Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

So you think George W. Bush is not a conservative?
SOTU transcript ^ | 1/22/04

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]


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; bushamnesty; sotu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580581-600601-620 ... 2,001-2,015 next last
To: Mo1
Did we say to vote for a Dem? Come on, say it with me, nooooooo. I knew you could. We could all vote for Tancredo or someone else like him.
581 posted on 01/22/2004 9:54:59 AM PST by looscnnn ("Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils" Gen. John Stark 1809)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies]

To: Ophiucus
lol - if both extremists hate him, then he MUST be doing something right.

You actually give the Democrats that much credibility? By the way, you'll notice as well that the Palestinians stepped up their terror campaign as Israel was becoming more conciliatory. Perhaps you'll see a parallel.

582 posted on 01/22/2004 9:55:00 AM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 570 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Ah yes, the blue base, standing on its 'pouting-purist-point.' Let's Roll.
583 posted on 01/22/2004 9:55:24 AM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 525 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT
Actually, we are in absolute agreement. I too am a strict constituionalist - but, I have a practical side.

As someone said (Winston Churchill ?), Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

To me, GWB is the worst candidate, except for all the others who are running.

584 posted on 01/22/2004 9:55:27 AM PST by skip2myloo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: skip2myloo
Have you bought a money order for $3K or more, if so - it was reported to the Feds.

Just curious, how am I reported to the Feds? I use cash and no ID.
585 posted on 01/22/2004 9:55:30 AM PST by BJClinton (Vote Democrat, it's easier than thinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
Proposing it is enough for me, it was the straw combined with his other socalist policies that broke the camels back for me.
586 posted on 01/22/2004 9:55:43 AM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 576 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Continually hiding from the truth must be a tough way to live.
587 posted on 01/22/2004 9:55:54 AM PST by B4Ranch (Dear Mr. President, Sir, Are you listening to the voters?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 556 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
Pres Bush is pushing for permanent tax cuts! Bad analogy IMO! Not to mention and I hate to say this, President Bush #41 did not run a very energetic campaign and the campaign of Clinton was energetic (even though full of lies). Clinton got people convinced they needed a younger man as President -- one who was hip and "soccer" Moms fell for him hook, line, and sinker. Not to mention the Perot factor. Please don't tell me that Perot didn't make a difference. I know lifelong Republicans that regret voting for little big ears because they didn't know the "real" Ross Perot.

Big difference between 1992 and 2004 -- 9/11 happened and America was attacked on her own soil by terrorists that destroyed the WTC's, damaged the Pentagon, and killed/injured thousands of people.

Pres Bush #41 lost because he didn't keep his promise of NO NEW TAXES! If you will go back and see the agenda that Pres Bush ran on in 2000, you will see that he is keeping his promises. Like it or not, he is doing domestically like he said he would do in the campaign and what he believes in his heart is best for America.

588 posted on 01/22/2004 9:55:57 AM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Support Bush-Cheney '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 516 | View Replies]

To: bray
Bump to that. We use them here in North Carolina!
589 posted on 01/22/2004 9:56:01 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 571 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
...That is, if one allows themselves to critically examine the President's policies, rather than blindly following or ignoring all facts that indicate he's no conservative.

I can't say Bush is NO conservative, he does have some conservative chips on his side of the ledger. On some social values issues, he's standing firm. He genuinely appreciates our troops home and abroad. He's prosecuting the WOT abroad, in other words, doing his job as C-in-C.

Bush is more properly classified just as he says - a Compassionate Conservative. This faux conservatism apparently condones spending taxpayer money wildly on big government programs in an effort to buy various groups' votes. This faux conservatism apparently favors NAFTA for half the world and an open borders policy - an obvious and serious national security failure. This faux conservatism apparently believes in a selective adherence to the Articles of the Constitution. This faux conservatism apparently believes in a selective enforcement of the rule of law. Fully upholding all of the Constitution and enforcing all laws might cost this Compassionate Conservative some votes. This faux conservatism apparently believes that the permanent importation of a massive low-skilled and very low-paid workforce is good for America (also their families come, soon to be classified as the working poor deserving of taxpayer assistance).

The stack of chips on Bush's side of the conservative ledger is looking awfully small.

590 posted on 01/22/2004 9:56:20 AM PST by citizen (Write-in Tom Tancredo President 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
Then the bank is not complying with the new rule, its CC I think.
591 posted on 01/22/2004 9:56:42 AM PST by skip2myloo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 585 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
Spot on
592 posted on 01/22/2004 9:56:55 AM PST by MJY1288 (WITHOUT DOUBLE STANDARDS, LIBERALS WOULDN'T HAVE ANY !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies]

To: looscnnn
We could all vote for Tancredo or someone else like him.

Why would you vote for a man who doesn't want your vote?

593 posted on 01/22/2004 9:57:47 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 581 | View Replies]

To: looscnnn
Really? I have been told that we are a small and insignificant group, thus our votes will not affect the outcome of the election. If this is truly the case, then your rants are due to paranoia. After all, why else would you rant about something small and insignificant?

I will not get into a p-----g contest with you. Your arguments are specious, and are tending to show that, yes you are small and insignificant. Not one of your thought processes has done one thing to further a conservative issue.!

594 posted on 01/22/2004 9:57:58 AM PST by woodyinscc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT
"Enact Conservative Legislation by reducing the size and scope of government, getting rid of the host of liberal BS that has been passed or you (The Republican Party) have lost my vote forever."

If Dr. Planned Parenthood himself won the election in 2004, legalized abortion on demand for all time, but balanced our federal budget and cut federal spending by abolishing our military, he would have accomplished your stated goal above of reducing the size and scope of government.

But it would NOT be conservative in any way, shape or form.

Thus, what you claim to want contrasts with who you say that you are: i.e. a "conservative."

595 posted on 01/22/2004 9:57:59 AM PST by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
They're indistinguishable from Democrats in that regard.

Good point

596 posted on 01/22/2004 9:58:08 AM PST by Mo1 (Join the dollar a day crowd now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 580 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
Excellent post. Good work, and just ignore the single-issue, sit-at-home-and-pout freeloaders who claim to be the most pious conservatives but depend on the rest of us to vote for a winner who will keep out the Trojan horse Marxists.

Principled quitters don't advance conservatism, they just make noise.
597 posted on 01/22/2004 9:58:23 AM PST by Diddle E. Squat (www.firethebcs.com, www.weneedaplayoff.com, www.firemackbrown.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
Just because you write the word "FACT" in big capital letters before each paragraph doesn't make your statements any less wrong.
598 posted on 01/22/2004 9:58:32 AM PST by Texas Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush; All
I’ve observed these "Bush Isn't Conservative" debates on FR long enough that I’m convinced we need to acknowledge what’s going on. In reading the arguments of the Bush-Bashers, in assessing their tone and behavior in their interaction with others, we need to conclude that what we’re seeing isn’t evidence of a political ideology; what we’re seeing is evidence of a personality disorder. Consider:

The Bush-Bashers, generally, consistently exhibit certain character traits --

• Perfectionism
• Inflexibility
• Stridency and argumentativeness
• Impracticality/detachment from reality
• A tendency to view the world from the perspective of the ideal, and inability to consider practical alternatives
• Aggressiveness
• Narrow viewpoint and the inability and unwillingness to consider other viewpoints
• Inability to see the big picture
• Elitism, and a tendency to consider only their position as being the “right” one
• Rigidity and the inability to accommodate, compromise, or exhibit flexibility
• Judgmentalism and defensiveness
• Lack of civility
• Negativity
• A preference to destroy what they disagree with rather than build on previous progress
• Inability to focus on an overall goal and to work cooperatively with others toward that goal
• Individuality, to the point of personal isolation

Interestingly enough, these character traits are found in extremists of every stripe, left as well as right. These character traits seem to be common to extremists, independent of ideology, which is why their behavior and attitudes are symptomatic of a personality disorder rather than a political philosophy. In fact, many of these traits closely parallel the symptoms of Paranoid Personality Disorder as identified by the American Psychiatric Association (see http://mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=569&cn=8 for confirming information).

599 posted on 01/22/2004 9:58:35 AM PST by My2Cents ("Failure is not an option.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: skip2myloo
To me, GWB is the worst candidate, except for all the others who are running.

LOL @ that....not how I would have put it, but it makes sense.

600 posted on 01/22/2004 9:58:53 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 584 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 561-580581-600601-620 ... 2,001-2,015 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson