Bush: Banning Gay Marriage Could Cut Deficit in Half

From lofty rhetoric and audacious proposals to unforgettable symbolism and first-rate costuming, the President's State of the Union address this week was a must-see event. In this official Swift Report wrap-up, we break down the best—and the even better.

The Swift Report wraps up the State of the Union

By Deanna Swift

WASHINGTON, DC--From lofty rhetoric and audacious proposals to unforgettable symbolism and first-rate costuming, the President's State of the Union address this week was an unforgettable event. By 9:07 PM EST, we were on the edge of our seats, and didn't let go until President Bush wrapped up with his dream of repaving the road to freedom more than hour later. Like many on the right-thinking side of the aisle, we clapped our hands raw, shouted ourselves hoarse, and are having a heck of a time washing off that purple ink stain. But in the cold light of day, what does it all mean? In this official Swift Report wrap-up, we break down the best—and the even better—of the president's State of the Union address.

Best looking senator in the house: John Thune
This senate newbie is living proof of the accuracy of South Dakota's official motto: "Great Faces, Great Places." But Thune wasn't the only looker in the house on Wednesday; in fact everyone looked great—considering that earlier in the week, many legislators stayed up for 36 hours straight during a contentious debate over whether erectile-dysfunction drugs like Viagra and Levitra should be covered by the new prescription drug benefit. After on-and-off debate all night, the body finally moved that erectile drugs should make it into the benefit. Not everyone on the floor gushed over the decision. Representative Steve King, Republican from Iowa, reminded the members that "There are only two reasons for sex. One is procreation, and the other is recreation. If we are going to subsidize someone's recreational sex, I don't think that's what our founding fathers had in mind." Then again, the founding fathers never saw John Thune.

Best reporter to watch the speech with: Jeff Gannon, White House News Correspondent, Talon News
The elite media has attacked Jeff Gannon as a Bush-friendly hack with no media credentials who routinely lobs soft-ball questions at the administration during White House press briefings. Our soft-ball question: what's so bad about that? When the Swift Report wants to know what the White House is thinking, we go straight to the source: Gannon's website Talon News. Case in point, Thursday morning's post-speech analysis. Having been up till the wee hours toasting the president, we couldn't remember much about the State of the Union by the morning after. Gannon set us straight with a single headline: "Bush Details Ambitious Second Term."

Best reason to change the station: Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid
Reid began his rebuttal to the president's address with the following: "I was born and raised in the high desert of Nevada in a tiny town called Searchlight. My dad was a hard-rock miner. My mom took in wash. I grew up around people of strong values—even if they rarely talked about them…" That was enough for us; we flipped to smut on MTV until it was time for Hannity and Colmes to revisit the triumphs of the president's address.

Most audacious proposal: private retirement accounts for Iraqis
President Bush's idea of extending liberty to the Iraqi retirement system may be popular among Rashid Street moguls, but it looks like he has a ways to go as far as convincing ordinary Iraqis that they should invest a portion of their payroll taxes in the Iraqi stock exchange. So far, his argument that Sunnis stand to benefit the most from partial privatization of the retirement system because they won't live long enough to collect their benefits seems to be falling on dead ears. And new polling data from the International Republican Institute seems to indicate that if there's one thing Iraqis can agree on these days, it's that the government should responsible for the wellbeing of the people. A whopping 85% of Iraqis surveyed strongly agreed with the statement that "wealth must be fairly and equally divided among the public by the state." What are you waiting for, Grover? To Bagdad!

Best symbol: purple finger ink
We knew turnout during this weekend's Iraqi election was higher than expected, but who knew that so many Republican legislators would get to cast a vote? The ubiquitous purple finger was especially moving when wagged by Safia Taleb al-Suhail, the Iraqi woman seated next to Laura Bush, and whose father was assassinated by Saddam Hussein's former intelligence agency. But apparently, event directors failed to communicate to Ms. al-Suhail that the two-fingered peace sign isn't exactly the gesture of choice among Republicans. Lest the GOP be branded commies and hippies, the damage controllers quickly moved to rebrand the sixty's signal. In its summary of the event, the Department of Defense information service referred to Ms. al-Suhail's gesture as "the two-fingered Iraqi peace sign."

Most cost-effective proposal: banning gay marriage
It may be hard to argue that amending the constitution to prevent lesbians from marrying is part of what President Bush termed in his speech "the guiding ideal of liberty for all," but there's one thing you can say about punitive measures designed to satisfy the base: they're cost-effective. Rewarding constituent groups doesn't come cheaply these days: $350 million here, $150 million there. Amending the constitution, on the other hand, is practically free. Of course no price is too high when it comes to protecting the sanctity of marriage. That's why the president framed his entire speech around our responsibility to the grandchildren: leaving them a world in which men are men, women are women and they're free to invest a portion of their payroll taxes. Estimated cost of partially privatizing social security: more than $7 billion dollars. Keeping Heather's two mommies from tying the knot: priceless.

Deanna Swift can be reached at deannaswift1@yahoo.com.

Send this page by entering the recipient's e-mail: