I don't think I'm alone here when I say that George's State of the Union address left something…no…left a lot to be desired. He pulled a bait-and-switch with the topic, starting out talking about domestic issues (economy, environment, jobs, etc) then, once he had the public's attention, moved to make another sales pitch for the war on Iraq. An effective, if not sneaky, public speaking ploy. Clever, clever boy.
About the economic issues, there was no major revelation here, nothing very exciting or revolutionary. In the mind of George W Bush Jr., cutting a major hunk out of taxes will help the economy because it will put more money in the pockets of the American citizens; which will in turn give us more money to spend and we will spend it; which will in turn generate more tax money (because you know the government takes its piece out of whatever you do with your money); which will help pad the country's coffers and all will be shiny and happy in the world. In theory. Yes, his plan works on paper. Is it practical and realistically feasible? No. No and no. First, cutting too much out of taxes will contribute to the national debt, as it's taxes that help keep it from getting WAY out of hand. Second, after such a recession and with the job market sucking as much as it does right now, people are not going to go out and spend like they'd need to for the country's piggybank to swell like George hopes it will. People are more likely going to invest and keep a fairly tight hold on that spare cash, at least until the markets settle down. Third, even if such a bill was to get into Congress to go through the motions, the economy most likely would recover on its own before Congress could ever come to an agreement on what should be in the bill or not. (Give it a year.) And then it has to get by Bush. (Tack on another couple of months.) Lastly, and apart from Bush's economic ideas and theorems, the stock market is wavering right now because of the uncertainty of war. Bush doesn't realize that if the stock markets had some kind of definite terms about this war with Iraq, it would stabilize (on that front at least). If Bush said in his speech Tuesday that were are absolutely going to war with Iraq, it would do wonders on its own because then the investors wouldn't have to guess and speculate. The markets hate guessing.
I feel I don't have to stay too much about the meat (so to speak) of Bush's speech. There was nothing startlingly new in it, just a rehash of what we already know and don't know. We already know that Saddam is a bad bad man. We already know that he has done and still does atrocious things to his own people. We already know that he's ducked and dodged UN guidelines and demands like a guy dodges a nagging girlfriend. This is nothing new, buddy. 0 points for keeping your public informed.
I can't wait to see what evidence against Iraq George plans to reveal on Feb 5. (I believe this is the date; if I'm wrong do let me know). Will we finally see a picture of Saddam with his paw in the cookie jar or will we just be shown the crumbs on the counter?