Transcript: The State of The Union — Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2007 — Page 1 — TIME
Like many before us, we can work through our differences, and achieve big things for the American people. Our citizens don’t much care which side of the aisle we sit on – as long as we are willing to cross that aisle when there is work to be done. Our job is to make life better for our fellow Americans, and help them to build a future of hope and opportunity – and this is the business before us tonight.
And we hit issues with the speech pretty early on, only in the third paragraph. Your job is not to make life better for us, but to allow us to make our own lives better.
First, we must balance the federal budget. We can do so without raising taxes. What we need to do is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009 — and met that goal three years ahead of schedule. Now let us take the next step. In the coming weeks, I will submit a budget that eliminates the federal deficit within the next five years. I ask you to make the same commitment. Together, we can restrain the spending appetite of the federal government, and balance the federal budget.
Well, I can just say, it’s about friggin’ time. Now how about getting that budget back down to what it was 12 years ago, or, better yet, even lower?
Next, there is the matter of earmarks. [...] The time has come to end this practice. So let us work together to reform the budget process … expose every earmark to the light of day and to a vote in Congress and cut the number and cost of earmarks at least in half by the end of this session.
Um, why not eliminate them altogether?
Five years ago, we rose above partisan differences to pass the No Child Left Behind Act — preserving local control, raising standards in public schools, and holding those schools accountable for results. And because we acted, students are performing better in reading and math, and minority students are closing the achievement gap.
Five years ago, the republicans caved in and agreed to more government intrusion into our lives by continuing with a federally funded education system, which we promised to abolish when you voted us into office 12 years ago. NCLB has done nothing to improve the state of the school system, because the schools are still not accountable to anyone to produce results, as parents are not free to take their money elsewhere when the school their child goes to is not performing. Yet I am free to stand up here and shove lies down your throat about how students are performing better, when nothing has really changed. (I’m not bitter about this issue at all)
Now the task is to build on this success, without watering down standards … without taking control from local communities … and without backsliding and calling it reform. We can lift student achievement even higher by giving local leaders flexibility to turn around failing schools … and by giving families with children stuck in failing schools the right to choose something better. We must increase funds for students who struggle — and make sure these children get the special help they need. And we can make sure our children are prepared for the jobs of the future, and our country is more competitive, by strengthening math and science skills. The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America’s children — and I ask Congress to reauthorize this [feel] good law.
Gee, you know, if you really wanted to do all that you say above (except for increasing funding, which almost every study ever done shows has no effect), you could just eliminate federally funding of education.
A future of hope and opportunity requires that all our citizens have affordable and available health care. When it comes to health care, government has an obligation to care for the elderly, the disabled, and poor children. We will meet those responsibilities. For all other Americans, private health insurance is the best way to meet their needs. But many Americans cannot afford a health insurance policy.
A “future of hope” does not require any such thing. A “future of hope” requires the government to interfere less in our lives, not more. I know I rant about this all the time, but it is of critical importance that the citizens of the U.S. understand and realize this one fact: It is not the government’s job to take care of you. It is not the government’s responsibility to take care of you, it is your responsibility. I know most of you out there would love to remain children for your entire life, with someone watching over you, wiping your ass for you, and making sure you never get any boo-boos, but guess what, it’s not anyone’s job but your own. GROW UP! If someone can’t afford a health insurance policy, guess what, they may have to pay for their own health care. And if they can’t afford it, then they don’t get it. That’s how the world works folks, no amount of whining or crying is going to change that. If you want to socialize medicine, fine, but be aware of the consequences, take a look at how the health care industry in countries that have already tried that is working (Canada, GB, etc).
My second proposal is to help the states that are coming up with innovative ways to cover the uninsured. States that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens should receive federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. I have asked the Secretary of Health and Human Services to work with Congress to take existing federal funds and use them to create “Affordable Choices” grants. These grants would give our Nation’s governors more money and more flexibility to get private health insurance to those most in need.
No, no, no, NO! If the states want to fund these initiatives, then fine, the people in that state can pay for them, but why should I, living in Virginia, have to pay for some crackpot scheme someone who shall remain nameless (Romney) in Massachusetts comes up with?
There are many other ways that Congress can help. We need to expand Health Savings Accounts … help small businesses through Association Health Plans … reduce costs and medical errors with better information technology … encourage price transparency … and protect good doctors from junk lawsuits by passing medical liability reform. And in all we do, we must remember that the best health care decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors.
No, what you need to do was hinted at in the last sentence, get the hell out of managing the health care market.
Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America — with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we are doubling the size of the Border Patrol — and funding new infrastructure and technology.
Well, unless you plan on building the Great Wall of America, the borders are never going to be “secure”. So quit trying to fool people.
We have made a lot of progress, thanks to good policies in Washington and the strong response of the market. Now even more dramatic advances are within reach. Tonight, I ask Congress to join me in pursuing a great goal. Let us build on the work we have done and reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent in the next ten years — thereby cutting our total imports by the equivalent of three-quarters of all the oil we now import from the Middle East.
Bah. How about you let the free market work? When it becomes practical to use other forms of energy storage and transport, we will do so.
With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflict and the course we have followed. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled — that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy.
I don’t comment often on the “War on Terror”, as I try to limit this blog to domestic issues, but I will make one comment here. I think some of the problem with our perception of this war is how it is being “marketed” to the public. We don’t have a concrete enemy here, it is the war on “terror”. What exactly is that? We need to stop being squeamish and politically correct about everything. We are in a war against radical Islam. This war has already encompassed two nations on the other side, and will probably add several more before it is through. I think that if the public had a concrete idea of the enemy we are fighting they would be a lot less unhappy about the war. Instead we are fighting this nebulous term terrorism. Terrorism is the weapon, not the enemy.
