The State of the Union Address that Barack Obama delivered last night bore little, if any, resemblance to the speech that, in my opinion, he should have delivered. The actual speech was, in fact, all too typical of the genre. It ran for an hour or more, and it consisted of an interminable laundry list of putative accomplishments and proposals. When, near the end, the President said, “I don’t quit,” I found myself thinking, “No, surely! But I very much wish you would.” In the course of an hour, I felt as if I had spent three weeks listening to the man. I very much doubt that I was alone.
Seven things stood out.
First, at no point did Barack Obama acknowledge that the promises that he made in campaigning for the so-called stimulus bill have gone unredeemed and that unemployment has continued to grow in a fashion that, he told us, it would not.
Second, much of the speech consisted in self-praise that, in the grim circumstances that we now face, seemed out of place.
Third, despite what the Climategate scandal has revealed concerning the dishonesty of those who have shilled for bills like the cap-and-trade measure passed by the House of Representatives, the President insists on our basing American public policy on discredited science.
Fourth, our President is still telling the same old lies concerning the healthcare reform measures passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives; and, despite everything that has happened, he intends to push for their reconciliation and passage into law by one means or another.
Fifth, he intends to raise taxes on the investing class — both by means of imposing a tax on the large banks and investment operations which will be passed on to those who make use of the services they provide, and by allowing the tax cuts introduced by President Bush to lapse for those making over $250,000 a year — and he has no appreciation for the role which the investing class, if not denied the rewards for which it has incurred considerable risks, can play in creating new jobs and fostering prosperity.
Sixth, Barack Obama has a vast array of programs that he wants to put in place, and he provided no information as to how these would be paid for.
Seventh, he is not in any way serious in the arguments that he makes for fiscal prudence.
I doubt that President Obama helped himself or his party with his State of the Union Address. A year ago, such a speech might have done him some good and would have done him no harm. By now, however, too many people are aware that they are being had. If anything, his decision to continue pushing his signature measures — cap and trade and healthcare reform — is likely to wreak havoc on his party in November.
Mikatollah, Understanding the path of history is often understanding one's perspective, the vantage point from which one looks out.
There are certain historians who would actually say that we were the aggressors with the Axis Alliance. Did Roosevelt & members of his administration help Pearl Harbor on because they felt we needed to join the fray? If nothing else, there is evidence to be considered.
It's a matter of how one chooses to look at it as it is with Iraq.
I could point out that one of the biggest critics against our involvement in Iraq – Scott Ritter – was recently arrested again and charged with displaying his private parts via a webcam to an undercover agent posing as an underage child. Maybe that's a cheap shot – why kick a man when he's down? – but it does irk me a bit that he was used by the media on a daily basis to bludgeon the previous administration but yet his fascinating midnight soirees go so little reported. Things like this make me quite suspicious and I personally take with a grain of salt that Hussein was bereft of any heavy duty weaponry.
However, I originally cited World War II and the pressures we put on the Soviet Union as potentially positive ways we've been involved in world affairs after you said that we've never had much success with conquest when in fact we've been quite successful.
To answer your point about Iraq, I would too offer that given that we were initially thrown far back on our heels in Iraq because of inadequate strategy, the American military complex has responded quite well and done a commendable job in effecting regime change. I hope that Iraq – which is really a beautiful place – continues to make progress and I applaud our efforts. There is no reason such a historically prominent people with so much oil to exchange for our paper should have to suffer under the yoke of a gangster.
But that, I'm afraid, is a product of my perspective and I don't expect you to agree with me.
With Israel, what's the point of being our ally if we cannot help them when they need us? At least Friends with Benefits?
Nice speaking with you.
mikatollah, please don't get angy with me. this has been interesting so far. so many posters on the internet just devolve into one celled organisms incapable of rational discussion. and you're doing an admirable job responding to board participants even if i disagree with you.
however, let's take North Korea, a sad place where another gangster/tyrant/despot keeps a people who might otherwise be quite productive under his heel and in poverty. there are 3 reasons why we might refrain from removing kim jong il from his current accomodations.
one, he really is China's problem. he probably doesn't leave his house without Bejing's approval. i think they have him under some control.
two, South Korea has made great economic strides by pursuing Western style economic practices. their prosperity has allowed them, among other things, to build quite a formidable military. north korea could not economically sustain a conflict with South Korea which lasted more than a few days.
three, north korea doesn't have the oil we need. the middle east does. it is in our national interest to maintain stability in the Middle East.
last quick point, if Iran knows they risk devastation, why do their tyrants continually claim that they will destroy Israel?
How long do you suppose that can go on before nobody listens to anything he says?
You think the president is a moron? I disagree.
"[T]he President insists on our basing American public policy on discredited science." — Paul A. Rahe
Of course its never been about the science, the deck is stacked and has always been stacked. The grants given are only given if there is a finding that man-made global warming is happening. This is a clear conflict of interest that shows the promoters of man-made global warming were never interested in real science.
Global warming advocates want to tax us and control our lives, nothing else matters, especially the manufactured "science."
The most ridiculous claim is that CO2 can somehow cause warming, CO2 has no property and no ability to do any such thing. CO2 is demonized by the the global warming alarmist simply because it is the perfect object of a tax, because you literally cannot live without producing CO2. It's what we exhale, its what makes the plants grow and its an essential compound for the cycle of life on planet Earth. Global warming alarmist literally want to tax the air that you breath and they could not care less about the science.
Now after that little stunt, the Supremes can re-examine the birth certificate issue. We can only hope.
I have noticed that AlGore is strange, does that count?
Funny, what I heard was a message to Senate democrats that their rejection of his advisory board idea was irrelevant, as he will do it anyway by executive order.
I also heard a message to the Supreme Court that their decision to uphold the principles of our Constitution was also irrelevant, as he will work with congress to pass legislation to nullify that decision.
What I heard was hugo chavez, claiming the power of America's first dictator.
Justice Alito has more class in his little finger then
Bozo could ever have in his lifetime…The guy is a
Chicago Thug, ACORN thug, and Union thug, all
rolled up in one big piece of crap………
Well, you and I know that, but why confuse the liberal kiddies?
SOTU: Just More Communist Lies!
Get the facts: http://www.commieblaster.com
Just as the President appears to have held the Supreme Court Justices in contempt, I now hold the President or should I say this egotistical, arrogant, hollow, delusional, Supreme Ruler in contempt. And exactly how much money that help fill the coffers of the Obama campaign came from foreign entities? I can only hope and pray that those who support this ruler and his agenda that are up for re-election this November will be removed.
Are you sure about those numbers?
Tell me, has anyone ever seen a ton of CO2 ?
What does it look like? What type container is used to contain it? A can, a bucket, a barrel?
I struggled through the whole speech. Concentrating more on reading the lips of the comments made by the "gallery." Basically it was a speech filled with errogant ranting about himself, while at the same time telling disgruntled and fed-up Americans what he thought they wanted to hear. Millions "heard" him, but I doubt that few believe. The tension between he and the Republicans was so thick you almost needed HD to see through it. He has no idea of the true meaning of the Constitution and is so full of himself that he cannot grasp reality. The deepest fibers of my being somehow wish he would reconsider the "I don't quit" attitude. Please, oh Great Messiah, do this country a favor and QUIT!!
The president does not seem to care about the November elections as much as giving pay back to his contributors with cap and trade and the health care bill. This gives a rather small window in which to shove through the agenda he thought he would have eight years to pass. I expect the nuclear option to be invoked in the senate in order to get these items through. The president does not seem to have much hope for a second term at this point. We have yet to see if the congress will prove to be as politically suicidal as Obama.