I do not make a habit of watching the annual Presidential Rah-Rah Address and this year was no different. I fetched the transcript and waded through the overly rehearsed pandering to duh masses. It was much less painful and I didn't have to listen to the "leader of the nation" mangle my mother tongue.
What did I garner in my reading of this years self-congratulatory love-fest speech?
Well, from the opening salvo I got a glimpse into the future if the Bush agenda is allowed to continue, (please note that it is little different than any potential Democratic philosophies that might exist). He announced that the US should commit to unending warfare and empire building, adventuring abroad, regime change, foreign aid, socialised medicine, destroying civil liberties, growing the police state and so much more.
Mr Bush also informed me that he didn't know the difference between an immigrant and an illegal immigrant. He also informed me that he had cut spending and not increased it as my eyes and mind had led me to believe by the figures from his government. He was honest that he was going to grow government even more than he already has by establishing some commissions to study some stuff that had already been studied by commissions still in existence and by giving private companies more tax money to do what they should already be doing, if there were a market for what he wishes them to do.
Oh, and did I mention that he said he was going to spend more money? While decreasing spending? Wow, he's in the wrong profession. He should be a magician.
The rest, well the rest was a replay of Mr. Bush's Manichean heresy, societal obliviousness and penchant for social engineering. I thought it was rather nice that he mentioned former President Clinton in his speech as someone his father liked, after all Bill and George are virtually indistinguishable from a political philosophy standpoint. They're both leftists. Both more than willing to use government to accomplish social engineering, both in favour of entitlements and both are more than willing to use the power of the State against their citizens. Shoot, they could have been seperated at birth!
And that's the reason I don't bother to watch the Presidential Stroke The Faithful Speech. There's no discernable difference between them from year to year, decade to decade or President to President. Why should I bother? The only neworks carrying them are the 3 old timers, the news channels and CSPAN. I'd rather read the transcript the next day than have to sit through the genuflections of the faithful as El Presidente' hits his "high spots". The scripted nature of the even is also a put off. When the "opposition" has a copy of it before the speech so they can put their "rebuttal" before the event then something is decidedly wrong.
If you weren't playing a drinking game while you watched then you wasted your time and that is time you will never again see. You can't get it back and you may well have lost some IQ points. You definitely lost some if you bought anything that came from our Dear Leader's mouth.
The State of the Onion is nothing more than a speech for the Faithful, for those who are already of a frame of mind to accept or deny whatever is said from the dais of power. Those who could hear with an open mind already have heard the speech numerous times over the course of their lives and likely have no inclination to hear the same speech again. When there is no difference between the parties that be then I see little reason to waste the time in listening to the Chosen One. It's time to pick up the remote and smite the channels.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled attrocities and windmill tilting. Maybe Mr. Bush will grant clemency to Mr. Steve Kubby this week. We do know that if it reaches his desk he'll sign it. He always signs what's put before him.
Update: I somehow doubt this is the top subject on Technorati given the other posts I've seen from the kids and spammers. It certainly is no more popular than Mr. Kubby's plight, just more abused.