We certainly did not learn anything about the state of the Union that we didn't already know from experience. Mostly more BS, empty promises, and some and mirrors.
Rockdoc Franz wrote: We certainly did not learn anything about the state of the Union that we didn't already know from experience. Mostly more BS, empty promises, and some and mirrors.
I think we learned that He cannot reverse what the former admin. has done, no matter how hard he tries.
And that he is running for office of President,, oh forgot he has Never stopped running.
In all fairness, it was generally a nice speech. The man is clearly a gifted speaker.
Unfortunately, it seems that his speech lacked substance. It sounded like he was laying out a series of "new" initiatives to get the lethargic economy jump started. What I don't understand is 1. if these initiatives are new, why he waited 3 years to introduce them? 2. if he wants Congress to make the initiatives come to life why would he introduce them for the first time in a public forum during the State of the Union Speech? and 3. Instead of immediately going on the road to campaign after the State of the Union Speech why wouldn't he stay in town (D.C.) long enough to introduce the substance of his "new" initiatives to the leaders of the House and Senate so they can roll up their sleeves and get to work while Mr. Obama is eating BBQ in Arizona or whatever.
I'm not the President and never will be, but I know a little bit about developing and executing plans. And what I have learned is that if you are going to introduce a complex and contentious initiative you pick the proper setting to introduce it. You introduce it to key stakeholders first to win their buy in....and then you stick around to answer questions and make sure your intent is understood and people actually execute your plan.
Either that or it was just a campaign speech. I wonder.
Shouldn't the state of the union talk about the high unemployment numbers, especially the high numbers of people who have been unemployed since Obama's
inaguration. Or working part time jobs but wanting full time work?
The 10's of millions who are working jobs way below their qualifications?
How about including the record numbers still on food stamps?
Maybe it should have mentioned all the foreclosures and given figures on how many homeowners are underwater?
No, just better to blame the Republicans and promise but never deliver.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
I believe we've already covered the job-loss, and who caused it, and the underemployment, and who caused it; and the lies about the "food stamp president", and who had the greater number... No need to cover it again...
I think the Republicans ought to draft legislation which gives judicial nominees for inferior courts the up/down vote requested within a reasonable period of time after being nominated - perhaps 180 days instead of the requested 90, and include within the legislation the requirement that all judicial nominees, including those to the Supreme Court, require at least a 3/5 majority to confirm. As for the Supreme Court nominees I don't think the present situation should be changed outside of the earlier mentioned 3/5 approval for confirmation. Significant majorities for such nominations are, IMNTBHO, necessary to ensure that the minority opinion is respected and part of any confirmation to the courts regardless of which political ideology happens to currently enjoy the majority position in the Senate.
LadyJazzer wrote: I believe we've already covered the job-loss, and who caused it, and the underemployment, and who caused it; and the lies about the "food stamp president", and who had the greater number... No need to cover it again...
Bush is gone now...Thank god...
No matter who caused it, it really should be part of the State Of The Union speech. I know the high continuing unemployment rate under Obama is a top 3 issue when pollsters ask voters about their chief concerns.
It is like President Obama is ignoring the elephant in the room. (Pun intended?)
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Totally agree.
