Our
View: President’s address arouses
mixed reactions
President George W. Bush’s State of the Union Address Tuesday evening had
its ups and downs, good points and bad points and issues to be discussed and
debated.
But when it comes down to it, what else would we expect Bush to declare but that
the state of the Union is certain, strong
and secure?
In reality, especially considering the Democratic response following Bush’s
address, our current state is divided and anything but united.
The president’s delivery was consistent and good for his standards, though
still nothing along the lines of charismatic speakers of the past like Dr. Martin
Luther King Jr. and President John F. Kennedy. Because of his mediocre speaking
abilities, parts of his speech were glossed over in a fashion that could have
used more emphasis. A few sections were examples of excellent language, and not
considering the debatable content of their meanings, would have been more memorable
coming from a more talented speaker.
One of the major themes the president discussed was America’s significant
presence around the world today. He advocated against the “false comfort
of isolationism,” a sentiment that characterized much of America before
WWII. He called for American intervention to help spread the cause of freedom
around the globe.
Such rhetoric is powerful and demands much of this country. Some may find it
reminiscent of the Monroe Doctrine from 1823 that declared the United States
the protectors of the Western Hemisphere. Critics against isolationism argue
it’s not America’s business to interfere around the globe.
But such detractors are naive in today’s expanding world, where oceans
and mountains can no longer slow man’s progress.
Bush is right concerning this matter. America and its allies cannot afford to
be isolationists and must take action in this world that is well-planned and
compassionate. The real debate should be not if this country should go abroad,
but which places to go abroad
and how to do it.
A second central issue Bush elaborated was how America is “addicted to
oil.” That’s certainly true. America’s reliance on oil from
a conflicted Middle East is horrendous, not to mention expensive and bad for
the environment. Bush has called for an expansive effort to find alternative
sources of energy.
Who wouldn’t agree with that point? Whether you’re a Democrat, Republican,
Bush supporter or hater, America needs to address its energy reliance and it’s
significant that Bush made it a cornerstone of his address. Yet his proposal
is missing a simple element: practicality.
Bush’s initiative to increase “research” on alternative sources
of energy such as hybrid, electric and pollution- free cars is an illusion to
actually tackle the issue. Does he not recall the numerous hybrid and electric
cars that have already hit the market? Instead, he should propose to give consumers
using energy efficient cars tax incentives, thus increasing the likelihood that
Americans will use these products.
Let’s hope no oil company special interest groups with deep pockets impede
our country’s advanced energy initiative.
A third theme was a typical gung-ho can-do American attitude. America is No.
1 this. America is No. 1 that. America will be the top contender in the world
for this, that and the other thing.
Enough is enough with this American arrogance. While it is true America does
lead this Earth in many things and should be proud of our accomplishments, it’s
about time we take a step off our supercilious pedestals. It’s about time
America, and especially Bush, learn a little humility and listen to just a few
of the international complaints against us.
In light of Bush’s flagrantly outward initiatives to dominate the global
unit, he neglected to adequately address the portion of our union currently suffering — the
Gulf Coast. He briefly spoke about the government’s support and devotion
to repair the region.
Get it together, President Bush. Anyone who has watched the news or read what
is actually going on in the Gulf knows the government needs to step things up
for the poor people who continue to suffer.
The president also declared that the country must “address deeper challenges
that existed before the storm arrived.” This contradicts the games administration
officials have been playing by withholding documents about the bureaucratic screw
up that took place during Hurricane Katrina. Americans need to hold Bush accountable
to these statements he makes and assure he does what he says.
One of the moments that caught our haughty president off guard was when the Democrats
cheered when Bush mentioned his failed Social Security solution last year. Bush
didn’t even acknowledge his opposition at that point, yet spoke routinely
about bipartisanship in Washington. He looked like a hypocrite, especially considering
he is an extremely partisan president. His partisanship, despite what he talked
about on Tuesday, is unlikely to change.
But partisanship goes both ways, as exemplified during the Democrat Party response
given by Virginia Gov. Timothy Kaine when he said, “I want to offer some
good news tonight — there is a better way.”
OK, governor. What is it? Unfortunately, much of what Kaine said perfectly characterized
the current Democratic Party problem: they complain about Bush like he’s
the devil incarnate but do not have any alternate solutions to his proposals.
Kaine also touted bipartisanship, yet as we are likely to see in the weeks to
come, many of his party’s most vocal leaders will still exemplify such
rigidity.
A CBS reporter confirmed after the speech that such an assumption will be true.
Calling Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean the “Democratic
Chief Flamethrower,” he said Dean labeled Bush’s speech “empty
rhetoric” before it was even delivered to the nation.
So much for bipartisanship if what Dean says characterizes enough other Democrats.
|
