The Writing on the Wall: The state of a very different union
Speech addresses domestic disturbances, foreign flaws
By Brian Goodman, opinion editor
Posted on January 25, 2007

Though Tuesday night was President Bush’s sixth foray into the epidictic rhetorical situation that is the State of the Union address, it was different this time, for a number of reasons.

For one, this is the first State of the Union in a while that will be delivered without the guidance of Bush’s influential chief speechwriter, Michael Gerson, who retired in June. You may remember Gerson from such presidential addresses as the infamous “Axis of Evil” speech, the “smoking gun/mushroom cloud” analogy leading up to the invasion of Iraq, and the effective National Cathedral speech on Sept. 14, 2001, President Bush’s first real and “articulate” response to the terror attacks three days previous. Dubbed “the most familiar person you don’t know” during an interview with Christianity Today, Gerson’s  fingerprints have been all over every speech the president has delivered since entering the White House, and his absence was no doubt strongly felt as the president prepared for the State of the Union, and the troop increase address on Jan. 10.

This is also the first State of the Union he is delivering to a room not full of friends. Following the earth-moving midterm election in November, President Bush was faced with a joint Congress with a majority of Democrats, a jarring reminder that he was no longer operating in a one-party system.

These two significant changes were reflected in the address itself, which had already been somewhat diffused by the president’s address a mere two weeks earlier. The decision was wisely made to leave Iraq for the end of the speech, with a stark focus on four domestic issues: health care, immigration, energy and education.

President Bush made a distinct attempt to sound as much like a Democrat as a Republican; perhaps Gerson left a copy of “How to Win Friends and Influence People” as a parting gift. His call to renew his tragically flawed No Child Left Behind plan, the evil love child of Bush and Ted Kennedy, as well his reiteration of his commendably progressive immigration policy, seemed to garner a warmer response from Democrats than from Republicans. His health-care initiatives, on the other hand, amount to little more than a small Band-Aid to the impoverished and an equally small bone to the insurance industry, a dedicated Republican lobby. Sounding like a Democrat does not alone make one a Democrat, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi made sure temper her applause throughout this section.

Much has already been written about the foreign-policy divisions between the president and Congress, both on the left and the right of the aisle. But a disturbing common ground began to show itself during and after Bush addressed his controversial “surge” plan to stabilize “sectarian violence” in Baghdad. Though they disagree about the methods, all parties involved agree on one point: we must “hold [the Iraqis] accountable,” as Barack Obama told CNN following the address.

The apparently well-received idea that we can somehow force the fledgling Iraqi government to pull itself up by the sandal straps and start “clearing out” insurgents is as demeaning as it is absurd. Lest these politicians forget, it was our military that destabilized what was a bad but strong government. We instituted a skeletal democracy amid escalating violence (particularly against Iraqi politicians, let us remember) and then have the audacity to threaten to withdraw our support if they can’t take care of themselves. Threatening to remove the resources and support Iraq will need to stabilize if they do not hurry up and stabilize is tantamount to removing a newborn’s umbilical cord and then threatening to drop the minutes-old child unless they demonstrate that they know how to walk; it is No Child Left Behind with guns. It is utterly reprehensible to both parties that this is the only issue on which they can all declaratively agree.

Brian Goodman is a senior communications major.