Posted on 01/22/2004 7:07:09 AM PST by Wolfstar
ED. NOTE: On Tuesday evening, January 20, 2004, the President of the United States gave one of the most conservative State of the Union addresses in at least a generation. For a SOTU speech, it had a remarkably short spending wish list. Instead, it had passages such as those excerpted below — none of which would have been spoken by a Democrat or liberal (i.e., Leftist), or even a "RINO." Check it out:
[BEGIN EXCERPTS: Bold/underscore emphasis by Wolfstar]
Our greatest responsibility is the active defense of the American people. Twenty-eight months have passed since September 11th, 2001 — over two years without an attack on American soil. And it is tempting to believe that the danger is behind us. That hope is understandable, comforting — and false.
[SNIP]
The once all-powerful ruler of Iraq was found in a hole, and now sits in a prison cell. Of the top 55 officials of the former regime, we have captured or killed 45. Our forces are on the offensive, leading over 1,600 patrols a day and conducting an average of 180 raids a week. We are dealing with these thugs in Iraq, just as surely as we dealt with Saddam Hussein's evil regime.
Because of American leadership and resolve, the world is changing for the better. Last month, the leader of Libya voluntarily pledged to disclose and dismantle all of his regime's weapons of mass destruction programs, including a uranium enrichment project for nuclear weapons.
[SNIP]
Nine months of intense negotiations involving the United States and Great Britain succeeded with Libya, while 12 years of diplomacy with Iraq did not. And one reason is clear: For diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible, and no one can now doubt the word of America.
Many of our troops are listening tonight. And I want you and your families to know: America is proud of you. And my administration, and this Congress, will give you the resources you need to fight and win the war on terror.
I know that some people question if America is really in a war at all. They view terrorism more as a crime, a problem to be solved mainly with law enforcement and indictments. After the World Trade Center was first attacked in 1993, some of the guilty were indicted and tried and convicted, and sent to prison. But the matter was not settled. The terrorists were still training and plotting in other nations, and drawing up more ambitious plans. After the chaos and carnage of September the 11th, it is not enough to serve our enemies with legal papers. The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got.
[SNIP]
Some critics have said our duties in Iraq must be internationalized. This particular criticism is hard to explain to our partners in Britain, Australia, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, Italy, Spain, Poland, Denmark, Hungary, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Romania, the Netherlands — (applause) — Norway, El Salvador, and the 17 other countries that have committed troops to Iraq. As we debate at home, we must never ignore the vital contributions of our international partners, or dismiss their sacrifices.
From the beginning, America has sought international support for our operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and we have gained much support. There is a difference, however, between leading a coalition of many nations, and submitting to the objections of a few. America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country.
We also hear doubts that democracy is a realistic goal for the greater Middle East, where freedom is rare. Yet it is mistaken, and condescending, to assume that whole cultures and great religions are incompatible with liberty and self-government. I believe that God has planted in every human heart the desire to live in freedom. And even when that desire is crushed by tyranny for decades, it will rise again.
[SNIP]
In the last three years, adversity has also revealed the fundamental strengths of the American economy. We have come through recession, and terrorist attack, and corporate scandals, and the uncertainties of war. And because you acted to stimulate our economy with tax relief, this economy is strong, and growing stronger.
You have doubled the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000, reduced the marriage penalty, begun to phase out the death tax, reduced taxes on capital gains and stock dividends, cut taxes on small businesses, and you have lowered taxes for every American who pays income taxes.
Americans took those dollars and put them to work, driving this economy forward. The pace of economic growth in the third quarter of 2003 was the fastest in nearly 20 years; new home construction, the highest in almost 20 years; home ownership rates, the highest ever. Manufacturing activity is increasing. Inflation is low. Interest rates are low. Exports are growing. Productivity is high, and jobs are on the rise.
These numbers confirm that the American people are using their money far better than government would have — and you were right to return it.
[SNIP]
We're requiring higher standards [in schools]. We are regularly testing every child on the fundamentals. We are reporting results to parents, and making sure they have better options when schools are not performing.
[SNIP]
We must continue to pursue an aggressive, pro-growth economic agenda. Congress has some unfinished business on the issue of taxes. The tax reductions you passed are set to expire. Unless you act — (applause) — unless you act — unless you act, the unfair tax on marriage will go back up. Unless you act, millions of families will be charged $300 more in federal taxes for every child. Unless you act, small businesses will pay higher taxes. Unless you act, the death tax will eventually come back to life. Unless you act, Americans face a tax increase. What Congress has given, the Congress should not take away. For the sake of job growth, the tax cuts you passed should be permanent.
Our agenda for jobs and growth must help small business owners and employees with relief from needless federal regulation, and protect them from junk and frivolous lawsuits.
Consumers and businesses need reliable supplies of energy to make our economy run — so I urge you to pass legislation to modernize our electricity system, promote conservation, and make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy.
My administration is promoting free and fair trade to open up new markets for America's entrepreneurs and manufacturers and farmers — to create jobs for American workers. Younger workers should have the opportunity to build a nest egg by saving part of their Social Security taxes in a personal retirement account. We should make the Social Security system a source of ownership for the American people.
[SNIP]
In two weeks, I will send you a budget that funds the war, protects the homeland, and meets important domestic needs, while limiting the growth in discretionary spending to less than 4 percent. This will require that Congress focus on priorities, cut wasteful spending, and be wise with the people's money. By doing so, we can cut the deficit in half over the next five years.
Tonight, I also ask you to reform our immigration laws so they reflect our values and benefit our economy.
[SNIP]
I oppose amnesty, because it would encourage further illegal immigration, and unfairly reward those who break our laws. My temporary worker program will preserve the citizenship path for those who respect the law, while bringing millions of hardworking men and women out from the shadows of American life.
[ED. NOTE: The precedent for guest worker programs goes back at least to the Eisenhower administration.]
[SNIP]
In January of 2006, seniors can get prescription drug coverage under Medicare. For a monthly premium of about $35, most seniors who do not have that coverage today can expect to see their drug bills cut roughly in half. Under this reform, senior citizens will be able to keep their Medicare just as it is, or they can choose a Medicare plan that fits them best — just as you, as members of Congress, can choose an insurance plan that meets your needs. And starting this year, millions of Americans will be able to save money tax-free for their medical expenses in a health savings account.
[SNIP]
On the critical issue of health care, our goal is to ensure that Americans can choose and afford private health care coverage that best fits their individual needs.
[SNIP]
Small businesses should be able to band together and negotiate for lower insurance rates, so they can cover more workers with health insurance. I urge you to pass association health plans. I ask you to give lower-income Americans a refundable tax credit that would allow millions to buy their own basic health insurance.
[SNIP]
To protect the doctor-patient relationship, and keep good doctors doing good work, we must eliminate wasteful and frivolous medical lawsuits. And tonight I propose that individuals who buy catastrophic health care coverage, as part of our new health savings accounts, be allowed to deduct 100 percent of the premiums from their taxes.
A government-run health care system is the wrong prescription. By keeping costs under control, expanding access, and helping more Americans afford coverage, we will preserve the system of private medicine that makes America's health care the best in the world.
[SNIP]
One of the worst decisions our children can make is to gamble their lives and futures on drugs. Our government is helping parents confront this problem with aggressive education, treatment, and law enforcement. Drug use in high school has declined by 11 percent over the last two years. Four hundred thousand fewer young people are using illegal drugs than in the year 2001.
[SNIP]
A strong America must also value the institution of marriage. I believe we should respect individuals as we take a principled stand for one of the most fundamental, enduring institutions of our civilization. Congress has already taken a stand on this issue by passing the Defense of Marriage Act, signed in 1996 by President Clinton. That statute protects marriage under federal law as a union of a man and a woman, and declares that one state may not redefine marriage for other states.
Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives. On an issue of such great consequence, the people's voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage.
[SNIP]
It's also important to strengthen our communities by unleashing the compassion of America's religious institutions. Religious charities of every creed are doing some of the most vital work in our country — mentoring children, feeding the hungry, taking the hand of the lonely. Yet government has often denied social service grants and contracts to these groups, just because they have a cross or a Star of David or a crescent on the wall. By executive order, I have opened billions of dollars in grant money to competition that includes faith-based charities. Tonight I ask you to codify this into law, so people of faith can know that the law will never discriminate against them again.
[SNIP]
The momentum of freedom in our world is unmistakable — and it is not carried forward by our power alone. 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.
[END EXCERPTS]
Thanks for the great late-afternoon belly laugh. Now I can go home from work with a silly grin on my face.
Since this is a two party system (will be for some time) there are but two choices. Like it or not, that's reality. Since the Left has had decades to steer us in the 'wrong' direction, I expect it'll take a while 'till a 'true' conservative ever makes it to the top of the ticket.
The socialist inertia that exists in the minds of the masses today will not be overcome in one election or two elections. It'll take many. A Bush defeat in '04 only adds another layer to the Left's predominance in keeping us from the chewy nugget at the center of the lollipop-- otherwise known as Liberty. The notion that one of the two parties ought to win from time to time (say every eight years) is puzzling. We should be in this to control the ship-of-state for at least another 40 years consecutively to counter the leftist inertia that has been our condition for many years. Now that would be a level playing field.
The democrat party used to stand for the working man, the little guy, and created programs that helped them obtain educations and housing, for instance. Today, they stand for something quite different: pro-homosexuality, high taxes, enviornmental wackism, anti-capitalism, reverse discrimination, UNism, and blatant socialism. This is a party I don't need to be invited to.
The plan to deal with illegals is partly an admission of defeat- the failure to secure our southern border. Hopefully, this administration is thinking ahead when they can hand-off to a more conservative candidate whose chances of success will reside with some of the minor victories they will acheive.
Who knows, in '08 we could have a candidate pushing for English only as the official language. If a flood of immigrants results in higher crime statistics, perhaps a renewed interest in the 2nd ammendment will take root.
And like you say, judges will prevail, however, they are only one leg of the stool and an energized executive and legislative branch could overwhelm them with changes so badly needed in our time. The time for our President and Congress to rub the liberal court's faces in their own mess has been long overdue. Lead, follow, or get out of the way should be our message to liberals who wish to thwart the constitution.
I always did hate that political spectrum thing they taught in high school. On the left you have Commies who are totalitarian and on the right you have Fascist who are totalitarian socialist. I think the right of the spectrum should really have anarchists as usually the more right you go, the less govt involvement in everything and therefore one would think anarchist actually belong there.
And every Democrat running represents a greater threat to America and its freedoms than we can imagine.
But, still, Dubya needs to know when he's offending his conservative base. These are serious issues for many centrist Democrats as well.
We don't like CFR.
We don't need a Patriot Act, we got along fine from 1787-2001 without a Patriot Act (except when Honest Abe suspended Habeus Corpus), and that included watching serious adversaries through two World Wars and a Cold War - and we don't need it now.
I think most of us could live with a true "Documented Guest Worker Program," but that doesn't mean the provision of billions of dollars in federal charity and largesse to millions of illegal aliens and a fast track to citizenship anchored by depositing newborn, ready-made American citizens in U.S. hospitals. It means, you come to work, we pay you and you go home.
When I hire a kid to mow my lawn, that doesn't mean I agree to adopt him and support him until he graduates from college.
Any program that legitimizes the presence of people who are here unlawfully is fundmentally wrong and unprincipled. So, we're confronted with an almost unsurmountable task of bringing under control a horrible situation caused by our repeated failure to control our borders. Now, even after the "last resort, one time Reagan Amnesty," the argument is our only alternative is once again to grant immunity. Two wrongs do not make a right.
Trying to convince us his proposal for legal sanctuary does not constitute "Amnesty" reminds of of another President who parsed the meaning of what is Is.
We're not weak-minded warriors Obi Wan Kenobi can control using the power of The Force.
He needs to curtail federal spending and he needs to stop the unbridled growth of big, obtrusive federal government.
I will vote again for George Bush as a practical matter because he is the only candidate who can win that I can remotely trust to lead America.
I'd rather have Ron Paul, but he's not running - and he couldn't win if he were.
I am not sure of that and the reason we will never know is the Republicrats will never let him run. Anyone wonder why, after Reagan, the Reps ran the 3 stellar conservatives Bush, Dole and Bush? The Dems are a little closer to the truth then most Reps would like to admit when the claim the RP is a country club. They need "conservatives" to caddy for them, but admittance is strictly for the insiders.
LOL! It's just for three years, MOM.
"This forum was established as a working forum for like minded lovers of individual rights to work toward preserving a concept near and dear to our hearts. Freedom." -- Jim Robinson
Calling on conservatives to sit out the election, thus allowing one of these Democrats to win the White House, is an act against freedom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.