I offered this post to a Republican friend of mine; he politely declined the offer of writing his response to the State of the Union Address. I am saying this just to make sure that you know I do try to provide the opinions of both sides of the aisle.
Of all the Bush State of the Union addresses I have heard, this one has been most tolerable. Maybe that’s because he had a new speech writer, maybe because there’s a Democratic majority, maybe (but not likely) Bush has become humbled by his defeat during the mid-terms. The first female Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi might have had an effect. Maybe, just maybe, Bush is trying to become more bipartisan…not likely though. Improved healthcare (he stopped short of universal healthcare) by way of tax cuts…hmmm don’t know about that. Researching and funding alternative sources of energy to improve the American economy…nice way of putting the environment in Republican terms. Adding 20,000+ troops so troop levels would rise to original Iraq invasion and post-”Mission Accomplished” sign levels and then expecting things to magically change…obviously this President went to Yale and got a 2.0 gpa (and that’s Yale, which means grade inflation). Maybe we will actually elect a President who earned his bachelors in 2008.
What was much more impressive was Jim Webb’s Democratic Party response to the President’s speech. I was amazed after he finished talking. There was much passion, yet much diplomacy. He presented his way firmly yet respectably. Webb mentioned what the Democrats have done during their first 42 days as the majority party and what they plan to do. Anyone who says the Democrats have no plan probably gets their information from the Fox News Channel. What made his response even more fascinating and professional was that he wrote it himself. Hopefully, Webb represents the new wave of Democrats coming to Washington. The ones who won’t back down to the President when he says ridiculous stuff like performing air strikes against Iran.