Home > Political Ranting > A Study of Strained Humility and Barely Concealed Arrogance, Part I

A Study of Strained Humility and Barely Concealed Arrogance, Part I

January 24th, 2007

This SotU speech is a strange one to be certain. In the face of approval numbers averaging dangerously close to 30%, this speech is not just to put forward Bush’s agenda,but to try to boost his numbers above the abysmal levels they are at now.

At least in the beginning of Bush’s speech, he sounds conciliatory, but as I noted before in regard to Bush’s 60 Minutes interview, it is a false expression of friendship, bipartisanship and humility which is belied by his actions and the veiled meaning beneath his other words. The soft words are aimed not at the Democrats, but at the American people, whom Bush hopes to swoon now that his numbers are lower than ever before.

And he strayed from his scripted speech in one insulting regard: even as he “reached out” to the new Democratic majority, he called it the “Democrat majority.” Used as an adjective, “Democrat” is a considered pejorative from Republicans, who refuse to associate the idea of democratic principles with the Democratic Party. Bush’s script read “Democratic majority,” but he spoke differently, betraying how he truly feels.

Some in this Chamber are new to the House and Senate — and I congratulate the Democratic majority. Congress has changed, but our responsibilities have not.

Translation: now that Democrats are in charge, I will start calling for congressional responsibility and accountability.

Yet we are all held to the same standards, and called to serve the same good purposes: To extend this Nation’s prosperity …

…which Bush has trashed…

to spend the people’s money wisely …

which Bush has not done, wasting it on Iraq, tax cuts for the wealthy and on engorged corporations, and on Republican congressional pork like no pork-spending spree ever before…

to solve problems, not leave them to future generations …

Do I even need to point this one out? How Bush has squandered our future in almost every way it can be squandered? Environmentally, financially, politically, militarily… remember, this is the guy who said he would leave the mess in Iraq to “future presidents.” A president who has turned a budget surplus into a record deficit for future generations to pay off or suffer from. A president who has done everything within his power to stall global warming relief, to sabotage even the idea that it is happening. A president who has depleted the military and poisoned the recruiting well for a generation to come. For Bush to lecture Congress and America that we should not leave problems for future generations is like John Wayne Gacy telling children not to be naughty.

to guard America against all evil, and to keep faith with those we have sent forth to defend us.

Translation: I want to (yet again) use the honor and sacrifice of the soldiers I sent out to be killed to further my wartime agenda, so I can send more of them to die. 

We are now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth — in a recovery that has created 7.2 million new jobs … so far.

I covered this one last year–same story, same exaggerations. Of course Bush is going to claim the economy is strong, what else can he do? It’s still a weak-ass claim–job growth a fraction of what it was under Clinton, the good jobs being outsourced overseas, wages not rising when inflation is factored in and Bush’s number-juggling is discounted, etc. etc.

Bush next delivered three economic proposals:

First, we must balance the Federal budget.

Oh, now he wants to balance the budget–now that Republicans are no longer in a position to rifle the treasury with pork.

We can do so without raising taxes.

On the rich, at least.

What we need to do is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C.

After six years, and only when Democrats take charge, he discovers this new principle.

We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009 — and met that goal 3 years ahead of schedule.

This chart belies that falsehood. Not to mention that Bush is talking about the estimated deficit, not the actual one, along with other economic jiggery-pokery. This article tells the real story:

William Spriggs, Howard University economics department chairman, said the increasing federal budget deficit means that the nation has been borrowing from the rest of the world at an astounding rate to fuel our consumption.

“The current account deficit has mushroomed from about 4% of GDP in 2001 to 6.8%, as of the third quarter of 2006,” Spriggs said.

However, there is a good chance the deficit will fall much more than it has–but not because of Bush, rather because Democrats will not go spend-crazy like the Republicans did. What Bush is doing here is planting a stake so he can later claim it was all his doing.

Next, there is the matter of earmarks. … The time has come to end this practice.

Again, now that Republicans no longer have free run of government coffers. And after Democrats have already started moving on this. These are two of Bush’s new strategies: call for fiscal restraint by Democrats he never hinted at with Republicans, and start claiming credit for Democratic successes.

With enough good sense and good will, you and I can fix Medicare and Medicaid — and save Social Security.

You know that whenever Bush talks about saving these programs, it means he wants to privatize them so they benefit the upper class and then and then destroy the remainder of the programs.

The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America’s children — and I ask Congress to reauthorize this good law.

Oh, swell. Continue a program that lionizes teaching to the test, that encourages corruption and manipulation which does harm to the students most in need, sucks creativity out of education and injects politics–and even that is underfunded. And then claim success by using standards that are educationally meaningless. Yeah, let’s keep on doing that.

Tonight, I propose two new initiatives to help more Americans afford their own insurance. First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income.

This sounds very good–and I hope that it actually is. But I am unfamiliar enough with the insurance and tax systems that I cannot independently judge it. I’m going to wait for the post-game analysis on this one, but with hope I can find something to agree with Bush on (there’s very little on that as it stands). Natural concerns: assuming the proposal is real and workable, that Bush actually follows through on it. And the question why Bush waited six years to do this; is it his true goal, or is it a chip on the bargaining table?

My second proposal is to help the States that are coming up with innovative ways to cover the uninsured. States that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens should receive Federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. … We need to expand Health Savings Accounts …

Here’s where flags start popping up, when Bush starts using the word “private” and “accounts.” Again, I am uninformed on the topic and will await hearing the analysis, but I have strong doubts about this one.

Already there is a hell of a lot… and I’m not even halfway through. One note on the speech in general: Bush does at least seem to be trying to give more than just platitudes to Democrats, though most of it (like immigration reform) is stuff he wanted anyway, but couldn’t get past Republicans. He’ll probably get a boost for bipartisanship (incredibly ironic, considering Bush’s past, including the very recent past), and at least for a short while, his numbers may go up.

I have to eat and get to work… more later.

Except for one thing: Bush mentioned Iran five times in the speech. Four times to mention that they sponsored terrorists (twice about Hezbollah, twice about Shia extremists), and once to mention that they are developing nukes.

Echoes of 2002… Not encouraging.

Categories: Political Ranting Tags: by
Comments are closed.