President Barack Obama laid out a clear path for continued recovery that will require sacrifice and inspired confidence in his second of eight State of the Union addresses Tuesday night.
“We are poised for progress,” he said to a standing ovation. “Two years after the worst recession most of us have ever known, the stock market has come roaring back. Corporate profits are up. The economy is growing again.”
But he said that was not enough, and that the times are long gone that, especially here in Michigan, you just showed up at the auto plant and got a middle class jobs. The recovery will be tough for some people, and the recovery will take sacrifice, just like previous generations had to.
“Thanks to the tax cuts we passed, Americans’ paychecks are a little bigger today,” he said. “Every business can write off the full cost of new investments that they make this year. And these steps, taken by Democrats and Republicans, will grow the economy and add to the more than one million private sector jobs created last year.”
The President said future success will take education and innovation as we compete with the world, and that we must encourage American innovation.
“None of us can predict with certainty what the next big industry will be or where the new jobs will come from,” he said. “Thirty years ago, we couldn’t know that something called the Internet would lead to an economic revolution.”
The President said we must act with urgency, like the space race that put the first American on the moon, and we must do that by investing in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology that is tied to national security, protects the planet and creates countless new jobs.
“We’re not just handing out money,” he said. “We’re issuing a challenge. We’re telling America’s scientists and engineers that if they assemble teams of the best minds in their fields, and focus on the hardest problems in clean energy, we’ll fund the Apollo projects of our time.”
The President said to ensure our continued climb out of the recession, we have to reduce the national debt with things like the health care insurance reform that if repealed will add $230 billion in the first decade to the deficit. But the President stuck to his long-running theme of bipartisanship, and he said he is willing to work with Republicans to make the law better.
“Now, I have heard rumors that a few of you still have concerns about our new health care law,” he said. “So let me be the first to say that anything can be improved. If you have ideas about how to improve this law by making care better or more affordable, I am eager to work with you.”
Perhaps his biggest and boldest proposal was to freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years that would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, and that move will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was President.
“This freeze will require painful cuts,” he said. “Already, we’ve frozen the salaries of hardworking federal employees for the next two years. I’ve proposed cuts to things I care deeply about, like community action programs. The Secretary of Defense has also agreed to cut tens of billions of dollars in spending that he and his generals believe our military can do without.”
28 comments:
This seems more like a report than your own spin, which is interesting. Copy and pasted, like I am going to do.
Now why would Obama talk about the space race and SPutnik all the while basically killing off NASA? And he mentioned Thomas Edison, inventor of the lightbulb whom the Dems again killed off that light bulb in favor of mercury filled curly que more expensive light bulbs.
You quote "The President said to ensure our continued climb out of the recession, we have to reduce the national debt with things like the health care insurance reform that if repealed will add $230 billion in the first decade to the deficit. But the President stuck to his long-running theme of bipartisanship, and he said he is willing to work with Republicans to make the law better." I quote back: "THE FACTS: The idea that Obama's health care law saves money for the government is based on some arguable assumptions.
To be sure, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated the law will slightly reduce red ink over 10 years. But the office's analysis assumes that steep cuts in Medicare spending, as called for in the law, will actually take place. Others in the government have concluded it is unrealistic to expect such savings from Medicare.
In recent years, for example, Congress has repeatedly overridden a law that would save the treasury billions by cutting deeply into Medicare pay for doctors. Just last month, the government once again put off the scheduled cuts for another year, at a cost of $19 billion. That money is being taken out of the health care overhaul. Congress has shown itself sensitive to pressure from seniors and their doctors, and there's little reason to think that will change."
You forgot to mention Obama said no earmarks. That is large gaffe on you and Obama for lying to the nation. OBAMA: Vowed to veto any bills sent to him that include "earmarks," pet spending provisions pushed by individual lawmakers. "Both parties in Congress should know this: If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it."
THE FACTS: House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has promised that no bill with earmarks will be sent to Obama in the first place. Republicans have taken the lead in battling earmarks while Obama signed plenty of earmark-laden spending bills when Democrats controlled both houses.
It's a turnabout for the president; in early 2009, Obama sounded like an apologist for the practice: "Done right, earmarks have given legislators the opportunity to direct federal money to worthy projects that benefit people in their districts, and that's why I've opposed their outright elimination," he said then.
Lastly lets add another health care reform idea. OBAMA: "I'm willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year: medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits."
THE FACTS: Republicans may be forgiven if this offer makes them feel like Charlie Brown running up to kick the football, only to have it pulled away, again.
Obama has expressed openness before to this prominent Republican proposal, but it has not come to much. It was one of several GOP ideas that were dropped or diminished in the health care law after Obama endorsed them in a televised bipartisan meeting at the height of the debate.
Republicans want federal action to limit jury awards in medical malpractice cases; what Obama appears to be offering, by supporting state efforts, falls short of that. The president has said he agrees that fear of being sued leads to unnecessary tests and procedures that drive up health care costs. So far the administration has only wanted to pay for pilot programs and studies.
Trial lawyers, major political donors to Democratic candidates, are strongly opposed to caps on jury awards. But the administration has been reluctant to support other approaches, such as the creation of specialized courts where expert judges, not juries, would decide malpractice cases.
So in closing, Obama claims he is anti earmark but has many many times signed bills with earmarks. He also claims he is willing to listen to Republican ideas on saving money in the health care reform but never ever uses their ideas and refuses to meet with them in the past. Now we have seen where that has gotten his parties in the national, state, local elecltions.
Kevin, I know its the GOP and the conservative media's spin machine that undid Obama. BLAH BLAH BLAH keep beating that same drum because the people arent buying it at all.
Part 3 from Kyle Wingfield.
How do you take seriously a speech in which the president says we will spend more money on educating students, rebuilding our infrastructure and funding research for innovation in alternative energy sources — all while saying we’re not going to spend more money?
How do you take seriously a speech in which the only budgetary dollar figure the president gives is a made-up one — a reduction in spending (even as spending is frozen, remember) as compared only to hypothetical future budgets?
How do you take seriously a speech in which the president claims the mantle of fiscal restraint — while essentially bidding to make permanent the supposedly temporary, stimulus-inflated levels of spending we’ve seen the last two years?
How do you take seriously a speech in which the president says he will work more closely with Republicans — by making the same offers he has made, but not acted on, in previous speeches? (Examples: “If you have ideas about how to improve [the health-reform] law…I am eager to work with you,” and, “I’m willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year: medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits” [my emphasis, because he's admitting he didn't act on it when they proposed it before].)
How do you take seriously a speech in which the president acknowledges that his own fiscal-reform commission said “the only way to tackle our deficit is to cut excessive spending wherever we find it” — and then essentially rules out cutting spending in entitlements?
Given all this, how do you take seriously those parts of the speech that did offer pleasant surprises — his calls to flatten and lower corporate income-tax rates, to simplify individual income taxes (note that he didn’t offer to simplify and then lower rates), to merge and consolidate duplicative federal agencies, and to veto any bill with earmarks?
Seriously — how?
The next two years are going to be even harder than I thought.
Copy and paste? Those are quotes from the speech, you moron.
At least this time you didn’t plagiarize and gave credit to the person who wrote this bunk. It’s not hard to figure out when you rip people off because there is actual punctuation. Any original thoughts? I didn’t think so.
Haha Kev Head. You didnt pause the speech and type it out word for word, you copied and pasted it from somewhere.
Next, your title says this about his speech "The President inspires with his second of eight SOU speeches" and just yesterday you are calling him a non-liberal. So who is he inspiring you or the people or both?
Way to not address any of the points I brought up above as you have no defense again for it.
Since you're an English Nazi (I use that word because some Democrat called the Republicans that on the House floor a week or two ago and since Dems are the epitome of etiquette I figured its now OK to use that), I will try to use more punctuation just for you. Mostly the non-use of capital letters is what you don't like. So here you go.
"""Perhaps his biggest and boldest proposal was to freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years that would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, and that move will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was President."""
Bullshit. Freezing record deficits is no fiscal responsibility. It's freezing the record spending where it is. Unacceptable.
Do you know what a quote is?
Yes, I said "The President inspires with his second of eight SOU speeches” because it’s true and the President is not a liberal. I wish he was.
You didn’t bring up any points.
I’m far from a “English Nazi.” But the BS you were writing was almost incoherent. Sorry, no Democrat call a “Republican that on the House floor a week or two ago,” and I already debunked that false charge when you made it.
Don’t do anything special for me; just try English. Besides, I thought you were unsubscribing?
Let me rephrase, “the biggest and boldest proposal was to freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years that would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, and that move will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was President.”
It is when we are just over a year out of the Bush recession, the longest and deepest since the Great Depression.
There is no de-bunking as the (liberal) HuffPo even reports it. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/19/steve-cohen-republican-nazis_n_811170.html
Kevin, you really are losing your marbles. And I cant unsubscribe because it wont let me so I will stay on because you make my day with all of your falling over yourself in verbage and hypocritical ways. Are you bringing that up again because you are getting a run for your money? Probably.
Also to quote Cohen, "You dont like the truth, so you just dismiss it." Thank you, please come again.
Lastly, thanks for not responding to any of the counterpoints raised because you dont have anything to counterpoint them. Obama is a Liberal, he is by no means a Conservative and now he is trying to be more centrist to hold on to his doomed and failed presidency.
The “HuffPo” is not liberal, but that is beside the point. Like I said before, he commented on the very effective GOP strategy that “if you tell a lie often enough peoples start to believe it”, and he compared the well-oiled GOP propaganda machine to the most efficient in history. Personally, I don’t condone those kinds of comparisons no matter how accurate.
Right, it won’t let you. Perhaps you are right; I forget how dumb you really are. Like I said, I can unsubscribe you if you like. I’m still waiting for a rightwing tool to prove I have ever lied. Right-wingers, and there are not a lot of these, that can actually think and string a coherent sentence together have tried and failed. Please, by all means stay; you do more for my side.
Once again, you have not raised any points. Those are not your points. I wish President Obama was a liberal, but he’s not. I agree 100 percent, by no means is he a conservative. How is his presidency failed, especially when you compare it to the last guy who is demonstratively one of the worst in U.S. history? President Obama has always been a centrist.
Ive noticed on your blog there are more conservatives speaking up more often now that I have commented more than once. That is helping your blog have a more conservative voice instead of the hate filled spewing filth lies you put forth on a daily basis.
So if not one person can debunk you, what website or news source can I use that you consider to be centered and not biased to debunk your falsities? Because everything that does prove youre always wrong you just brush off like you did above.
Arianna Huffington is a self described liberal, so then in essence her website is liberal AND is pro-Democrat in every way as the socialist party of America isnt the new Democrat party yet.
The lies that you have told on this site have been proven and backed up. Anyone wanting to take the time only need look through the archives and they are likely to see at least one per month (the average is probably higher). Just because you refuse to believe facts when presented and they don't fit what you want to hear doesn't make your lies less of a lie.
I too read most of what Brad pasted above and he's right, you haven't debunked any thing that he's posted and didn't even discuss it. But then, you don't discuss nor even debate. You only snarl at anyone that has a differing opinion and even facts that disprove your own words.
It's funny that Brad would say there is no place to unsubscribe. I go for a couple of days without reading your drivel and then come back and read some. I know what you're going to say about different topics but still come back and read it. It's like a canker sore. You know that if you put your tongue on it, it's going to hurt, but still you just have to try it.
Reading your stuff is comic relief. Sometimes, a good laugh is needed. I've had some real belly busters reading your stuff. Maybe you should try this material at one of those comedy clubs and see how it goes.
The only “hate filled spewing filth lies” are coming from you and anonymous coward. Like I said before, I’m still waiting for you or coward, hate the USA or any other rightwing tool to point out where I lied. On occasion, I have made a mistake, and in that rare case I admit it and correct it.
I agree, Arianna Huffington is liberal. Like I said before, he commented on the very effective GOP strategy that “if you tell a lie often enough peoples start to believe it”, and he compared the well-oiled GOP propaganda machine to the most efficient in history. Personally, I don’t condone those kinds of comparisons no matter how accurate.
Sorry, anonymous, I have never lied, and you certainly have never proved I have. You certainly have lied however, like the time you claimed that we were “nearly shoulder to shoulder once.”
I’ll debate with a reasonable person, not an anonymous scumbag like you that stoops to false, personal attacks and hides like the anonymous coward you are. It’s more than “funny that Brad would say there is no place to unsubscribe” it’s also a lie. If what I write is “drivel” and “comic relief” it should be easy debunk, so why can’t you? But thanks for the compliment; coming from an anonymous coward like you it means a lot.
aaaaaaaaahahaha i am smiling while i type this. Sorry punctuation. You and your name calling again is awesome and you cant defend one allegedation brought up against you side of the aisle, the socialist liberal progressive side. Everything posted you say is false yet you cant prove it to be false by proving what I or anyone else has siad to be true. You have been debunked many times, you just refuse to counter ANYTHING! So debate away with yourself as it looks like you are doing because you sure as heck dont do that with the comments.
are doing because you sure as heck dont do that with the comments.
I don’t see any name-calling; I just pointed out facts. I can and have defended every single allegation, as well as every single “allegedation,” brought up against my “side of the aisle, and I will continue to do so for liberals progressives, but since I don’t know any socialists I’ll decline there.
Sorry, nothing I have written on this blog has been debunked, and certainly not by someone like you.
everything posted above you have not debunked. have a nice morning trying to debunk it. let me know when you do, if you can.
I forgot to mention in the first post, the first of 8 speeches, aaaaahahahaha. Why would you even hope or write that since he is a "conservative"? Kevin you should take your show on the comedy circuit. Commence with rebuttle of the facts above please, I am still waiting.
Again, I forget how dumb you really are. “everything (sic) posted above you have not debunked?” I agree because there is nothing to debunk in my post of the recap of the SOU.
No, the second of 8 SOU speeches. Who ever said President Obama is a conservative? Why would I “Commence with rebuttle (sic) of the facts above please?” Again, it’s my post of the recap of the SOU.
As for comedy; there really is nothing funny about your stupidity.
You said he was centrist, my mistakte. What makes him a centrist and not a liberal?
Anything posted in the comments on this story you have NOT debunked. So what you are telling me is that you wont counter anything that you specifically dont mention in your blog? So my counterpoints to Obama's WTF SOTU arent relevant even though its about what you said because you may or may not have mentioned it in your blog?
I have to admit I didn't bother looking over father of the world greatest burger flipper,his alias Brad and liar supreme Republican Michigander comments before I respond or added my two cents because their comments is 99.99999% bullshit.
The SOTU, the response from Shimp Howard and the racist dingbat response from Michele Bachmann should provide proof to the non wing nut America that their side of the political fence have nothing for them and there is hope on our side.
I'm glad the Repugs pick Shimp to give their response I can say to Mr.and Mrs.Teabagger well President Obama doesn't want to touch your Medicare but if Paul Ryan can get his way you won't even have it. Not only will Paul Ryan take away your social security and Medicare he wants you to pay higher taxes to offset tax cuts for Paris Hilton and the cast of Jersey Shore.
The Repugs spent all last year screaming about jobs yet the first thing they did was to vote for repeal health care which ONLY 18% of the country supports and they're pushing for some anti-abortion bill.
And you guys did hand us a pretty good political weapon to smack you bastards over the head with next year. If the Republicans got rid of health care they will add to the debt and over 100 million people will be out of insurance.
Brad I'm glad you quoted a person who claim Sputnik was the reason that Soviet Union collapse never mind Sputnik was in 1957 and the Soviet Union fall apart in 1991.
ahahahahahahaaaaa now im laughing at this person too. please, show me where medicare and social security is being taken away?
obama is cutting medicare $500 million as part of obamacare already, so whatever the GOP plans regardingthat you should like it.
you and kev heads noses are sooooooooooo far up obama's ass you cant smell what he is doing. despite evidence to the contrary you refuse to believe it. and thats why i laugh at your near or short sightedness of your statements because you are clueless. there always is a portion of the population like that, that are stuck in their ways and wont change positions on anything even if they are proven wrong.
I wonder how you right wingers tie your own shoes in the morning? CBO states the current health care bill not only saves money it brings down the debt and if the Repugs got their way it would add money to the debt and millions of people will have no insurance. That's from the CBO and you got your "information" from some lame ass right wing website.
As for Paul Ryan I got that information from the man himself where he wants to give rich people more tax cuts at the expense of the middle class and working poor.
Again you guys make up 18% of the population that wants to go back to the old system of health insurance companies kicking people off because they got sick.
Johnny C too bad your name isnt Johnny Vegas.
Your precious CBO huh? It saves money? So let me get this straight, the govt aka taxpayers is going to spend more on Obamacare and by spending MORE money its going to save us more money. No wonder the country is in a massive shit storm of financial hurt.
Funny story about the CBO. While the CBO did produce a report projecting that Obamacare COULD produce $124 billion of savings over its first 10 years (note not past 10 years), no honest and intelligent person believes that that score will ever become reality. Not even the CBO. CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote: “CBO’s cost estimate noted that the legislation maintains and puts into effect a number of policies that might be difficult to sustain over a long period of time.” Elmendorf then goes on to identify a number of specific Obamacare policies, such as arbitrary reductions in the growth rate for Medicare spending, that anyone who follows health care policy knows will be impossible to actually implement. Here is the link, enjoy that read.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11355/hr4872.pdf
A link on the effects of Obamacare already. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/the_damage_has_already_begun_pzcq1MmzRb3O626H6Q7PqI
Obama in the SOTU talked about more spending more spending more spending; I have no idea how we are going to get out from under his spending mentality.
Lets review shall we? To be continued on the next post because I will run out of room.
you would be the Govt that Johnny C and KevHead so lovingly adore only when their guy is in office.
-The U.S. Post Service was established in 1775. You have had 234 years to get it right and it is broke.
-Social Security was established in 1935. Then the government stuck their hands in the cookie jar! You have had 74 years to get it right and it is broke.
-Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it right and it is broke.
-War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more.
-Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 44 years to get it right and they are broke.
-Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 39 years to get it right and it is broke.
-The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 32 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure.
So KevHead and Johnny C You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars
AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED WITH A GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM??
The you's refer to government and BOOM LAWYERED. So please do us all a favor and just stop voting because your party has throw many failed policies down our throats that we continually overpay on. Thanks guys.
Brad,
What the hell are you talking about? You jamming in a lot of bull shit in two right wing rants. All the things you link up to prove your piss poor points are from right wing websites so you fail on that front.
You haven't address the fact if the Repugs get their way they would add more to the debt and more people would lose their insurance.
You make shit up and I'm force to come back to read through vast amounts of bull shit and popped u in the face with reality.
how many trillions of dollars has been added to the national debt under harry pelosi, and then barack harry pelosi? please johnny, youre out of your league.
Post a Comment