State of the Union 2007

I missed hearing the State of the Union Address given by President Bush (see a transcript here) earlier this month. About that time I was lost in some personal issues that (gasp) I considered more important then hearing what our President had to say. I was worried about whether I could get my truck fixed without going bankrupt and whether or not I could still find away to finish paying for my kids' college educations.

However, the next morning I had worked through the personal issues and once again I was ready to find out what was going on in the world. I was not able to get at a transcript of what our President had to say immediately, however I was able to hear a number of opinions about what was said. Pundits seemed to dwell on what our President had to say about the War in Iraq, which I guess was fair since at least our President dwelt on this area himself for at least half of his presentation.

(See here) a Slate Webzine piece written by Gregg Easterbrook that analyzes what our President had to say about the Global Warming/Energy Independence issue in the address. I encourage anyone reading what I have to say about this first go and actually read what Gregg had to say before you go any further.

My opinion? Democrats better climb onboard and follow where the President leads on this issue. While some Democrats might feel, as do I, that these actions do not go far enough, the steps proposed really are a strong "first step" in the right direction. If Democrats expend all their efforts in fighting against the progress the President proposes, we are apt to see NOT A DAMN THING done prior to the 2008 elections. IF NOTHING IS DONE, I am going to be as willing to take out my wrath against "them damn Democrats" as I am the Republicans. You Democrats are looking at a REPUBLICAN President who proposes real and substantial progress. You Democrats better sign on with the support you can obtain on this issue from ANY Republican, and that most certainly includes that Republican which wields the veto pen. You can not realistically expect to obtain a better plan out of the Senate. Republicans still control 49 of the 100 seats there and you will be unable to break the filibuster without signing a few Republicans onboard. With Dubyah providing the leadership, you might find at least a few climbing onboard to help you obtain the super majority needed to break the filibuster.

I am not saying concerned Democrats need to give up on their goals. I am only saying Democrats should set their short term goals on that which might reasonably be expected to be attained. What you are facing is "some progress" or "no progress". Our President has illuminated a path towards "some" progress and I am going to hold accountable with my vote any who are responsible for NO PROGRESS being the result.

Perhaps if Congress delivers unto Dubyah everything he asks for on this issue, we might even hear from Dubyah further proposals for further steps one year from now. Perhaps by slowly taking chisel and hammer to the large rock that blocks our path we can slowly whittle away at it. But if Democrats become obstructionists to what our President proposes when he proposes real action on the issue, I am going to be pretty upset and less likely to vote Democrat come 2008.


Post a Comment

<< Home