In general, I liked it. Mostly that’s because my expectations are low. So don’t worry, I’ll get to the specifics of not liking it, but in general it didn’t read like a laundry list of how everything is either our fault or Bush’s fault but that Obama will now save us all. It was upbeat and proAmerican. It was forward looking.
So by saying “I liked it”, I’m saying I really hated last years and most all of Obama’s speeches, so this was an improvement.
He started by going directly into civility.
Now, by itself, this simple recognition [of being civil] won’t usher in a new era of cooperation. What comes of this moment is up to us. What comes of this moment will be determined not by whether we can sit together tonight, but whether we can work together tomorrow. (Applause.)
I believe we can. And I believe we must. That’s what the people who sent us here expect of us. With their votes, they’ve determined that governing will now be a shared responsibility between parties. New laws will only pass with support from Democrats and Republicans. We will move forward together, or not at all -– for the challenges we face are bigger than party, and bigger than politics.
A bold move in my opinion because he points out that any new law will ONLY pass with bipartisan cooperation. This IMMEDIATELY brings to mind Obamacare and why it needed to be repealed and not tweaked.
In the general tone, one thing I didn’t like…..President Obama is my age, yet like other presidents before him he talks as though most of us grew up during the depression or WWII and we want to return to those glory days. We have our own “glory” and our own innovations. So statements like this seem out of touch to me.….
What we can do – what America does better than anyone – is spark the creativity and imagination of our people. We are the nation that put cars in driveways and computers in offices; the nation of Edison and the Wright brothers; of Google and Facebook. In America, innovation doesn’t just change our lives. It’s how we make a living.
Our free enterprise system is what drives innovation. But because it’s not always profitable for companies to invest in basic research, throughout history our government has provided cutting-edge scientists and inventors with the support that they need. That’s what planted the seeds for the Internet. That’s what helped make possible things like computer chips and GPS.
This generation has done tons more than Google and Facebook. How about nanotechnology and robotics? Cancer is no longer a death sentence. How does our “free enterprise system” drive innovation yet be so in need of government “investment”?
In every bit of positivity about Americans and our ability to innovate and grow and put people to work he has to put his little government fingers in it.
The first step in winning the future is encouraging American innovation.
How about just leaving people alone to do with their money what they want to do?
On Education he talks about how great our schools are, but that we need to “invest” more, blah, blah so that our children can then go out and “innovate”. And then he invites our children to grow up and become teachers. Huh?
In fact, to every young person listening tonight who’s contemplating their career choice: If you want to make a difference in the life of our nation; if you want to make a difference in the life of a child – become a teacher. Your country needs you.
The Apollo program he mentions encouraged children to grow up and become engineers and scientists. If Obama wants innovators to come up with new ideas for green energy he needs to encourage physicists, not teachers.
Other big ideas, 85 percent of the nation’s energy from clean energy by 2035; 80 percent of Americans having access to high-speed rail within 25 years; and 98 percent having access to high-speed wireless within five years:
Within 25 years, our goal is to give 80% of Americans access to high-speed rail, which could allow you go places in half the time it takes to travel by car. For some trips, it will be faster than flying – without the pat-down. As we speak, routes in California and the Midwest are already underway.
1-Americans won’t use Amtrak. Why the high-speed rail?
2 – As soon as there is a terrorist attack on a high speed rail, there will be pat downs. doh
On taxes.
For example, over the years, a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries. Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and it has to change.
So tonight, I’m asking Democrats and Republicans to simplify the system. Get rid of the loopholes. Level the playing field. And use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years –- without adding to our deficit. It can be done.
Good, OR, you could lower the tax rate so that companies no longer find it “profitable” to pay for lobbyists to get their loopholes.
This government thinks that the money you earn is their money.
And their conclusion [the fiscal commission] is that the only way to tackle our deficit is to cut excessive spending wherever we find it –- in domestic spending, defense spending, health care spending, and spending through tax breaks and loopholes.
A tax break is not “spending”.
He talked about the oddness of the government and how salmon fishing is covered in multiple ways due to the huge bureaucracy, BUT he didn’t discuss how to fix that. Which is one area where he has real responsibility. If you have too many commissions, eliminate some. doh.
I loved the ending. You all remember Brandon Fisher:
That dream -– that American Dream -– is what drove the Allen Brothers to reinvent their roofing company for a new era. It’s what drove those students at Forsyth Tech to learn a new skill and work towards the future. And that dream is the story of a small business owner named Brandon Fisher.
His drill bit helped save those men in Chile trapped in the mine last summer. One of Mr. Fisher’s employees said ““We proved that Center Rock is a little company, but we do big things.”
Conclusion:
Obama caught the “we do big things” bit, but not the “little company”. The government needs to get out of the way so that millions of little companies can get started doing the big things this country CAN do.
Part of getting out of the way is focusing laser like on the debt created in the last 2 years. Then and only then can they focus on the debt created in the last 10 years that Obama likes to talk about.
Leaving those payments to children and grandchildren of today’s America is shameful.
But the overarching theme of the speech, the tag line for which was “Winning the Future” was economic growth. Not that any of the policies he espoused will lead to that, but that is what he implored Americans to achieve, in spite of him.
UPDATE: Fixed a mispelling and put a quote in quote format.
Great commentary — agree with most of it. Would add that having everyone sit with the opposite party really helped to noticeably keep down all of the jumping up and applauding or booing that usually goes on and kept the speech short.
Boringly delivered speech though — lots of holes and contradictions — AP’s fact checkers have done a good job.
This too was entertaining commentary:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/01/25/surprising-ridiculous-moment-review-obamas-state-union-speech/
That was a good one. Thanks for the link.
And Ben Stein in the American Spectator completely made your point about income and taxes:
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/01/26/obama-and-the-bodysnatchers
“When he railed against tax breaks that he considered identical to government spending, that was outright socialism. That concept implies that all the income in the nation belongs to the state, and that if we let working people keep any of it, that is the same as a government expenditure. The opposite is true. The income belongs to the people, and they allow government to have some of it. But, of course, the servant has become the master now.”
Hopefully no one believes this zebra has changed his stripes from the speech last night. I am sure his agenda has not changed one iota, the only difference is the playing field has changed. Sounded to me like the first speech of a reelection campaign.