As Florida goes to the polls today, we're approaching crunch time in American politics. So let's get to it.
State of the Union
Last night a lame-duck President with a 32% approval rating took to the rostrum before a Congress with more foes than friends. I was expecting a truly depressing speech and what I heard was a reasonably well-polished call to "finish the people's business". What I didn't hear was "...the state of our Union is strong". So I give George Bush full marks for starting off the festivities with a little reality.
Bush supporters could be cheered by his typical resolve with familiar issues like his tax cuts and Iraq. He wants both to be permanent. Just kidding. Kind of. He did implore Congress to make his tax cuts permanent and he trumpeted the success of the "surge" in Iraq to make the case for continued resolve in that conflict. One of his best moments was parrying arguments against the tax cuts: "Some in Washington argue that letting tax relief expire is not a tax increase. Try explaining that to 116 million American taxpayers who would see their taxes rise by an average of $1,800. Others have said they would personally be happy to pay higher taxes. I welcome their enthusiasm. I’m pleased to report that the I.R.S. accepts both checks and money orders." It's always good rhetorical technique to acknowledge your opponents' arguments before you counter them, and that was a perfect example.
If you're a Bush detractor you shook your head at the tired accounting practice that gave him that $1,800 figure. He said "average", as in the "average" income of patrons at a bar suddenly shot up because Bill Gates walked in. "Median" is the word that tells the real story and that figure is much lower, more like $858 for the "average" American. You also shook your head when you heard almost identical verbiage used to describe the Iranian nucular, I'm sorry, nuclear threat, that described Saddam Hussein's nuclear capabilities. Minus the yellow cake. Acknowledging the recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, even if you wanted to dismiss it as overly optimistic, would have been a good move. There's still worry out there that this President doesn't read those. And, of course, if you're a Bush detractor you continue to shake your head at the language that justifies the Iraq war: "...a failed Iraq would embolden the extremists, strengthen Iran, and give terrorists a base from which to launch new attacks on our friends, our allies and our homeland. The enemy has made its intentions clear. At a time when the momentum seemed to favor them, Al Qaeda’s top commander in Iraq declared that they will not rest until they have attacked us here in Washington." No mention of getting Osama Bin Laden. For most Americans, that's a puzzling (to put it politely) omission.
Finally, though, let's try to be positive. There were some surprising and welcome points of focus. Like the "Pell Grants for Kids". $300 million to give lower income children the chance to attend better schools. "Trade Adjustment Assistance" for workers displaced by the loss of jobs to overseas competition. (I don't know how it would work or if it would work, but it's a nice idea. Especially for a Republican.) Getting tough on earmarks. That's unassailably good policy. Supporting the Dole/ Shalala recommendations to improve the plight of our injured veterans. And re-committing to the Afghanistan front. About time for both of those issues.
So while I wasn't inspired, I wasn't depressed. I saw a President who still had some energy to commit to "the people's business".
Barry's Big Day
"Perfect storms" aren't always bad things. Take yesterday. In the afternoon, Barack Obama basked in the adulation of thousands of college students as Ted and Caroline Kennedy publicly endorsed him. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/28/AR2008012801482.html?hpid=topnews
Then last night at the State of the Union Address, Obama got more face time than Jack Nicholson at a Laker's game and was even involved in a "did he or didn't he" moment concerning a picture that showed him possibly snubbing Hillary. Wow. There isn't enough money to buy that kind of PR. So do we call off this contest. Barry wins? Not so fast. The one thing we've seen in this primary season is that old 'mo' swings fast and hard and very unpredictably. Plus, I'm always sceptical of a Ted Kennedy endorsement because he's seen as the poster boy of ultra liberal democratic politics. It can really hurt in a general, when you need indies and even some Repubs. The good news is that if Obama goes up against McCain, McCain can't hammer Obama's affiliation with Ted because he (McCain) sponsored legislation with Kennedy! The real key in my mind is Caroline's endorsement. I'm sorry, but when the daughter of the most inspirational politician in the last 50 years compares you to him, that's heavy and Barry's ridin' the Big Kahuna. For now.
Florida
One of the reasons this blog exists is in response to the lame attempts by the pundits to handicap the primary contests. We believe that we should just wait to let the people speak. But here's the general set up. We're looking at a too-close-to-call race between McCain and Romney with this caveat: if Rudy gets wild support from absentee and mail-in ballots (reportedly, a million of them have been cast), he'll be in the mix. Conventional wisdom says that Rudy needs to win or he's done (even though he says he'll debate in SoCal, regardless); that McCain needs to win to bolster his fundraising; and that Romney just needs to have a strong showing.
It's getting personal between Mitt and Mac. Mac started it over the weekend by saying that Mitt wanted to withdraw the troops from Iraq. Then Mitt escalated it by saying McCain supported liberal policies an then...well, just read this link for the whole story. It's the usual "you're a liberal!" "No, you're a liberal!" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/27/AR2008012700912_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008012802805
Meanwhile, the liberals have got their own little game going on in Florida.
Florida Dems are going to the polls, even though their delegates won't be recognized at the convention. Hillary will be there to claim the Pyrrhic victory--anything to stop Obama's surge, while Barry will say he stuck to the Dems pledge to not campaign (even though he did run ads). We'll be up to bring you thoughts on the whole shootin' match tomorrow!
Leave a comment by clicking on "comments" below.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

2 comments:
Probably like many of us, I was not impressed by the State of the Union speech last night. What I heard and saw was a president that didn't say anything new, other than to blame the Congress for failing to act quick enough on certain legislation. The body language that I noticed from both the President and Vice-President was to say the least was non-impressive, with visiably apparent smurks and chuckles. Again, more of the same. I really don't expect anything more or less from the the two of them at this point. They are on the way out, and Congress is not at all effective right now. More of the same when you see the Republican's give a standing ovation for every comment the President makes and the Democrat's sitting tight in their seats. We are all waiting for a 'change of the guard' before anything changes in this respect. At this point, I believe a 'total refresh' of Congress and our leaders would only do good for our country which seems to be somewhat lost at the moment. Even though I am a Democrat, I really believe in my heart that we just need better leaders and collaborators running our country. I don't really care which party they come from, as long as they can work together to create peace and prosperity for all of us. We all deserve better.
Amen to that. So who gives us that?
Mac, Mitt, Hill or Barry?
Post a Comment