The Speech
I thought it was good. Overall, I was pleased with what the President said. I think this was one of his best SOTU speeches, in fact. There are always a few sticking points on the domestic side of things, but again, overall I was pleased. Here is a link to NRO's symposium on the speech. These guys are tough on the President at times, but you will find their analysis fair and intelligent. Also, Michael Novak was overall pleasantly surprised at the President's performance.
It's important to note that Bush has never, ever wavered in his conviction that we must win the War on Terror. No Clintonesque finger to the wind, poll-driven decisions from him. He has been savaged in the press, especially since the 2006 election, but he maintains his stand no matter what they say. Bravo, Mr. President. I, for one, am proud to have you as my President.
UPDATE: We highlighted Jules Crittendon's article earlier about what he thought the President should say. Here is his analysis of what the President did say.
JASmius adds: It seems like a lot longer than it actually has been since the days when I would have stayed late at the office to live-blog something like this. Even a year ago I was sorely tempted, though I couldn't manage to make the time. Last night I was out on the production floor staring at the undersides of conveyors and then at home bulldozing my son into finishing a school project he's been putting off for two months. I realized on the way home that the State of the Union Show was on, but I didn't give it more than that passing thought.
I've read the post-game analysis. I also read the pre-game analysis. What strikes me is the sad emptiness that subsumed the President's words. What he said was fine, for the most part. What he didn't say was more telling. For all the stalwart rhetoric about the war, there was no ultimatum to Iran to cease pursuing nuclear weapons and meddling in Iraq, or else. Until the mullahgarchy is eliminated Iraq cannot be stablized. It's just that simple. If Bush isn't willing to do that, without which the "war on terror" cannot be won, then "the surge" and any other gimmickry we employ anywhere in the Middle East is futile, three thousand or so American servicepeople really have died in vain, and a whole lot more of their civilian counterparts will be joining them in the not very distant future.
On the domestic side, what we got was a rafter of good ideas that everybody in that chamber and everybody listening and/or watching knew will be dead on arrival at Capitol Hill in toto. That'd be the case even if the President (or the GOP congressional remnant) was willing to fight for any of them, which he won't. I could almost wonder why he even bothered.
Of course, the same thing could be said about his foreign policy comments, since the only practical question is not if the Democrats will defund the war and force our defeat, but when. Bush may have thrown down a gauntlet on Iraq last night, but the American public is solidly behind the DisLoyal Opposition's determination to cut and run, and will remain there at least until that determination produces the inevitable next disaster. And perhaps even beyond that.
The Son of Man once said that a prophet has no honor in his own country. How much less a gelded president shorn of the means as well as the inclination to muster the partisan fighting spirit that his words' realization will demand.
It's important to note that Bush has never, ever wavered in his conviction that we must win the War on Terror. No Clintonesque finger to the wind, poll-driven decisions from him. He has been savaged in the press, especially since the 2006 election, but he maintains his stand no matter what they say. Bravo, Mr. President. I, for one, am proud to have you as my President.
UPDATE: We highlighted Jules Crittendon's article earlier about what he thought the President should say. Here is his analysis of what the President did say.
JASmius adds: It seems like a lot longer than it actually has been since the days when I would have stayed late at the office to live-blog something like this. Even a year ago I was sorely tempted, though I couldn't manage to make the time. Last night I was out on the production floor staring at the undersides of conveyors and then at home bulldozing my son into finishing a school project he's been putting off for two months. I realized on the way home that the State of the Union Show was on, but I didn't give it more than that passing thought.
I've read the post-game analysis. I also read the pre-game analysis. What strikes me is the sad emptiness that subsumed the President's words. What he said was fine, for the most part. What he didn't say was more telling. For all the stalwart rhetoric about the war, there was no ultimatum to Iran to cease pursuing nuclear weapons and meddling in Iraq, or else. Until the mullahgarchy is eliminated Iraq cannot be stablized. It's just that simple. If Bush isn't willing to do that, without which the "war on terror" cannot be won, then "the surge" and any other gimmickry we employ anywhere in the Middle East is futile, three thousand or so American servicepeople really have died in vain, and a whole lot more of their civilian counterparts will be joining them in the not very distant future.
On the domestic side, what we got was a rafter of good ideas that everybody in that chamber and everybody listening and/or watching knew will be dead on arrival at Capitol Hill in toto. That'd be the case even if the President (or the GOP congressional remnant) was willing to fight for any of them, which he won't. I could almost wonder why he even bothered.
Of course, the same thing could be said about his foreign policy comments, since the only practical question is not if the Democrats will defund the war and force our defeat, but when. Bush may have thrown down a gauntlet on Iraq last night, but the American public is solidly behind the DisLoyal Opposition's determination to cut and run, and will remain there at least until that determination produces the inevitable next disaster. And perhaps even beyond that.
The Son of Man once said that a prophet has no honor in his own country. How much less a gelded president shorn of the means as well as the inclination to muster the partisan fighting spirit that his words' realization will demand.
posted by Jennifer at 2:13 AM
<<< Home