If you weren't able to watch President Bush's State of the Union address last month, a revised, printform is now available. It's much longer and there are colorful pictures, but the rigorous politically motivated sentiment remains.

You won't find it under "State of the Union," however. It's located in the Congressional hopper under the title "The 2005 Budget Plan."

Bush's $2.4 trillion spending plan was unveiled Tuesday to criticism from liberals and lukewarm support from the GOP. The plan, highlighted by a $29 billion increase in defense and security spending, again bows to the centrist politics found along the campaign trail.

Bush's budget plan reads like a "What's Hot, What's Not" list of Republican intrigue. As if the State of the Union wasn't a reminder he's running for re-election this year - a reminder about as subtle as a backhanded slap to the jaw - the latest budget of expenditures serves a similar purpose.

You say, Democrats support the environment, agriculture, education and the arts? Slash them all, says Bush's budget plan. The Environmental Protection Agency would receive a 7.2 percent reduction under Bush's budget and the Department of Agriculture's discretionary spending would be slashed by 8 percent. The portion of Bush's spending plan that actually hopes to decrease the nation's budget shortfalls takes its cuts from 38 programs in the Education Department - including arts-in-education programs.

Too many people in prison? Bush made some liberal headway by proposing a four-year, $300 million program to reintroduce prisoners into society. But his budget would eliminate prisoner-literacy programs. Should Bush's timely pro-immigration stance come to fruition and secure his incumbency this November, his proposed budget cut includes striking a Labor Department training program for migrant and seasonal farm workers.

To be sure, these proposals are entirely preliminary. Any expenditure requires the consent of the Republican-dominated Congress, which would likely come after the current campaign has run its course.

Remember, though, the traffic that conservative legislation has ran into the past two years. The Bush administration has been unwavering - dangerously so - in the two years since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Defense spending and homeland security have received a veritable carte blanche in legislative expedience, and have a Republican president and conservative Congress to thank.

But like most of Bush's reign in the Oval Office, the budget plan's linchpin is in defense spending. The Washington Post reported Tuesday that the White House is expected to ask for as much as an additional $50 million in defense spending before the end of this month.

This, of course, is in addition to the $29 billion requested in the budget proposal. If it's too unsightly to ask Congress for $80 billion in defense funds outright, perhaps it really isn't being asked in the interest of the nation - or being asked in the best interest of the administration's ability to finance a "war."

Is it selfish to ask for $2.4 trillion in spending money while a nation limps its way to a divisive presidential election? Not selfish. Arrogant is a better word.