Comparison with another State of the Union

[hfojvt]

I looked up a state of the Union from 2004. My intent was to compare Bush touting the benefits of his tax cuts to Obama touting the extension of those tax cuts and so on. However, I was struck by a seemingly glaring difference or two.

First, Bush repeatedly used this SOTU to respond to his critics, and defend his conservative policies. Some examples

"But the status quo always has defenders. Some want to undermine the No Child Left Behind Act by weakening standards and accountability. Yet the results we require are really a matter of common sense:"

"We also hear doubts that democracy is a realistic goal for the greater Middle East, where freedom is rare."

"Some critics have said our duties in Iraq must be internationalized."

"Some in this chamber, and in our country, did not support the liberation of Iraq. Objections to war often come from principled motives."

"I know that some people question if America is really in a war at all. They view terrorism more as a crime, a problem to be solved mainly with law enforcement and indictments."

Again and again Bush tried to make his case to the American people. "I am for this. Some people are against it for these reasons, and this is why they are wrong." This also creates the false impression that Bush is considering opposing points of view.

Not that Bush sets some kind of standard for other Presidents to live up to, but he was fairly effective at getting Congress to do what he wanted. It would have been nice to see Obama make a case to the American people for progressive policies.

* Talk about the dangers of income inequality, and push back against those who fight for the rich. (and I still think this would have been way more effective if he had let Republicans make the tax cuts expire)

* Talk about the value of progressive taxes, and push back against those who want to make taxes less progressive.

* Talk about the value of social programs for helping those in need, and push back against those who want to cut them.

* Talk about the value of social security and push back against those who want to cut it.

* Talk about the value of unions and push back against those who attack them.

* Talk about the value of teachers and push back against those who are laying them off and belittling them.

and so on.



Another thing Bush did, was make the case that his policies were working, which may explain why there still seem to be many people who think that the Bush tax cuts created jobs.

"These numbers confirm that the American people are using their money far better than government would have, and you were right to return it."



Bush also pushed for the long term. The tax cuts were not set to expire until 2010, but he said this in 2004.



"Congress has some unfinished business on the issue of taxes. The tax reductions you passed are set to expire. Unless you act -- unless you act -- unless you act, the unfair tax on marriage will go back up. Unless you act, millions of families will be charged 300 dollars more in Federal taxes for every child. Unless you act, small businesses will pay higher taxes. Unless you act, the death tax will eventually come back to life. Unless you act, Americans face a tax increase. What Congress has given, the Congress should not take away: For the sake of job growth, the tax cuts you passed should be permanent."



and this in 2005



"I will send you a budget that holds the growth of discretionary spending below inflation, makes tax relief permanent, and stays on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009."



and this in 2006



"Yet the tax relief is set to expire in the next few years.

If we do nothing, American families will face a massive tax increase they do not expect and will not welcome.

Because America needs more than a temporary expansion, we need more than temporary tax relief.

I urge the Congress to act responsibly and make the tax cuts permanent. "



and this in 2007



"Tonight, I want to discuss three economic reforms that deserve to be priorities for this Congress.

First, we must balance the federal budget.

(APPLAUSE)

BUSH: We can do so without raising taxes. "



He spent a fair amount of time hitting the theme that "tax cuts are good, tax increases are bad". If our side believes in something, then it would be nice if we worked more at getting that message out. The message of last night just seemed to be "Republicans are mostly right and we/I promise to work with them." We worked with them on the tax cuts, and they are right about the need for spending cuts, and the need to eliminate earmarks and the need to reform social security and the need to reform the tax code (okay, I would concede that the last part is important, but it would also be nice to lay out some boundaries for the word 'reform'. Not just a simpler tax code, but a more progressive one.)

Back in September 2009, Somerby suggested these for progressive themes

"You can’t expect Obama to compensate for the lack of a strong, well-established counter-narrative. But if we ever do build such a narrative, it would probably turn on these points:

First, it would turn on some well-crafted statement of an obvious fact: Big Moneyed Interests will try to loot you. They’ll do it every time—till they’re stopped.

Second, it might turn on a second obvious fact: Big Moneyed Interests will send tribunes out to deceive you. They will lie in your faces—till they’re stopped."

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh090409.shtml



Yet our leaders show no apparent desire to fight against Big Money. The White House, at least, is NOT pushing back against Grand Theft Trust Fund. And is not pushing back against the false notion that we have a spending problem.