Just for a change of pace,, what did you think of the State of the Union Address Yesterday??
Personally I thought it just more promises and little real planning or ideas behind it.
Comments everyone??
Printable View
Just for a change of pace,, what did you think of the State of the Union Address Yesterday??
Personally I thought it just more promises and little real planning or ideas behind it.
Comments everyone??
I thought it was obvious that Obama either isn't listening to the majority of the American public, or he heard them loud and clear and chooses to push forward with his agenda regardless.
He stated things that are blatantly untrue.
"One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression. So we acted – immediately and aggressively. And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed."Um, nope. I definitely wouldn't say that the worst of the storm has PASSED. He has put us even further in debt, spending more than any administration in history. Our unemployment (which he stated would not fall below 8% if we passed the Stimulus bill), is now over 10% and projected to go lower.
"I am also proposing a new small business tax credit – one that will go to over one million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages."Now this one, I liked! This is a good idea.
"Tomorrow, I’ll visit Tampa, Florida, where workers will soon break ground on a new high-speed railroad funded by the Recovery Act."Trust me, I live in the area. This is something that will rarely get used. Parking is abysmal where they are going to put the railway's station. (Ybor City) There is already an aquarium there, along with the port of Tampa and it's where cruise ships set out. There are several parking garages, but the only way to add parking is for the City to simply kick out some of the businesses and build more garages. This has already been voted against by the citizens here, yet now they're moving forward with it. No one is going to want to fight for parking, pay to park, pay to ride the train...only to shave off 20 minutes to the drive time. (Then they still have to pay to get into Disney, where the other end of the railway will be)
"We will double our exports over the next five years, an increase that will support two million jobs in America."Exports of what? To where? Are we guaranteed that there are buyers for double the exports?
On health care: "Still, this is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became. I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people."That's because the longer it was debated, the more the people realized that what was written into the bill is not altogether a good thing. And more speeches from you explaining the bill even more won't help!
"We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal,... "Nope, this is not in our Constitution, it's in our Bill of Rights - and he knows this, or should, since he studied the Constitution during college.
There's more I could say, but I have things to do...a life to live!
I recorded the speech, but havent had a chance to watch it yet, so I will have to get back to you on my perspective Stealth.
Ooops! it's projected to go HIGHER. Duh. See what happens when you're in a hurry and have a ton of things to do?!Quote:
Originally Posted by steelish
I was going to do a point by point posting a copy of the entire speech, but that effort however thorough is too large to place in any single post.
All of the following quotes are taken from the excerpt of the President’s State of the Union Address provided by The White House, Office of the Press Secretary’s online release.
I am not going to bother going over the “fluff” parts where he makes the standard rally cry or tries to explain away his difficulties by blaming the previous administration or makes empty attempts to appear more like the average citizen instead of the average politician, they do make up the bulk of his speech, but really don’t address anything as to the state of our union except pointing out how much wool we have allowed our politicians to pull over our eyes.
“One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by a severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression. So we acted -– immediately and aggressively. And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed."
But he is going to start off with a lie? The worst has passed? Last time I checked things have gotten worse. Unemployment has risen and the deficit has only increased.
“For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast enough. Some are frustrated; some are angry. They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded, but hard work on Main Street isn't; or why Washington has been unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems. They're tired of the partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness. They know we can't afford it. Not now. “
Seems like? WTF… Try “IS”, “Wall street” is the only one being helped and rewarded and they got us into this mess to begin with! And he is the primary one behind doing the rewarding at that. It took him a year to figure out we are sick of partisanship and poverty? Or is he just sounding like he wants us to cooperate? Remember this is the same man who set up a podium and teleprompters to address a classroom of middle school students.
His solution for fixing the economy is based completely upon the former administrations? I told ya all that he wasn’t going to change anything a long time ago but follow in his predecessors footsteps because he lacked the experience to do anything else.
“Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same banks that helped cause this crisis”
He purposes charging the Banks a modest fee and extending unemployment. I have nothing against that; I didn’t want the banks or Wall Street to get one red cent to begin with. But I do purpose that his modest fee isn’t going to amount to a hill of beans, in the end he will cave to the bigwigs. He also claims to have cut taxes, yet, I didn’t see any reduction whatsoever in my taxes. I wonder who is getting all these magical tax cuts. So far apparently lies and dam lies make the wheels of his speech go round and round.
Truth be told He didn’t raised income taxes, but, he sure hasn’t done anything to stop the raise in prices on home insurance, property tax mil rates, or the price of gas and power. Every single bill I pay for regular day to day living in those regards has done nothing but went up, in some cases doubled…like groceries.
As for all these magical new jobs I haven’t seen any of them yet.
“The plan that has made all of this possible, from the tax cuts to the jobs, is the Recovery Act. That's right -– the Recovery Act, also known as the stimulus bill.”
Again WTF! Let’s use the same plan that hasn’t been working to fix things? They won’t even hire more “strippers” at the club where I had to go back to dancing at to make ends meet so I could stay in school.
“So tonight, I'm proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat.”
Talk is cheap; I will believe this one when I see it. He should have given all of the stimulus money to the small business to begin with.
”Next, we can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow. “
I am all for that. Let’s rebuild the entire infrastructure of the country. Now show me where and how you plan to pay for it.
The Tampa High-speed Railroad is his corner stone? Who exactly is paying for that? He already has me dancing naked for drunks to pay for school, I can’t afford to pay for his toy train that no one in Tampa wants. How about you spend that money to rebuild the failing roads instead and make cheaper cars that don’t use fossil fuels. A statewide mass transit system isn’t a feasible solution on the scale it would take in a state like Florida.
“We should put more Americans to work building clean energy facilities- and give rebates to Americans who make their homes more energy-efficient, which supports clean energy jobs. And to encourage these and other businesses to stay within our borders, it is time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas, and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs right here in the United States of America.”
OK here I agree, I am all for converting my home to not have to rely on the power or water companies and keep our business from running off to other countries just so they can increase their own profit margin. To bad that goes directly against the water and power companies wishes not to mention the big foreign investors; gee I wonder how much money he thinks I have to do all this, will I have to go into porn to pay for it.
“Now, one place to start is serious financial reform. Look, I am not interested in punishing banks.”
Blinks! Punishing the banks?!?, no of course not, we know how much he loves them….because he rewarded them!!!
“It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.”
Allmost spit up my coffee......My, oh my how he has changed his tune here, looks like big oil and coal have their fingers deep into his pockets now.
Then after saying what every other president before him since Regan has said about the economy about increasing exports and fostering growth he goes into education.
“To make college more affordable, this bill will finally end the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that go to banks for student loans.”
So much for what little bit of government money I can get for school, porn is looking better and better.
“ Instead, let's take that money and give families a $10,000 tax credit for four years of college and increase Pell Grants.”
Good luck getting through the four year peerage and liberal indoctrination system our colleges have become.
I must give him credit for saying we need to re-vamp the insurance industry. Fat chance of that actually happening, I bet coal and oil are not the only ones with their fingers up his ass.
“But if anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know”
Dozens of things have been purposed only to be shot down. How about we leave Iraq and Afghanistan like he promised in the first place we would do, and re-focus our military’s direction on self defense and re-building the infrastructure for a little while. Then use some of that massive excess in the defense budget used on offensive initiatives and strategic deterrence (provided by our taxes) to really stimulate internally organized growth and development. The amount spent on bonuses alone last year would be enough to pay off almost every single mortgage in the USA. Just think how much extra money that would put into the play.
I am in agreement with the “freeze” as well as going through the budget and cutting programs out. But I think that’s not enough, he has entire divisions of government that need to be cut or reorganized.
“Now, yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I'll issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans.”
Careful here, he is suggesting that if our elected officials do not agree to do it his way, that he is going to do it anyway somehow. Dangerous ground people and it’s exactly this kind of thing that led the Republic upon which we based our own to end up under the tyranny of an empire.
“Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it's time to try something new.”
Like what? Sidestepping our political systems check and balances through executive orders?
Oh wait I know something that will change things.
Next election we have…if a candidate is listed as a republican or a democrat, we just simply wont vote for them at all and instead throw our support to one of the other people who have been trying to get in who are from a whole different party or are independent with real fresh ideas as opposed to the same ole two party tug of war!
"It's time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office. “
How about this, we don’t allow monetary political contributions at all!
“With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests –- including foreign corporations –- to spend without limit in our elections. I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.”
Wait a second; didn’t he himself get elected this very way? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t agree with the Courts decision. I just wanted to point out the inherent irony this time. Allowing corporations to openly spend as much as they wish just brings what has been going on anyway out into the open. But again I say we shouldn’t allow money into the process at all!
“Of course, none of these reforms will even happen if we don't also reform how we work with one another. Now, I'm not naïve. I never thought that the mere fact of my election would usher in peace and harmony -- (laughter) -- and some post-partisan era. I knew that both parties have fed divisions that are deeply entrenched. And on some issues, there are simply philosophical differences that will always cause us to part ways. These disagreements, about the role of government in our lives, about our national priorities and our national security, they've been taking place for over 200 years. They're the very essence of our democracy.”
The whole two party only thing wouldn’t be nearly as polarized if the media wasn’t feeding off building tension where it wasn’t and excluding representation of other views; which is something I am sure they will do reverently once they start “spinning” this speech into what they want it to say.
“But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day”.
Including the day he gave this speech.
Then he gets to the War stuff.
“Now, these diplomatic efforts have also strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of nuclear weapons”. That's why North Korea now faces increased isolation, and stronger sanctions –- sanctions that are being vigorously enforced. That's why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated. And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: They, too, will face growing consequences. That is a promise.”
In other words he means that he is perfectly willing to continue following in his predecessor’s footsteps and go even further, especially if he can convince the Russians and Chinese to back our hegemony if we decide to invade either of these two so called forces of “evil”.
Then he goes on to say why he supports American imperialism all the while calling it something else and window dressing it under the veil of democracy. Sounds surprisingly like the speeches given by different Archons when Athenians formed their own empire except our banner is supposed to be civil rights violations.
“Those of us in public office can respond to this reality by playing it safe and avoid telling hard truths and pointing fingers. We can do what's necessary to keep our poll numbers high, and get through the next election instead of doing what's best for the next generation. “
My personal response to the television at this point was: “Well then get on with it, just try and not fuck us anymore than you already have!”
Talk is cheap, no more is that proved ironically true and false than with politicians, true because what little that comes out of their mouth is true, false because what does roll out of their mouth is all too often not cheap, at least not for those of us who end up paying for their gibber jabber.
I really want to be wrong, to be mistaken and believe that our “beloved” leader really is magically endowed and that his natural penchance for mendacity as a politician is a misconception on my part.
Though I must say nothing in his speech on the state of our Union has shown me that I should be hopeful in any way what so ever.
The State of the Union addresses can be found here, and they have them all, way back to Washington's. For contrast, try reading Ronald Reagan's address. He left Americans with patriotic feelings, wanting to do more for our country. Obama's speech, by comparison, leaves Americans feeling as if we are the enemy of the government.
Now, just from that alone, who do you think is the President who inspires pride in the country...the one who makes American men and women want to serve for their country? Obama even isolated the Supreme Court and the Senate during his speech, making them seem like the enemy (of the administration, not of the people). He obviously, by his words during the speech and his actions during his first year, has an agenda that he is determined to see through no matter who or what stands in his way.
And taught Constitutional law.
Yet he has been heard to saw that the Constitution is "fundamentally flawed"
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelish
Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
Don't forget the insurance companies, the auto companies. And the sweet deals the unions got, both in the auto buyout and health insurance!
0123456789Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
and did you also know that we export enough that if we kept it for ourselves we would reduce our oil dependency GREATLY. The only reason it's exported is for foreign relations.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
Ah...they have you there. The next logical step to this equation is those that get loans and plan to go into government service to pay them off will be "asked" to get specific degrees determined by the government.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
I was disappointed he didn't list of our enemies and then proceed on how we will deal with them.
Oh, but he did! (if you are one of those who believe he views the average American citizen as the "enemy")Quote:
Originally Posted by VaAugusta
It's funny how people are quick to call one side a liar over several statements they make and then respond with lies of their own.
As for government control, at least it gives the possibility of selling off assets at a later date. The last thing you want is a country that is trillions of dollars in debt to start giving handouts for private run infrastructure.
I agree that the US education system (K-12) is in shambles and won't be fixed by the Obama bills which also violate the 10th amendment.
I also agree that the US college costs are absurd, and the financing is terrible.
And actually the reason oil is exported in such large countries is that governments have made things called free trade agreements so companies sell wherever they make the most profit. The US government as an organization is not taking oil from the US strategic reserve exporting it to other countries and then buying oil from elsewhere to replenish it. Companies like Exxon are selling oil to the highest bidder, which is often abroad.
As for statewide mass transit its a much harder problem in Canada where provinces are bigger, yet some achievements have been made on that front. The fact is taxpayers are a diverse bunch, I'm sure people who live in downtown cores and don't drive would be willing to express just as much outrage at your idea that their tax dollars should pay for your roads. The fact is taxes come from a diverse group of people with diverse interests, and that diversity means there will be government programs you don't approve of.
As for 'punishing' the banks, it is an established fact that the interest on government loans was well below market value and it is also clearly shown on financial statements for Q3 from major banks that the vast majority of banks relent the money at a sizable profit. Why should the government not charge fees for organizations that exaggerated and caused a crisis, demanded a government bailout, then used it to pad profits. I actually think the government should be looking into criminal charges relating to negligence in causing the recession. I'm fairly sure that many of these companies failed their own risk management checks frequently, and then promptly modified the formulas so they'd pass. Instead of using the academic standard, they are all using variants that don't actually mitigate risk but claim to. If that's not criminal negligence and fraud I don't know what is.
I think whatever bad moves he made in the State of the Union Address are going to be overshadowed by his Q&A with the Republicans in Baltimore.
Personally he put some hope back into me about him with the gesture. Even if I am still reluctant to trust him, once bitten twice shy they say.
Is it possible that he really has gotten the message, is he really willing to work together with his opponents and find common ground. I shall not hold my breath but I so want to hope that both parties can put their differences aside and stop making apeals to their respective bases out of fear over re-election.
In any event I give him kudos for it and I thought he did way better imho at Baltimore than he did with his address.
Time will tell ultimately.
The fact is; Floridians voted on this. It was on a ballot. The citizens of the state voted NO. It was voted down. That is the fact. Now they are going through with it regardless.Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
The banks did exactly what the government REQUIRED them to do...give high risk loans to people the banks knew full well could not afford them. As a result, the housing market crashed and the banks started to fail. They didn't demand a bailout (not all of them, some of them tried to refuse it) and now they're being made out as the bad guy in all this. Mainstream media is not helping to get the facts out there either.Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
Please feel free to include your evidence on the government requiring the banks to give loans they did not desire to give. My recollection seems to be banks actively lobbying to be able to extend further credit, not complaining about the government forcing them to. See various exemptions that were the result of direct appeals to the Bush administration, most notably Bear Stearns.
Also keep in mind we haven't seen versions of the bills that Obama actually wants to finalize and sign off on. We've seen attempts by the senate and house to put all sorts of special interests through. Maybe Obama will refuse to sign bills that violate certain campaign promises.
The citizens voted to not do it with state funds. If the federal government is supplying money to do this or no money at all then I'm fairly sure they'd vote for this.
Furthermore its a different story when its part of a national rail plan.
High speed rail exclusive to a small piece of Florida is very different from high speed rail all over the country with a long term plan of connected routes.
They're giving us state funds to get it started, those funds do not include upkeep, building more parking garages, added police to direct traffic during heavy volume, or revamping the roads surrounding the stations.Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
I scrolled up after posting the above sentence and saw your other responses, including the one about banks. I'll reply after work. I have to leave in less than one minute, otherwise I would reply now. I had a very large post about this very thing (which no one seemed to be able to rebut) but it was wiped out during the big library crash.
I think he took too long and spent far too much money to say ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth694
it's really bad, we're fucked.
I've provided links to the sources:Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
During the Carter administration, government officials, egged on by left-wing activists, began accusing mortgage lenders of racism and "redlining" because urban blacks were being denied mortgages at a higher rate than suburban whites.
The pressure to make more loans to minorities (read: to borrowers with weak credit histories) became relentless. Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, empowering regulators to punish banks that failed to "meet the credit needs" of "low-income, minority, and distressed neighborhoods." Lenders responded by loosening their underwriting standards and making increasingly shoddy loans. The two government-chartered mortgage finance firms, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, encouraged this "subprime" lending by authorizing ever more "flexible" criteria by which high-risk borrowers could be qualified for home loans, and then buying up the questionable mortgages that ensued.
All this was justified as a means of increasing homeownership among minorities and the poor. Affirmative-action policies trumped sound business practices. A manual issued by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston advised mortgage lenders to disregard financial common sense. "Lack of credit history should not be seen as a negative factor," the Fed's guidelines instructed. Lenders were directed to accept welfare payments and unemployment benefits as "valid income sources" to qualify for a mortgage. Failure to comply could mean a lawsuit.
As long as housing prices kept rising, the illusion that all this was good public policy could be sustained. But it didn't take a financial whiz to recognize that a day of reckoning would come. What does it mean when Boston banks start making many more loans to minorities? Most likely, that they are knowingly approving risky loans in order to get the feds and the activists off their backs . . . When the coming wave of foreclosures rolls through the inner city, which of today's self-congratulating bankers, politicians, and regulators plans to take the credit?
Frank doesn't. But his fingerprints are all over this fiasco. Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.
Now that the bubble has burst and the "systemic risk" is apparent to all, Frank blithely declares: "The private sector got us into this mess." Well, give the congressman points for gall. Wall Street and private lenders have plenty to answer for, but it was Washington and the political class that derailed this train.
I am so speechless that I don't know how to say what I want to say.
How can our government blow so much smoke up our ass and tell us it is good for us and not to worry about this near-4 trillion dollar budget?
Obama should be a used-car salesman at 'Slick Sam's' or something, the way he can stand there in a speech and say what he does into the camera as straight-faced as if he were telling us that sunrise will occur at 8:11 AM in Montana tomorrow.
Thanks, guys, for taking your valuable time to write about such important matters.
I'll agree that the federal banking acts tend to be terrible, and that the links to those reports blame bankers for discrimination. This of course begs the question, if the bankers aren't actually fixing the discrimination problem by issuing bad loans, how did this cause the crisis? You can't both have your cake and eat it to. Your reports indicated that bankers are still denying loans to blacks at a disproportionately high rate, which means they are not making the high risk loans the ridiculous law would suggest. Ergo, this did not cause the financial crisis.
I point to the specific actions where the worst collapses in the crunch were by organizations that specifically requested overrides of debt limits that were already unreasonable and unsafe, not to comply with specific policies but to pad the bottom line.
As for Reagan, he started the myth that tax cuts pay for themselves, leading directly to the absurdly large $10+ trillion deficit that the US now faces. This has been shown to be false in every country in the world where it has been applied. That being said its nice to pay less taxes, after all it won't be your problem when the government goes bankrupt.
????????Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
Because issuing bad loans IS the cause of the crisis. It doesn't matter whether or not it "fixed" discrimination. The fact remains that the banks were coerced into making loans that they well knew the recipients would default on.
Just because the government's ambitious goal of eliminating discrimination may or may not have worked has no bearing on the end result.
This should scare any Americans reading this forum.
You linked me to an article that shows bankers failed to comply with the regulation. If the bankers are failing to comply with the regulation they aren't making the ridiculous loans it stipulates. So the crisis isn't being caused by bankers being forced to make loans they don't want to make, due to a regulation they aren't complying with.
If the bankers actually complied with the regulation and made the bad loans that then defaulted then I could agree. But the evidence you've given shows that they didn't. So I don't see how people somehow magically defaulted on these loans that were never made.
I can buy that!Quote:
Originally Posted by steelish
I believe I saw somewhere that the administration is already heading in that direction. With an increase in forgiveness for getting a degree in a "green" field.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelish
Explain!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
That is nothing short of nationalization! And what gives rise to the cry of leading us to socialism.Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
Much of what Obama wants to can be said to viloate that amendment!Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
But is more Government handouts the solution. First insurance companies, banks, auto, and now universities???Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
Therefore, by your estimation the US would be exporting every drop of oil it can produce. Well such is not the case. Exports only account for about 12.5% of production!Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
Does not address the question raised. By this argument nobody should give a rats ... and let NAMBLA do as it sees fit!Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
Most all of the banks have already paid back the Government for the monies, that many were forced to take and pay for the privilege. A fee is to be assessed to the banks on top of this to recover funds that other entities are not paying, and likely never will. This is a punishment. There is adequate evidence that the entity that caused the "crisis" was in fact Congress. Therefore all the remedies you espouse are do to Congress more than the banks. Kind of hard to stay within a risk management level when the Government demands that you engage in activities that such programs were say are ill considered.Quote:
Originally Posted by SadisticNature
But even in Baltimore he was still adamant that his way was the only way to go. Means that he still believes in the Democrat ideal of compromise. Democrats hold the line and the Republicans compromise!
Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri