State of the Union speech 2005

Reactions to the State of the Union Address: A reader writes:

While trawling through the reactions to the SOTU, it occurred to me that Bush has made clear his agenda: That he himself replace FDR and FDR's welfare state. That welfare state will be as large or larger and more intrusive than ever, BUT, the rich guys will be in on the take. Thus the Republican party will displace the Democratic party. So, the speech's overt intent is for Republican party elite to displace the old left-liberal elite, a much better deal for rich people, with assorted bribes to the Unwashed Masses to consent to a somewhat worse deal, BUT the covert intent (what the Germans call the schwerpunkt, 'the main thrust of the battle') is actually the elimination of the CONSERVATIVES, that is, the sort of people (actually) in favor of a constitutional republic and smaller government, not to mention American nationalism....

It's all very Weimar Republic.

Larry Auster writes on his website:

Since the theme of Bush’s leadership is supposedly the spread of freedom and democracy abroad, what are we to make of the hallmarks of the pro-Bush politics in this country, coming from both the elites and the non-elites: the cheerleading, the extravagant adoration, the worship of the great leader, the constant thanks to God for the great leader, the admiration for his deep wisdom, his staunch courage, his transcendent ability to weather all storms, the personal expressions of bliss whenever he’s successful, and the unending stream of “conservative” opinion columns telling us over and over how great Bush is doing and how pathetic his opponents are? Does this sound like the way a democratic and republican people talk about their elected leader? Or does it sound instead like a certain 20th century European political movement not associated with democracy at all, but with its rejection?...

Our quasi-religious faith in America as the spreader of freedom around the world grows in proportion as our actual America loses its culture, its morality, its spiritual and historical cohesion, and its will to defend itself, not to mention its real liberties, which are not to be confused with its modern, liberationist liberties. We can’t defend the actual America anymore, because we fear that we’ve already given so much of it away that the attempt to bring it back would make us seem like extremists or cranks. So, needing something to believe in, but no longer having a real country to believe in, we turn what’s left of our country into a mission to achieve universal democracy, and we believe in that instead.

The more we empty our country of its historical meaning, the more hysterical becomes our embrace of Bush’s messianic rhetoric, which is not about America, but about the world.