State of the Union Rundown 2007: Can you feel it?!
I know what you were thinking. She's going to let us down this year. The State of the Union will come and go, and there will be no posting. This all-momentous speech will be as dust in the wind, and what will we remember it by?
Just kidding! Seriously, though, this one did sneak up on me. But not to fear, for NBC pulled through and once again provided live coverage available online to those of us (un)fortunate enough to be without a television set. So here are some of the highlights, lowlights, and soft moodlights of SOTU 2007:
Predictably, most people are honing in on the whole war in Iraq. The news media is all about dissecting the "new strategy" and the expected non-binding resolution from Congress saying they don't like it. Granted, it is a big deal, but all this fuss misses a major, huge, and otherwise enormously important thing that happened during the speech tonight.
PRESIDENT BUSH ASKED FOR $1.2 BILLION TO FIGHT MALARIA IN AFRICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do you realize how huge this is? Do you realize how many people malaria kills every year? Do you know how cheap it is to prevent this disease? Do you have the capacity to comprehend how many lives can be saved with $1.2 billion dollars??? A couple of quick facts: 1) Every 30 seconds an African child dies of malaria--more than one million child deaths a year. <http://forum.nd.edu/global-health-issue/facts>; 2)"A mosquito net treated with a long-lasting insecticide costs less than US$4....we already have highly effective and well-tolerated antimalarial drugs (artemisinin-based combination treatments; ACTs) to replace those drugs such as chloroquine that have fallen to resistance. These cost less than US$1 per child treated. Less than US$20 would guarantee a poor African child access to life-saving interventions." <http://www.scidev.net/Opinions/index.cfm?fuseaction=readOpinions&itemid=341&language=1>
Needless to say, I believe this particular request of the President should be applauded (and complied with). Also, kudos for the call to raise Darfur awareness. Promotion of alternative fuels was also a good thing, especially with emphasis on research and technological breakthroughs. We need to find an energy-efficient method of producing ethanol.
Since it would be ridiculous (and inappropriate) to ignore Iraq, I'll say a few words. First of all, you will recall me yelling at the radio when we went to war against Iraq. I would have voted no. But here's the catch: once we are engaged in an armed conflict, the calculus changes. Political discussions are always important in a democracy, but at some point people have got to shut up about how we shouldn't have gone to war in the first place and figure out what to do with what the President called "the war we're in." There are, of course, competing theories about what exactly it is we should be doing at this point. As it stands, we are "surging." Will this work? I have not the slightest idea. I only know this: I hope it does. And if it does not, anyone who gloats about it is a disgusting human being, because the failure of the surge would be the failure of the Iraqi state, the deterioration of an already chaotic and violent situation, and a tragic spike in the number of troops--and Iraqis--dying. Can any decent person seriously be pleased about being "right" if these are the consequences?
Hmmm...what else? I'll believe the saving of Social Security and the elimination of the national debt when I see them. Health care reform is important, but I'm skeptical about this tax cut scheme (what about the people who make enough to not qualify for assistance, but not enough to pay that much in taxes?). NCLB is generally terrible and should not be renewed (at least, not without some serious amendment, and even then I'm not sure it's salvageable). Just say no to school vouchers. And of course, the single greatest disappointment for me in this speech was the failure to address the people of Iran and distinguish them from their oppressive government. Engaging the people is essential!
Best mood-lighting moment: immigration reform. Smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors. I said it last year and sadly, I turned out to be right. But we have a different, Democratic Congress this time!, you protest. Doesn't matter. Half of them will be too busy running for president to even vote on bills, let alone develop the sort of nuanced immigration reform package that would both mean something and actually get passed.
It was clear that President Bush's favorite parts of this speech came at the beginning ("Madame Speaker"--more on that shortly) and the end (yea, heroes!...and inviting Dikembe Mutombo was a nice touch, you have to admit). Over all, even though it was hard work, I think he did a decent job of laying out an agenda that was meaningful while playing on those initiatives for which there was bipartisan support. Again, whether any of these will come to pass is an entirely different question.
Now for some extra-SOTU commentary. First, I enjoyed all the camera shots of members of Congress snoozing during the speech. I could just imagine media folks--"hey, Senator Obama just nodded off! Zoom in!" Secondly, Nancy Pelosi was classy. I have never been (and probably still am not) a huge Nancy Pelosi fan. Still, although she did seem somewhat self-conscious (I would be too!), I thought she pulled of the first woman speaker thing admirably this evening. And thank you, Speaker Pelosi, for wearing a suit that was not black or navy or gray. (Did you notice that the President's suit was totally navy blue?! I wasn't expecting that. Always keeps me on my toes...)
Senator Jim Webb gave the official Democratic response to the SOTU. I respect a good Jacksonian Democrat. I don't agree with everything he said, but I certainly appreciate his comments supporting the average working American and the reminder that economic statistics can tell more than one story.
And that's a rap. Another year, another State of the Union...what did you think?
Edit: You can read the text of the SOTU here and the Democratic response here.
Just kidding! Seriously, though, this one did sneak up on me. But not to fear, for NBC pulled through and once again provided live coverage available online to those of us (un)fortunate enough to be without a television set. So here are some of the highlights, lowlights, and soft moodlights of SOTU 2007:
Predictably, most people are honing in on the whole war in Iraq. The news media is all about dissecting the "new strategy" and the expected non-binding resolution from Congress saying they don't like it. Granted, it is a big deal, but all this fuss misses a major, huge, and otherwise enormously important thing that happened during the speech tonight.
PRESIDENT BUSH ASKED FOR $1.2 BILLION TO FIGHT MALARIA IN AFRICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do you realize how huge this is? Do you realize how many people malaria kills every year? Do you know how cheap it is to prevent this disease? Do you have the capacity to comprehend how many lives can be saved with $1.2 billion dollars??? A couple of quick facts: 1) Every 30 seconds an African child dies of malaria--more than one million child deaths a year. <http://forum.nd.edu/global-health-issue/facts>; 2)"A mosquito net treated with a long-lasting insecticide costs less than US$4....we already have highly effective and well-tolerated antimalarial drugs (artemisinin-based combination treatments; ACTs) to replace those drugs such as chloroquine that have fallen to resistance. These cost less than US$1 per child treated. Less than US$20 would guarantee a poor African child access to life-saving interventions." <http://www.scidev.net/Opinions/index.cfm?fuseaction=readOpinions&itemid=341&language=1>
Needless to say, I believe this particular request of the President should be applauded (and complied with). Also, kudos for the call to raise Darfur awareness. Promotion of alternative fuels was also a good thing, especially with emphasis on research and technological breakthroughs. We need to find an energy-efficient method of producing ethanol.
Since it would be ridiculous (and inappropriate) to ignore Iraq, I'll say a few words. First of all, you will recall me yelling at the radio when we went to war against Iraq. I would have voted no. But here's the catch: once we are engaged in an armed conflict, the calculus changes. Political discussions are always important in a democracy, but at some point people have got to shut up about how we shouldn't have gone to war in the first place and figure out what to do with what the President called "the war we're in." There are, of course, competing theories about what exactly it is we should be doing at this point. As it stands, we are "surging." Will this work? I have not the slightest idea. I only know this: I hope it does. And if it does not, anyone who gloats about it is a disgusting human being, because the failure of the surge would be the failure of the Iraqi state, the deterioration of an already chaotic and violent situation, and a tragic spike in the number of troops--and Iraqis--dying. Can any decent person seriously be pleased about being "right" if these are the consequences?
Hmmm...what else? I'll believe the saving of Social Security and the elimination of the national debt when I see them. Health care reform is important, but I'm skeptical about this tax cut scheme (what about the people who make enough to not qualify for assistance, but not enough to pay that much in taxes?). NCLB is generally terrible and should not be renewed (at least, not without some serious amendment, and even then I'm not sure it's salvageable). Just say no to school vouchers. And of course, the single greatest disappointment for me in this speech was the failure to address the people of Iran and distinguish them from their oppressive government. Engaging the people is essential!
Best mood-lighting moment: immigration reform. Smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors. I said it last year and sadly, I turned out to be right. But we have a different, Democratic Congress this time!, you protest. Doesn't matter. Half of them will be too busy running for president to even vote on bills, let alone develop the sort of nuanced immigration reform package that would both mean something and actually get passed.
It was clear that President Bush's favorite parts of this speech came at the beginning ("Madame Speaker"--more on that shortly) and the end (yea, heroes!...and inviting Dikembe Mutombo was a nice touch, you have to admit). Over all, even though it was hard work, I think he did a decent job of laying out an agenda that was meaningful while playing on those initiatives for which there was bipartisan support. Again, whether any of these will come to pass is an entirely different question.
Now for some extra-SOTU commentary. First, I enjoyed all the camera shots of members of Congress snoozing during the speech. I could just imagine media folks--"hey, Senator Obama just nodded off! Zoom in!" Secondly, Nancy Pelosi was classy. I have never been (and probably still am not) a huge Nancy Pelosi fan. Still, although she did seem somewhat self-conscious (I would be too!), I thought she pulled of the first woman speaker thing admirably this evening. And thank you, Speaker Pelosi, for wearing a suit that was not black or navy or gray. (Did you notice that the President's suit was totally navy blue?! I wasn't expecting that. Always keeps me on my toes...)
Senator Jim Webb gave the official Democratic response to the SOTU. I respect a good Jacksonian Democrat. I don't agree with everything he said, but I certainly appreciate his comments supporting the average working American and the reminder that economic statistics can tell more than one story.
And that's a rap. Another year, another State of the Union...what did you think?
Edit: You can read the text of the SOTU here and the Democratic response here.
posted by Joni at 7:47 PM
2 comments
