Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
PowerBlogging the State of the Union
PowerBlogging the State of the Union
Apr 20, 2025 10:37 AM

I’ll be watching President Bush’s final State of the Union speech tonight and PowerBlog readers are invited to react and respond in ments section below.

I’ll be updating this post throughout the night (below the break) for those of you interested in the mentary. For now, let me just add this spoiler: the State of our Union is strong!

And for those of you who subscribe to SIRIUS Satellite Radio, I’m scheduled to discuss the speech at 10:40 PM Eastern on The Catholic Channel, channel 159. The conversation will focus especially on the proposed tax rebates, the federal budget, and tax cuts. Update: The audio of the interview is streaming here (download MP3 here).

Here’s a brief primer on what to expect tonight.

I think I’ll be watching NBC’s coverage, off the strength of their American Gladiators prelude.

NBC’s presidential historian reminds us that the President’s approval ratings are historically low. A bit later, Tim Russert notes that the President’s are at 31%, while Congress’ are at 18%.

Prediction: The perception of George W. Bush’s legacy will improve with age. People on both sides of the aisle will point to his leadership in a time of national trial.

9:12 PM: The President says we must “trust people with their own money.” That sounds about right. This is clearly a reference to the importance of passing the stimulus package quickly. Only in Washington does “immediate” action mean something finally happens four or five months later.

9:14 PM: The President starts strong on taxes, following up on his stress on the economic stimulus package. He says he will veto any bill that crosses his desk that raises taxes.

9:15 PM: The President promises a balanced budget by 2012, just about the time the next President’s first term will be ending. He’s right that the government needs to be accountable for how it spends the citizens’ money. Tax cuts without a balanced budget seem prima facie irresponsible.

9:17 PM: He will veto any bill that doesn’t cut earmarks in half. How about just eliminating them? Check out Citizens Against Government Waste.

9:21 PM: On education, Bush reiterates the legacy of No Child Left Behind, calling it a “bipartisan” achievement that needs to be strengthened. Barack Obama and Ted Kennedy are sitting next to each other.

9:22 PM: “Pell Grants for Kids” sounds like a public school voucher system.

9:26 PM: On energy, the President wants to fund carbon-capturing technologies for coal plants. It’s simply a fact that attempts to make the US energy independent will have to take advantage of coal, at least in the short- to mid-term, since it is so readily available domestically.

9:28 PM: Time and again the President is equating increased government funding with “dynamic” innovation in technology and science. I’m with Arnold Kling on this question, preferring privately funded innovation prizes over “trying to work the political system.”

9:32 PM: Speaking of the President’s legacy, one of the things he has done that will have lasting effects is bring entitlement reform onto the table. He never got anything passed, but he did a lot of the heavy lifting necessary for true reform by bringing these “pressing” issues into the public consciousness.

9:34 PM: He’s also taken a lot of heat over his attempts to find a moderating position on immigration. He’s right that we need a “humane” solution.

9:35 PM: “People when given the chance will choose a future of freedom and peace.”

9:50 PM: The last fifteen minutes or so have focused on the war on terror, particularly on Iraq: “We will not rest until this enemy has been defeated.”

9:54 PM: Transitioning from a discussion of a two-state solution in Israel and Palestine (two “democratic” states) and the threat of Iran, the President starts to discuss domestic security. I am thankful and frankly amazed that we have not suffered another terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11.

9:57 PM: The President is outlining prehensive plan to advance both American foreign interests and meet the demands of our conscience by creating a more passionate” foreign policy focused on increased foreign development aid.

10:01 PM: The President concludes with a bit of history, noting the change in language from the Articles of Confederation, “We the undersigned delegates…”, to the Constitution, “We the people…”, which was ratified on September 17, 1787.

10:04 PM: Tim Russert called the speech the “minimalist agenda of a lame duck President.”

As appropriate in a time of war, the bulk of the speech focused on the war on terror in its various fronts. Given the “lame duck” status of a relatively unpopular President, it is an open question how much influence, beyond the “veto” threat that was raised more than once in this speech, President Bush will have over the next year on domestic policy.

10:06 PM: David Gregory points to the President’s “bitterness” over his inability to pass either entitlement or immigration reform. Again, these two issues, especially the former, is likely to be one of the important legacies of his domestic work. History will vindicate his argument that Social Security needs radical reform.

I think it’s an interesting question as to what sort of tone this speech has set for any potential Presidential successor of either party. Was this used at all as an opportunity to try and set up the agenda of the next President?

10:16 PM: Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius delivers the Democratic response.

10:18 PM: Sorry, that’s the “American” response, focusing on the economy. “A temporary fix is only the first step,” referring to the stimulus package.

10:21 PM: On a number of domestic issues, from raising the minimum wage to “going green,” the governor asks the President, “Will you join us?”

Here’s a link to the full text of the 2008 State of the Union address.

It looks like action on the economic stimulus package might not be so immediate. The WaPo is reporting that the Senate version to be taken up tomorrow has some rather significant divergences from the plan agreed to by the President and the House leadership.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Gleaner Tech #1: Solar Bottle Lights in the Philippines
[Note: This is the first in an occasional series on gleaner technology.] In the Philippines, the cost of electricity often means poor citizens are left in the dark—even when the sun is shining. Social entrepreneur Illac Diaz e up with an indigenous and ingenious solution for lighting problems in the country’s e areas: He use plastic bottles, water, and chlorine to lighten up the dark homes of poor. The solution provides both a cheap source of lighting and environmentally friendly...
Madison on Religious Conscience
The HHS Mandate is troubling to so many simply because it’s a clear Constitutional violation. Any basic understanding of Constitutional rights and our religious freedom sees that this is primarily about religious liberty, and not solely an issue concerning contraceptives or Roman Catholics. Last week we heard from James Madison on religious liberty in my post “Religious Liberty or Government Tolerance?” In 1792, Madison wrote an essay titled “Property” in the National Gazette. This is a brilliant piece by Madison...
The “Right to Be Insured” Trumps Religious Liberty?
New York pundit Al Sharpton and California Senator Barbara Boxer agree: The “right” to insurance paid for by an employer trumps freedom of conscience and religion. Senator Boxer warned yesterday that if the HHS contraception mandate was repealed it would set a dangerous precedence of religious rights trumping the right to be insured. On MSNBC’s Politics Nation with Al Sharpton last night, Boxer affirmed that under the proposed amendment proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt, an employer would not be forced...
How Conservatives Fight Poverty
At Public Discourse, Ryan T. Anderson reviews Lawrence Mead’s From Prophecy to Charity: How to Help the Poor: The loudest voices in our national debates about political economy tend to be libertarians and social welfare statists. To our detriment, most public policy discussions are filtered through these two lenses. At the same time, we tend to conflate the policy issues facing our nation as if they were one and the same. But consider the range of America’s political-economic challenges: How...
Gleaner Technology
Gleaning is the traditional Biblical practice of gathering crops that would otherwise be left in the fields to rot, or be plowed under after harvest. The biblical mandate for the es from Deuteronomy 24:19, When you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it. It shall be for the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow, that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work...
Subsidiarity vs. Soft Totalitarianism
While the recent contraceptive mandate controversy has exposed the Obama Administration’s disregard for religious freedoms, it has also reveled their natural disdain for subsidiarity. As George Weigel notes, this incident tells us “something very important, and very disturbing, about the cast of mind in the Executive Branch.” It is no exaggeration to describe that cast of mind as “soft totalitarianism”: an effort to eliminate the vital role in health care, education and social service played by the institutions of civil...
Befuddled Bureaucrats on the Bayou
I’ve tried to stay on top of the federal government’s response to natural disasters here at Acton. I’ve written a number mentaries, blog posts, and a story in Religion & Liberty covering the issue. “Spiritual Labor and the Big Spill” specifically addressed the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill. For extensive background on this short clip of Bobby Jindal at CPAC 2012, see my post “Bobby Jindal on Centralized Disaster Response.” ...
Creeping Crony Corporatism
In this week’s Acton Commentary, “Corrupted Capitalism and the Housing Crisis,” I contend we need to add some categories to our thinking about political economy. In this case, the idea of “corporatism” helps understand a good deal of what we see in the American system today. Adding corporatism to our quiver helps us to make some more nuanced distinctions than simple “socialism” and “capitalism” allow. Take, for instance, Mitt Romney’s contention this week while campaigning in Michigan that the bailouts...
The End of Secularism and the HHS Mandate
The primary point of my first book, The End of Secularism, was to demonstrate that secularism doesn’t do what it claims to do, which is to solve the problem of religious difference. As I look at the administration’s attempt to mandate that religious employers pay for contraceptive products, I see that they have confirmed one of my charges in the book. I wrote that secularists claim that they are occupying a neutral position in the public square, but in reality...
Politicians and the Pursuit of Happiness
In this week’s Acton Commentary I conclude, “The American people do not need politicians to tell them what happiness is and how it should be pursued.” I admit that I didn’t have this quote in mind (or I would have used it!), but Art Carden (follow him here and read him here) notes the following from Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations: What is the species of domestic industry which his capital can employ, and of which the produce is likely...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved