed down in the dumps. Nice red suit though.
Heck, Ted Kennedy didn’t even applaud his own stupid program being touted.
I didn’t either.
You guys crack me up. MAKE THE TAX CUTS PERMANENT. Hello, where do you think the money that goes into the black hole that is Iraq comes from????
More than a trillion dollars so far. Doesn’t take much to understand that you can’t spend, spend, spend and then cut taxes.
Well, RDean, we’re paying for Iraq now! They don’t need more taxes, but you can do as the President suggested — write out a check or send in a money order to the IRS. They’ll take it. Even with the stimulus package, the Dems want to add a program. They are the ones who want to spend, spend, spend. Enough already with the “programs.”
Kristin: Did you catch President Bush’s final State of the Union address? If not, you can review the highlights here, which focused on fiscal responsibility … (etc.)
Frank: As in, exploring why a federal government under the control of Republican majority for six years failed to exercise any?
I have to agree with Frank that the Repub. majority didn’t exercise any fiscal responsibility, but that doesn’t make them worse than Democrats. It makes them equal, or a little less or equal depending on who you think spent more.
The only thing we can hope for is that the Republicans have learned their lesson. The Democrats have not.
These last eight years will always seem a dismal era to me, I think. As others have said, the President and the Congress have let us down. It’s very disappointing when the best that one can say about our Republican leaders is that the Democrats were worse.
To Democrats: don’t you dare turn this around and suggest that the Republicans are the ones who are pro-spending. Look at the records. You are entitled to say that Republicans do it too, but not that the Democrats are fiscally more conservative.
On Iraq war expenditures I would say that its unfortunate that it has cost us so much. I can’t honestly say whether or not it has been worth the money, but I have mostly supported the action. I don’t think that our expenditures there should have anything to do with our tax policies and with our other spending. The military is a legitimate program for the government to spend on.
“You guys crack me up. MAKE THE TAX CUTS PERMANENT. Hello, where do you think the money that goes into the black hole that is Iraq comes from????”
Hello! Anyone home? Besides the broken record that is…
Less income taxes mean we have more money to spend. More money to spend means we spend it. More money spent means more profits for companies it’s spent on. More profits mean more taxes generated than otherwise would have been…. These companies basically pay most of the taxes. When it comes to this scenario, I’m puzzled that otherwise smart people don’t get it.
What about that don’t you get? Since you’re so smart (or are you just a smart alec?).
I found Bush in great form last night. As NJL said , he enjoyed himself and at the same time gave a compelling account of domestic and international realities. He was convincing in his fundamental view that the American people are quite capable of solving most problems on their own without relying on a bloated federal government.
He did give a clear view of what governmental measures should be taken along with a stirring account of the success of the surge and the need to continue through a victory in Iraq.
He in fact is a forceful and able president who has no intention of playing the lame-duck role over the next year.
I am probably wrong about this but the Libertarian streak in me understands Bush’s actions on spending bills.
A Republican Congress sent him bills. They were the best that could be gotten through a closely divided Congress. He signed them. This is on the Congress, not the President.
Now there is a Democratic Congress, W vetoes some of their bills.
While I agree that spending has been out of control at the national level, if Bush would have vetoed every spending package that came his way nothing would have gotten done and he would have been labeled as “President No.”
(Sort of like how Senator Jesse Helms was termed “Senator No” when I was interning with him.)
Damned-if-you-do, damned if you don’t, I say.
And I echo what Bob posted in #12. I expect the veto pen to be used much more often with San Fran Nan and Dingy Harry leading Congress.
I think Bush did a heckuva job last night. Can you imagine the speech John Kerry would have given last night, had he been in the WH the past three years?
if Bush would have vetoed every spending package that came his way nothing would have gotten done and he would have been labeled as “President No.”
As opposed to none? Ah, the black and white world of the less than compassionate conservatives. Either all of them or none of them.
The money we spend on Iraq is borrowed. You people know that right?
“Hello, where do you think the money that goes into the black hole that is Iraq comes from????”
Your question seems to suggest a certain pool of fixed tax dollars is being redirected. Imprecise use of words like “tax cuts” confuse the economically illiterate and allow the issue to be demagogued.
What is being cut is the rate at which future income is taxed. Tax revenues often rise as tax rates are lowered becuase more overall income is generated.
#15
It doesn’t matter. You can give them links..Explain how the laffer curve works, as you just did.
Nothing you say will sink in.
It’s the BDS, I’m tellin’ ya.
Inclined to believe you…
#16
True. The data don’t matter, only the platitudes. Don’t talk about the actual complexities of our huge economic system, simply utter the right words from the playbook like well-programmed automatons.
They say we think in black and white terms, but liberals always think of money as a finite substance that can only go from our pockets to “the government” and then back out to us.
I only saw a few clips of the SotU address, but I noticed that Nancy Pelosi was sitting behind the President reading something during the speech. What was that all about?
PETER LEAVITT #11 Bush . . . was convincing in his fundamental view that the American people are quite capable of solving most problems on their own without relying on a bloated federal government.
It’s a little late for him to call Americans to a shared purpose, so, as always, he demanded and scolded.
TYCHICUS, Nancy assuredly was reading the document George had just put into her hands. It was benign.
The speech last night was great!
President Bush has gone a great job, one day those who have ridiculed this man, as 9-11 unfolded, which Bush worked hard to secure our land….. will be ashamed about their misguided anger.
It’s not the recipe, it’s the pudding. The test of a great speech is whether it persuaded.
I thought he did great. As usual, the Dem response made the lack of Congressional action the President’s fault. Everything is GW’s fault - ask ZZ!
It persuaded me, Scroopy.
I think Pelosi was reading the program. I want to commend her for not making too many of those funny movements with her mouth that she made last year. That was annoying.
I’m going to miss George.
Before I watched the Presidents speech last night (in re-runs), I read it online. I find it helpful to read without the distraction of his personality.
After watching the speech, here are my comments:
1. It’s a modest agenda reflecting the reality that he’s a lame-duck in these final months leading up to the election.
2. It contained the appropriate amount of “red meat” for the Republican side of the aisle.
3. While there were several enthusiastic responses from the Republican side of the aisle, many of his proposals were greeted with polite applause, not enthusiasm. In short, they’re DOA.
4. The biggest moment of hypocrisy was when the
Republican side of the aisle applauded enthusiastically Bush’s call for limiting “pork”. Over the 6 years they were in power, they the Republicans more than doubled the number of “pork” items in the budget. Those men and women have no shame.
5. Bush attempted to link “supporting our men and women in uniform” with his private war in Iraq. The majority of Congress and the American people are not fooled any more.
Over-all it was a moderate performance, appropriate for a man who’s time is almost up.