President Bush delivered the State of the Union address last Tuesday, January 20, and as usual, Wesleyan students had something to say about it. Many students reacted particularly strongly to Bush’s positions on the war in Iraq and gay marriage.
The President also addressed security, the economy, education, immigration, drug abuse and social services. He urged Congress to make tax cuts permanent, proposed that senior citizens be able to choose their Medicare programs, denounced drug use among teenagers and athletes, and defended the right of faith-based charities to compete for federal funding.
Before delving more deeply into any issues, Bush stated, “the American people are showing that the state of our union is confident and strong.”
“I remember Clinton always started by saying the state of the union was strong,” said Annie Fox ’07. “And Bush started by saying the same thing, which was weird because it’s so clearly not true.”
Fox, like many students, has political views decidedly to the left of Bush’s stances. The sentiments most commonly voiced on campus represent the political climate here, but not necessarily Bush’s target audience—generally thought to be conservatives who are likely to vote for him in this year’s election.
“I thought he was just talking about stuff that was going to help him get re-elected,” said Scott Diamond ’07. “It was in his own best interest, not in the best interest of the country.”
The President’s statements about the “war on terror” also disturbed Diamond.
“He was using the same material now as he did [before the capture of Saddam Hussein]. It was justified only because Saddam was caught. Otherwise he had nothing to go on.”
Luke Snelling ’05, a more conservative student, saw it differently.
“I was pleased with the domestic focus of the speech, and the fact that it focused on accomplished as well as potential goals,” Snelling said. “The war on terror distracted a lot of people from what’s happening here.”
Snelling stated that he was pleased to hear about President Bush’s plans for educational reform, which include strengthening the No Child Left Behind Act that requires third-graders to pass a standardized test before passing to the next grade, and expanding Advanced Placement programs in low-income schools.
Other students took issue, however, with what they saw as President Bush presenting lies or opinions as fact. Brian Brotman ’07 was skeptical when President Bush referred to “WMD-related programs” as a justification for America’s capture of Saddam Hussein because he saw it as an implication that no actual weapons were found, contrary to his original statements.
“It says in the Constitution that lying in the State of the Union is an impeachable offense,” said Brotman. “He continued lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He said that a majority of Americans oppose gay marriage, [when this isn’t the case]. He lied about the usefulness of tax cuts, saying that they benefit all Americans when they only benefit the rich.”
Mike Donnella ’07 was similarly appalled, especially by Bush’s proposal for doubling the budget of abstinence-only education and his strong condemnation of gay marriage.
“I had to walk out. I couldn’t take any more lies,” said Donnella. “I think having sex outside of marriage is a much less harmful thing than lying to an entire country about why he went to war in Iraq when he was planning on it from his first day in office.”
Since issues of gay rights play a large role in campus politics, some students listened eagerly for Bush’s statement on the “sanctity of marriage.” According to the President, “activist judges have begun redefining marriage…without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives.”
Judith Klausner ’07 found Bush’s alternative proposal—prohibiting gay marriage at the federal level through “the constitutional process”—problematic.
“I was a little surprised by how blatantly he proposed an amendment that’s clearly unconstitutional,” she said.
Leave a Reply