I’ll try to keep this short and sweet, mainly because I’m still getting over a cold, and am not feeling totally up to par.
2 major things of note happened yesterday.
First, Sam Alito was confirmed to the Supreme Court. This is great news, as the balance of the court has now shifted from liberal judicial activism to conservative judicial responsibility.
Second, the President’s State of the Union speech was given last night, and not only was it a very good speech, but it allowed the people of America to see the Democrats’ true colors. Here are some highlights (all quotes taken from the official transcript):
The President outlined the continuing success in Iraq, telling of how the US military was handing over more and more of the military and police responsibilities over to the Iraqi military and police forces as they become more equiped. He also took the opportunity to address the stringent opposition he has received from many Americans, including members of Congress:
In the coming year, I will continue to reach out and seek your good advice. Yet, there is a difference between responsible criticism that aims for success, and defeatism that refuses to acknowledge anything but failure. Hindsight alone is not wisdom, and second-guessing is not a strategy.
Needless to say, the Democrats were not impressed, but it did need to be said.
President Bush also addressed the debate over the warrant-less wiretapping, providing what was, in my mind, the most beautiful moment of the entire speech.
The President said:
It is said that prior to the attacks of September the 11th, our government failed to connect the dots of the conspiracy. We now know that two of the hijackers in the United States placed telephone calls to al Qaeda operatives overseas. But we did not know about their plans until it was too late. So to prevent another attack –- based on authority given to me by the Constitution and by statute — I have authorized a terrorist surveillance program to aggressively pursue the international communications of suspected al Qaeda operatives and affiliates to and from America. Previous Presidents have used the same constitutional authority I have, and federal courts have approved the use of that authority. Appropriate members of Congress have been kept informed. The terrorist surveillance program has helped prevent terrorist attacks. It remains essential to the security of America. If there are people inside our country who are talking with al Qaeda, we want to know about it, because we will not sit back and wait to be hit again.
Immediately after he said, “we will not sit back and wait to be hit again,” the camera went to a close-up of Hillary Clinton’s face. She had this strange disbelieving smile on her face as she rolled her eyes and slowly shook her head back and forth. This is where we see Hillary’s true character: President Bush is using a program extremely similar in form and function to a program that her husband used during his own presidency, yet she cannot seem to believe that he would defend using that program to prevent another attack on American soil…or maybe she doesn’t believe that the program is being used against terrorists. It’s hard to tell what Hillary believes. Either way, though, it’s obvious that she’s willing to politicize this program and further endanger the US for her own political gain.
The greatest political slam-dunk of the speech came when President Bush addressed Social Security reform.
The President began by outlining the problems with the current system:
The retirement of the baby boom generation will put unprecedented strains on the federal government. By 2030, spending for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid alone will be almost 60 percent of the entire federal budget. And that will present future Congresses with impossible choices — staggering tax increases, immense deficits, or deep cuts in every category of spending.
He then attempted to begin outlining his new proposal. He started by saying, “Congress did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security…” The Democrats didn’t allow him to finish that sentence – they immediately jumped out of their seats, cheering and applauding. This in and of itself outs the Democrats as petty political animals – yes, they defeated the President’s proposal, but there was no counter proposal. Just like everything else since George W. Bush was elected President, the agenda is “defeat Bush, no matter the cost,” even if that cost comes at the American people’s expense. This is typical of Democratic strategy: all attack, no vision for the future.
After the Democrats finally sat back down, the President finished his sentence: “yet the rising cost of entitlements is a problem that is not going away. And every year we fail to act, the situation gets worse.” This is all too true, and a truth that the Democrats are all too willing to ignore as long as a conservative sits in the White House.
This circus act on Social Security is made all the more laughable when you consider the fact that during the Clinton administration, the Democrats couldn’t get over how dire the circumstances were for Social Security…yet even then, they shot down every proposal put forward by the Republican Congress, with no proposal of their own. Now that George Bush is president, not only do they not have a proposal to fix the problem (other than drastic tax hikes), but they deny that a problem even exists. The hypocricy continues.
On a side note: Cindy Sheehan had been invited to the State of the Union by some liberal Representative from North Cal…but she was removed from the House Chamber by capitol police for protesting, after she removed her jacket, revealing a t-shirt that read, “2245 Dead. How many more?” She claims police brutality, but I highly doubt any such thing happened. She also claims her freedom of speech has been restricted, but she was apparently unaware of the prohibition against protesting inside the Capitol Building. This would be called a partisan attack, except for the fact that a Representative’s wife was also removed for wearing a t-shirt that read “Support the Troops / Defending Our Freedom.” A man was also removed from the Clinton impeachment hearings because he was wearing a t-shirt with an anti-Clinton slogan.
Now, all political bickering aside over this stupid stunt by Cindy, and only one question remains: what the heck are these people doing wearing t-shirts to the State of the Union address? She’s not out in the streets of Washington, Texas, or San Fran with a buch of smelly, sandal-wearing hippies, she’s in the Capitol Building about to witness one of the most important speeches of the year (which, I’m sure, she didn’t appreciate…I would’ve loved to have had a ticket). It’s rude, disrespectful, and just plain stupid…just like the Congressional Democrats acted, when you think about it. I guess she just wanted to fit in with the rest of the wacko libs…