Opinions on Feb 2nd State of the Union address

[Censport]

Transcript of President Bush's State of the Union address, 2-2-05

I missed the first 2/3rds of the address, getting home in time to hear him talk about foreign policy. But from everything I've heard this was his best ever, way better than his inaugural address a couple of weeks ago.

There were a number of Iraqis in the audience, proudly displaying their purple-stained index fingers to show they had voted in their first free election. Many, if not all, of the Republican members of Congress had the purple ink on their fingers as a show of solidarity. I didn't see any Democrats wearing the purple, but there's always Lieberman and Miller.

I endured the responses by Reid and Pelosi, and they were as inaccurate as expected. Amazing how a stuck-in-the-60's radical like Pelosi tries to present herself as a moderate. Compared to who, Stalin?!?!? Even though they had to prepare their "responses" before they heard the president's address, that didn't keep Pelosi from demanding a timeline for pulling the troops from Iraq after GWB gave an excellent reason why he wouldn't propose a deadline. (And I have to admit, he gave a great reason, one I never thought of!) I also got a great laugh from Reid complaining about the deficit, then proposing more spending programs. These two would be more at home trying to sell appliances on the Home Shopping Channel.

So.... any thoughts from y'all?

 

[No-name]

Didn't get a chance to see it, but I watched the spin at 11 and read the transcript in the a.m. paper. Lots of good emotional moments. Human, warm and fuzzy. Seemed like a good liberal speech. Spoke well about preserving good liberal programs. Hinted at an exit strategy for Iraq.

I don't see how his social security bail out would work... seems like you can take your own money and start a Roth IRA right now anyway, (and everyone under 55 should.) But other than that, it is just clever smoke to hide a reduction in benefits. You reduce your pay in, put the difference into private whatever and we reduce your payout?

I don't agree on making tax cuts permanent. I do agree that the tax code should be simplified and straightforward.

didn't hear or read the democratic response, but I don't think it matters. The president seems to have stolen all the liberal issues and is claiming "leadership" on them. (Like Arnold, W will save us all.)

Look for the little guy to get screwed and oil companies, energy companies, and other Bush Big Business contacts to get really really really rich.

 

[Censport]

Sorry, double post.

 

[Censport]

I don't see how his social security bail out would work... seems like you can take your own money and start a Roth IRA right now anyway, (and everyone under 55 should.) But other than that, it is just clever smoke to hide a reduction in benefits. You reduce your pay in, put the difference into private whatever and we reduce your payout?

Huh?!?!? So you think people should pay less in and get more out?!? What is that, Liberal math? And yes, you can start a Roth IRA right now, but with his plan you can use the money that is now being withheld. So instead of paying into two systems, one which will work for you and the other which only works for the government, you have the option of paying into the one that'll work for you. Right now, we don't have that choice.

The president seems to have stolen all the liberal issues and is claiming "leadership" on them.

Good. I've long gotten sick of Democrats campaigning on issues they claim to "own" but never fix. "If you vote for Republicans, they'll take away your social security!" Once SS is privatized (personalized), Reid, Dean, Pelosi and co. won't be able to hold seniors hostage at the voting booth. The way it is now, Democrats have no agenda other than obstructing Republicans.

 

[No-name]

Huh?!?!? So you think people should pay less in and get more out?!? What is that, Liberal math? .

Kinda like the republican economics of lowering taxes to raise revenues.

And yes, you can start a Roth IRA right now, but with his plan you can use the money that is now being withheld. In other words, you'll have more of your money to put into your account that can't be touched by Senators hungry for yet another vote-buying social program.

Kinda like the republican vote buying tax cuts.

Your current social security withholding pays someone else's retirement. SS has a surplus that we borrow, but sometime in the next twenty years or so, it will start operating on a deficit. Taking money out so that you or I can invest in our own retirement without reducing SS benefits puts the system in a deficit now. BTW Your current property and state taxes pays for some other person's (kid's) education. Your highway/gas taxes fix potholes everywhere, and unless you have your own military, fire department or police, your taxes pay them too, whether you personally need them or not. It is very socialistic. Although it is your money, we spend it on the greater good. That's what taxes do.

Good. I've long gotten sick of Democrats campaigning on issues they claim to "own" but never fix. "If you vote for Republicans, they'll take away your social security!" The way it is now, Democrats have no agenda other than obstructing Republicans.

Is this because Republicans NEVER obstruct? (Oh I forgot, they never do anyting bad.)

I'm waiting for them to fix it. Fix everything: Republican White House, Senate, House, and Supreme Court. Go for it guys. Get working! (Education, The economy, trade, social security, abortion, gay marriage, and Iraq-- one line, no waiting!)

I'm certain the soldiers in the field will get the armor for their hmmwv's, their increased death benefit and a pay raise tomorrow. Or at least Monday? Is Wednesday good? Education and Social Security-- How does Friday sound?

 

[Censport]

Is this because Republicans NEVER obstruct? (Oh I forgot, they never do anyting bad.)

I never said the Republicans don't obstruct. I said that the Democrats don't have any plan other than obstruction. You've said it yourself: The left doesn't have a cohesive message. (or a coherent leader)

I'm waiting for them to fix it. Fix everything: Republican White House, Senate, House, and Supreme Court. Go for it guys. Get working! (Education, The economy, trade, social security, abortion, gay marriage, and Iraq-- one line, no waiting!)

Yeah, you're right: we haven't fixed anything. Except slavery, we ended that.

And repaired the Union.

And passed the Civil Rights Act.

And won the Cold War.

And ended the Vietnam War.

And gave welfare it's first drastically needed reform.

We're still working on the mess Jimmy Carter left, but hey... how's that war on poverty coming?

And what's "broken" about abortion or gay marriage? Education? Well that's what we get for reaching out to Teddy Kennedy.

I'm certain the soldiers in the field will get the armor for their hmmwv's, their increased death benefit and a pay raise tomorrow. Or at least Monday? Is Wednesday good? Education and Social Security-- How does Friday sound?

"Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?"

 

[No-name]

LOL.

I think this belongs on the other thread, but here goes a bit of brain waste from the top of my head. (I haven't had a chance to research.)
Read the e-mails from troops in the field. They're good soldiers who don't complain loudly or to the press. But they ask for things like water and radios.

It is good to know that your party used to be liberal. I pray that they return to their liberal roots. So your Republican party won the civil war, ended slavery, passed the civil rights act, and won Cold war and the vietnam war? (didn't you say that the lesson of Vietnam was to WIN? I thought the Paris accords-- and opening talks with China were pretty good.) Would Abe Lincoln recognize the party since Reagan? Wow!(Ike also desegregated the military and federal government.) It's good to pick and choose the good things you like about the GOP. Especially since they have such a proud liberal legacy. I can think of a half a dozen more. If I was a billionaire I could think of a dozen.

Ask your fellow Dixie-crats why guys like Strum Thurmond switched parties. It wasn't the same GOP that stood against most civil rights legislation and ended affirmative action? That wanted to kill the US department of education. That cut job training, federal housing, day care and head start? That de-regulated the savings and loan industry, energy companies, airlines? That broke the air traffic controller's union? That bought an entire carrier group that the Navy said they didn't need? This is the party that wants to give away the federal forests, lets multinationals drill for oil on environmentally sensitive lands for almost free, Kow tows to mining and manufacturing interests. That opposed Clean air act, clean water, EPA, worker safety and the assault weapons ban? Is this the party that invaded Granada and intervened in Nicaragua?

My party used to be a war mongering racist xenephobic den of nanny-rapers. Now we wander the political landscape bereft of vision, uncertain of direction. Perhaps we can remember the great liberal accomplishments of the GOP past and learn from Lincoln.

 

[No-name]

RE State of the Union-- Best Democrat Quote: REP. HAROLD FORD JR. (D-TN): "[T]he Democrats Are Going To Have To Get A Better Message On Social Security ... Our Only Response Cannot Be To Say, 'No.'"

Democratic accomplishments:
Won several wars including 1812, Mexican, WWI & II. Presided over largest growth in area in the countries history. Agrarian reform. Women's suffrage, progressive graduated income tax, direct election of Senators, Established Federal Reserve Board, 1st Labor laws, child welfare laws, The New Deal including Social Security, the national highway system, Truman's initial integration of the military, Marshall Plan, rebuilding of Europe and Japan, NATO, UN, space race, Peace Corp, banned atmospheric nuclear testing, Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, War on Poverty, Great Society including medicare, ESEA...and harp on Nobel prize winner James Earl Carter all you'd like, but he helped restore the nation's trust in government after Watergate and brought Israel and Egypt together in the Camp David Accords.

Other Republican Accomplishments:
Clean Air Act. EPA, OSHA, SALT I & II, signed Head Start and IDEA, HUD, National Park System, NTSB and clean air/mileage standards for cars.

 

[Censport]

...and harp on Nobel prize winner James Earl Carter all you'd like, but he helped restore the nation's trust in government after Watergate...

*cough* he did?!?!?

Hee hee hee....

Glad to see you listed some DNC accomplishments. If you still hadn't by the time I got back from the weekend, I was gonna start worrying about you.

Edited because I forgot to ask: How many of those DNC accomplishments occured back when y'all were more "conservative", and how many since ya went all pinko on us?

 

[No-name]

Got an e-mail from W today asking me to contact my congressman and senators about social security. Although we're apparently on a first name basis, I don't think the President knows me very well.

 

[Censport]

Gee, I didn't get one. Maybe he thinks I'm a done deal....

 

[Sally_Hawn]

For those who?fll live in America for the rest of their lives, don?ft count on

President Bush for your retirement!!!!!

In my view, George W. Bush is doing a good job for national security. Not a very good one on social security. In fact, some financial analysts had consecutively given him an F on his report card in terms of the economy, calling his performance embarrassing, ?gsoooooooo embarrassing that it would make Paris Hilton blush!?h (I didn't come up with this quote. Some guys on Wall Street did).

Sabro is right. Bush?fs social security reform will not work. It is a beautiful concept though – allowing younger people to invest part of their social security in the private sector, giving them more control over their financial futures. For example, they can divert some of their social security to the mutual funds of their own choice. With some business acumen, one may even end up with more retirement benefits than what the original plan can offer.

At this moment there?fre more contributions going in than expenses coming out of the social security system, thus the American government can put aside the ?gextra?h in a trust fund. But in about 13 years, with a shrinking working population, there will be more old people receiving social security benefits than young people giving towards the system. By that time, Uncle Sam has to withdraw money from his piggy bank, and it is estimated that the trust fund will be exhausted within the next 50 years.

Hmmm, the trust fund will be exhausted within the next 50 years even without Bush?fs new plan. What would happen if Bush allows some workers to invest their money somewhere else (instead of putting it in the trust fund)? It means there will be less money left to pay the current and near future retirees. And the government has to come up with these payments by borrowing.

Whoa! With the huge deficits incurred from the Iraq war and slow economy in the last few years, how can the American government afford such a social security reform? (There are risks in the private sector too. Workers might make bad investments and end up with peanuts).

 

[No-name]

Domo Arigato Sally_Hawn

I agree with everything in your post. Except the thing about national security. Good explanation about how thid SS thing works. I do have to give Bush credit. Although his "take your money out and do whatever you want with it" plan is a hairbrained attempt to gut the system, and should appeal widely to the ignorant and the wealthy, at least he had the guts to bring up the subject. By some time tables you have 13 to 50 years to figure this out-- which is not much time. We have to get rid of the weird math and double speak. You either have to raise contributions or lower benefits.

Budget analysts are carefully poring over the president's most recent budget. Even the initial OMB look says it is $300 billion over. Democrats are predictably aghast. Again, I think we need to drop the strange math and voodoo economics and roll back the big W tax cuts.

 

[Censport]

Social Security as it stands (which the DNC is now circling the wagons to protect, although they liked a privatizing-reform idea proposed by Clinton) is going to fail, so now what? Besides, who ever said that SS was supposed to be your sole retirement?

BTW, I've heard that a plan very similar to W's is working great in Chile (a buddy of mine has a girlfriend there, talk about your long-distance relationships!).

 

[No-name]

The devil is in the details.