1/11/05 The Democratic State of the Union Address
Sounds pretty impressive doesn't it?
The reality is that it probably won't be, and it will be relegated to a few sound bites after George Bush's Coronation address on the 20th.
I got to thinking; does it have to be this way? We have 10 days before the "faith fest" begins. I am just so sick and tired of the party of change and forward thought continuing to simply respond meekly to whatever outrageous assertions this administration wants to float into public opinion. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to anticipate the drivel that will flow from Bush's mouth on Coronation Day. Why can't we simply appoint a leader (the $10 million question!) from the party, well ahead of the Coronation, to go on national television, maybe even primetime bought with the leftover election funds, and state simply and clearly the Democratic State of Union? I would envision this person calmly and seriously stating the truth and asking "are you better off now than you were four years ago?" laying the groundwork for more Reaganesque "there you go agains" after the Coronation address.
Then have a big press conference afterwards! Show the country some true leadership and preempt the bastards.
Just imagine the squeals of "no fair!", "that's just disrespectful!", or "that's undermining the safety of our troops!" as our party simply lays out the truth. This would come at a pivotal and fragile time for them with Bush's ratings at an all-time low. Please, someone, show me where it is written in the rulebook where we have to wait for the Coronation speech and then respond! We should take this opportunity to rub their collective faces in the destruction that they have wrought both domestically and abroad. With any luck, an ongoing heated debate would arise between our party leadership and Scott McClellan for an entire week in the national press preceding the Coronation. This would immediately throw RoveCo into damage control mode to preserve the lighting and ambience for the opening act of "We've Won the War, the War is Over".
Feel free to disagree with me, but I think we can be reasonably certain that Bush's Coronation speech will include phrases to this effect:
"Our country stands poised as a leader among freedom loving nations to usher in a new democracy to the downtrodden peoples of Iraq." [ Why not in our state of the Union address one week before this layout all of the facts that the civil war in Iraq is escalating with no end in sight and that sham elections that even the UN has difficulty sanctioning are about to be conducted in the name of America.]
"Soon we will be welcoming home with open arms our brave sons and daughters, in ever increasing numbers, who have served so honorably for the cause of freedom." [One week beforehand we present the case upon which most experts agree that America will continue to have a significant and endangered military presence for decades to come. Add to that the pathetic and diminishing services available for both mental and physical injuries for our returning veterans.]
"Our great country faces many terrifying and daunting challenges in the year to come including the modernization of the Social Security Entitlement System. With compassion and fiscal responsibility this will be accomplished to the fairness and betterment of all generations to come." [This administration has been one of the most rampantly fiscally irresponsible in the history of our nation. Their borrowing threatens the very welfare of our children. They should simply return immediately the money that they have borrowed from Social Security.]
I think you can see where I'm coming from, and I won't belabor with more examples. There are probably many out there that would be better at this than I.
My question is, why not do this? There is still time. What does our party have to lose? Don't wait until after the Coronation speech! Make them have to explain, and throw a monkey wrench into the pomp and pageantry. As the other side is so fond of pointing out, "If you're explaining, you're losing."