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 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 2,001-2,015 next last
To: PhiKapMom
Where at in Virginia... our forefathers could have been neighbors?

Yesterday... on Sean Hannity's show, someone from the administration (sorry, don't know who it was - working and listening at same time) talked about how discretionary spending had been reduced from 15% under Clinton to 4% under Bush.

The prescription drug "bill" is a bill who's time had come. And if someone didn't know that the President was going to pass this... then they weren't paying attention to the 2000 campaign. Because he said he was going to do it.

81 posted on 01/22/2004 7:41:28 AM PST by carton253 (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States and war is what they got! (W))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
No one has to "think" Bush is or is not conservative. He has proven himself to be anything BUT a conservative.
82 posted on 01/22/2004 7:41:38 AM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
No one has to "think" Bush is or is not conservative. He has proven himself to be anything BUT a conservative.
83 posted on 01/22/2004 7:41:50 AM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
No one has to "think" Bush is or is not conservative. He has proven himself to be anything BUT a conservative.
84 posted on 01/22/2004 7:41:56 AM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xJones
Agreed, we need to hold their feet to the fire. This is one of the reasons I am being so vocal. I want Rove (Wormtongue) and GWB to see loud and clear that the shift to the left to pander for votes will cost them dearly.
85 posted on 01/22/2004 7:43:07 AM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
So... you don't plan to answer my question?
86 posted on 01/22/2004 7:43:46 AM PST by carton253 (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States and war is what they got! (W))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar; Poohbah; wirestripper; PhiKapMom
And we never had an illegal immigration/southern border problem until the bracero program was killed in 1965 at the behest of labor unions...

One has to wonder if there might not be a connection - cause and effect. I am not one to let a "rule of law" mantra defend bad laws or the misapplication of laws. Otherwise, there lies the road to crap like Elian Gonzalez, going after a farmer who accidentally runs over an endangered rat, or a homeowner who shoots a burglar in his home and is prosecuted.
87 posted on 01/22/2004 7:43:49 AM PST by hchutch (Why did the Nazgul run from Arwen's flash flood? All they managed to do was to end up dying tired.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar; rintense; MJY1288; RedBloodedAmerican; twyn1; kitkat; justshe; ladyinred; lonestar; ...
FYI Ping ..
88 posted on 01/22/2004 7:43:54 AM PST by Mo1 (Join the dollar a day crowd now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
bracero program?
89 posted on 01/22/2004 7:44:37 AM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
My alternative is to wirte in a conservative candidate.

And those of us who's vote he's lost aren't thinking about ourselves, we're thinking about the future of the country. Certainly more so than those willing to follow blindly while W writes blank check after blank check.
90 posted on 01/22/2004 7:44:54 AM PST by Bikers4Bush (Constitution party here I come. Write in Tancredo in 04'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
The more I study this president, the more he reminds me of Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln had huge fights with his own party, which, because half the country left the Congress, controlled the Congress with a large majority. But the abolitionists were constantly nipping at his heels.

Lincoln knew that he had to first win the war, keep the French and English from recogizing the Confederacy, THEN worry about emancipation...and even then, making sure to only emancipate the slaves in areas NOT under federal control so as to keep the border states from seceding. It was a political decision.

Bush realizes that he must do certain things in order to keep the country moving in the right direction:

1) Win re-election after a photo-finish election last time--otherwise, his "positions" are irrelevant. Can anyone doubt that any of the Democratic candidates (except perhaps Lieberman) won't have drastically different policies on the important issues involving all the areas that are causing ulcers amongst the conservatives on this board? Will Kerry, or Edwards, Dean, whomever be better than Bush? So why would you want to "stay home" and help elect them by your "protest?"

2) Add to the Republican majority in both houses. Especially the Senate. I know I sound like a broken record, but those judges are key to almost every issue Freepers are concerned about. Don't we need more conservative judges to rule constitutionally on school prayer, immigration, health-care initiatives, gun control, abortion, campaign finance "reform", and almost every issue we are debating here?

3) Bush knows that the more "centrist" he is perceived by the electorate, the more "leftist" the Dems will have to be to separate themselves. The Dems know that only by being able to portray themselves as being vastly different on issues from Bush, can they persuade voters to make a change. His positioning himself on several issues as a "centrist" leaves them nowhere to go but further left. That is electoral suicide for them. And in a Bush second term, with a more Republican congress, he can get more judges through and probably make two or three Supreme Court choices. Look at the difference Breyer and Ginsburg's votes on recent issues have made! It's Clinton's legacy which we will have to live with for years! Let's not let Kerry or Edwards make those next few appointments.

Bush and Rove realize this. I wish more Freepers did. Hold your nose if you have to, but...read my tagline...
91 posted on 01/22/2004 7:45:08 AM PST by Keith (IT'S ALL ABOUT THE JUDGES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
You are right on the money!

All these vote taker backers probably never voted to begin with.

His support is broad and will include more democrats this year.

There is no doubt in my mind that he will be re-elected, baring any major misfortune to derail the campaign.

I do expect many attempts to do so.

92 posted on 01/22/2004 7:45:28 AM PST by Cold Heat ("It is easier for an ass to succeed in that trade than any other." [Samuel Clemens, on lawyers])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
The only thing that party stands for that's conservative is limited government. The rest is just plain leftist.

There is no "rest" -- either you believe in limited government, or you believe in nanny statism.

93 posted on 01/22/2004 7:45:29 AM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Peach; Wolfstar
I suupport President Bush.I am not happy with the bloated budget,voted in by our dear representatives or the lack of a way to enforce our present immigration laws as states and municipalities vote to not be involved in enforcement.

I support Bush the man, a fine wartime President,a good man,not a perfect man.Vetos can work!

I do not support the unreasonable ,unrealistic "my way or the highway" expectations by some.I regret they will unable to support Bush.If staying home on election day is the choice or voting third party is the choice they make,they must do what they must do.

I'd hate to be forced to live with their decision by having a Massachusetts,Kennedy liberal, an ambulance chasing lightweight, or a paranoid narcissist as President.
94 posted on 01/22/2004 7:45:35 AM PST by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bikers4Bush
From the looks of your "Tagline", you do not seem to be open to the "winning back your vote."

Who is the candidate for president of the "Constitution Party" ?
95 posted on 01/22/2004 7:46:11 AM PST by Chief901
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Porterville
Much easier to call us disruptors than to admit that we may actually have reasonable arguements eh?

Pathetic.
96 posted on 01/22/2004 7:46:16 AM PST by Bikers4Bush (Constitution party here I come. Write in Tancredo in 04'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Porterville
He might have lost your vote, but I don't think I or anybody else really cares

Whistling past the grave yard award of the day.

97 posted on 01/22/2004 7:46:17 AM PST by Protagoras (When they asked me what I thought of freedom in America,,, I said I thought it would be a good idea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: looscnnn; All
Libertarians are for open borders (Section 19 of the 2002 Libertarian Platform) --

Immigration
We hold that human rights should not be denied or abridged on the basis of nationality and welcome all refugees to our country.

What does that say? If we just threw open our borders then we would be so overrun you would be wishing for the days of President Bush when at least he tried to get a handle on the problem.

Maybe someone on FR should do an article on the Libertarian Platform which I just read the synopsis. It is mind boggling -- convinced me that the Libertarian Party is nothing more than a group of the "if it feels good, do it" crowd of the 60's.

98 posted on 01/22/2004 7:47:01 AM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Support Bush-Cheney '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: RiflemanSharpe
AND THE CONSTITUTION PARTY CAN'T WIN!

You vote for whoever is running from that conservative-enough-but-losing party, and you vote for the Democrat. Period.

IF all of you who claim superiority to the rest of us will admit that you are choosing to vote FOR the Democrat by throwing your vote away, then so be it. YOU have to live with that choice.

But at least be honest about it. You're "we're more conservative than you" attitude, if there are enough of you (which fortunately, there aren't, IMO) is apparently willing to throw America to the wolves!

99 posted on 01/22/2004 7:47:20 AM PST by ohioWfan (BUSH 2004 - Leadership, Integrity, Morality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
Libertarian Bush-hater alert.

No, I'm a strict constructionist, wrong again as usual.

100 posted on 01/22/2004 7:47:24 AM PST by steve50 ("There is Tranquility in Ignorance, but Servitude is its Partner.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 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