Posted on 01/29/2002 7:09:28 PM PST by woofie
Tuesday, January 29, 2002
BUSH TRANSFIGURED: The development of Bush Republicanism took another step in this speech. It was in many ways a masterly transition. The president started soberly, talking, as he should have, about by far the most urgent task in front of us: the war on terrorism. Listening and looking at him, I felt even more securely than in the past, that he gets it. He understands that the danger is still enormous; that the risks still huge; the price of failure unthinkable. We needed to be reminded. Even those of us most intent on a thorough war on terror had felt our concentration lapse; our focus blur. Bush sharpened it – and us - again. I was struck by the phrase, ‘I will not wait on events.’ It was perhaps an unintentional rebuke to his predecessor and to his pre-9/11 self. But it was reassuring nonetheless. Also surprising and perhaps important: Iran was mentioned before Iraq. For those of you who remember, this is a re-emphasis I’ve been arguing for for a while. It was extremely encouraging to see it in the speech. That Iran-sponsored boat full of weapons for the PLO was arguably the dumbest initiative those clerical thugs have perpetrated in a very long time. This new emphasis also lies behind, I think, the new tough line with the Palestinians. An Iranian-backed client state on the West Bank has to be avoided. So we may have to deal with Iran if we are ever going to forge some kind of peace in Palestine. The president is obviously spending a lot of time with Paul Wolfowitz.
PULLING A CLINTON: Domestically, the president did something even sharper. He did to the Democrats what Clinton did to the Republicans. He co-opted large amounts of their agenda – some of it disingenuously, some of it genuinely. He tackled the gender gap masterfully. He did it visually by seeming to give nods to more women than men - introducing the Afghan woman minister, the grieving Spann widow, the heroic female flight attendants, the First Lady, and others. And he did so rhetorically, describing respect for women, for example, as a non-negotiable American principle. His outreach to Ted Kennedy will resonate with moderates; his emphasis on education neutralizes a strong Democratic issue; his calls for more spending on domestic programs, like the extension of unemployment benefits and a modest prescription drug program, can only further increase his bipartisan appeal. But where he went beyond Clinton was in not just co-opting the opposition’s most popular programs, but in also appealing to the McCain-Perot middle. He did this by Kennedy-esque calls for service to country, for volunteerism, and putting goals other than self at the center of our lives. I liked his comparison between two cultures: that of “If it feels good, do it,” and “Let’s Roll.” Notice that the sixties have not been replaced by some moralizing or constrictive social conservatism - but by a more neutral, uplifting spirit of action and service, a problem-solving ethic that is practical but also moral, and deeply American.
IN GOD HE TRUSTS: I can see how David Brooks will be heartened by this speech. It has a certain amount of TR in it; and it certainly moves distinctively away from Reaganite skepticism of government. All that is to the good. Skepticism of government and respect for government are two central conservative moods. In this time of national emergency, conservatives should emphasize the latter. But I was also struck by Bush’s appeal to the religious right. He appealed to their most important contribution to the debate – not their stigmatization of others, but their insistence on a moral center to our public life. Bush restated again and again the principle of the reality of evil. And he said at one point that we can only defeat evil with God on our side. This invocation of God – in a non-routine or formulaic way – was very striking. It will have resonated with many religious people in the country, but especially with the most devout. This faith and its surety in Bush will be enough to keep the social conservatives in his coalition, while allowing him to expand government in small but critical ways and broaden the Republican tent even wider. I’m sure with reflection, I’ll think of some caveats about this speech, but right now, I can’t see how he went wrong. I’d say his ratings would go up. But then, they can hardly go any higher. Perhaps the one thing to take from this speech is the most important one. The president has not let down his guard against the enemy. However great the temptation, neither should we.
Bush Post-State of The Union Approval Rating Soars To 107% !!!
(The poll was taken by thoroughly perplexed Democrat pollsters from Florida.)
I never expressed a lack of regard for anyone. You did.
President Bush is orchestrating a war designed to protect you physically, and to protect your right to say whatever you want to say, whether it is true or not. You show your appreciation by judging the condition of his heart and lying about his pro-life position.
You may be rabidly pro-life, but in God's eyes, a liar is no better than a woman who has had an abortion. You best put down your stones.
That's pretty much all I have to say to you.
Trouble is, he turned right around and funded Planned Parenthood -- the biggest killer in the world -- to the tune of over $100 million dollars. And, as of right now, he's currently mulling over handing the United Nations Population Fund -- the people who have supported forced abortions in China and abortion worldwide -- up to, I believe, $50 million.
Some pro-lifer.
Bucky doesn't argue ; he slings " mud ", hurls invective, and throws himself self righteous pity parties. : - )
He mentioned YOU specifically. He said you were a total waste of time because NOTHING he could EVER do would please you.
Are you implying that the president was less than ingenuous?
What exactly was Askel5's "concern"?
It's always a challenge to navigate the labrynths of her convoluted sentence structure. One can be sure, however, that there's always a shot at one of the Bush's somewhere in there.
My reference to a "burr under her saddle" was accurate, not a personal attack at all. Just read her posts to me. ESCR is one of her classic complaints; she wants to know why Bush didn't spend half the speech on it.
Odd, don't you think?
Yes, except for those who are already dead.
So Bush is fighting a war on 2 fronts against terrorist and against political terrorist(the demoRATS). The fact that he is raising non military spending 2% in an election year is amazing. Check the record. He is in the process of declawing the rats, IF he get a majority in the Senate (wish he has 60 but...) he can get some action.
He proposed the partial privatization of Social Security for heavens sake! That is ultimatly the biggest threat to the continued growth ob big goverment in our lifetime. Imagining this happening without terminal political reprocussions would have been unthinkable in the past.
When you are at war you have Strategic Objectives, and Tatical Objectives. We always want to go directly to the strategic results we desire, but if we ignore the tatical realities we will fail.
I agree. This isn't about whether Bush is pro-life; but rather, whether he will continue to be actively pro-abortion. Cutting off $34 million to UNFPA, which promotes forced abortion would appear to be a no brainer. (We can't afford it anyway.) And yet we stil have no decision from the White House.
Once Bush stops signing bills that fund abortion promoters, I will consider him neutral on the life issue. But right now he is helping to subsidize the wrong side.
Would you say all men are created equal and that each has the right to life? Yes, except for those who are already dead.
Why would you post this to me?
You have some wish to underscore Bush's Clintonesque keeping of his campaign promise by funding research on only those human embryos which had "already been killed"?
The mining of gold from a Non-Person's teeth being absolute immoral unless, of course, the Non-Person was already dead and divested of all rights by some Private Corporate Entity from whom our Government procures "already been killed" Non-Person corpses?
Sure you can't work Brittany Spears and Bob Dole in here somewhere?
For now, I'll just remind you that abortion and eugenics are GOP policies. It's little wonder George Bush decided in favor of the "hopeful" technology by which we nailed open the window of Human Non-Personhood.
They haven't been exactly subtle about their motive or means, you know.
In 1977 Robert McNamara, as head of the World Bank, saw in population growth the "gravest issue" short of nuclear war and in a particularly prophetic statement lamented that the decisions that had led to this growth were "not in the exclusive control of a few governments but rather in the literally hundreds of millions of individual parents who will determine the outcome."This is not to say that population control has made no headway in Asia. Pushed incessantly by figures like the World Bank's McNamara, the idea that nations could become rich only if they moved to control their population rates became an article of faith among Western and Western- educated intellectuals in Asia-a faith backed up by aid dollars linked to the willingness of recipient countries to develop control measures. In the Philippines, for example, the U.S. Agency for International Development obtained a provision in the Marcos-era constitution granting the state authority over population levels. The Western missionary fervor once directed at Christianizing Asia has been channeled, in the second half of the twentieth century, into proselytizing for fewer Asians. -Population and the Wealth of Nations
Of course, the World Bank is not technically a US government office. But before joining the World Bank, this fellow was none other than Robert S. MacNamara, US Secretary of Defense.
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.