SOTUS Part 1

Last night, I started to watch the President deliver his first State of The Union address. Then a half hour into his 1 hour and fifteen minute address, I decided I wasn’t going to sit and watch it anymore. What I am going to do is go through Obama’s SOTU and take him apart piece by piece by piece. He deserves to be ruthlessly annihilated by his own words. Why? Because this President & his Progressive, Statist Party are ruthlessly annihilating this the great people of this great United States of America.

So let’s get started:

Madam Speaker, Vice President Biden, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:

Our Constitution declares that from time to time, the President shall give to Congress information about the state of our union. For 220 years, our leaders have fulfilled this duty. They’ve done so during periods of prosperity and tranquility. And they’ve done so in the midst of war and depression; at moments of great strife and great struggle.

It’s tempting to look back on these moments and assume that our progress was inevitable -– that America was always destined to succeed. But when the Union was turned back at Bull Run, and the Allies first landed at Omaha Beach, victory was very much in doubt. When the market crashed on Black Tuesday, and civil rights marchers were beaten on Bloody Sunday, the future was anything but certain. These were the times that tested the courage of our convictions, and the strength of our union. And despite all our divisions and disagreements, our hesitations and our fears, America prevailed because we chose to move forward as one nation, as one people.

Again, we are tested. And again, we must answer history’s call.

What Obama doesn’t understand is that every one of the events in history he mentioned resulted in Americans believing that progress was inevitable. Americans have always believed, and to this day believe, America is destined to succeed. The sheer arrogant ignorance of Obama to suggest that he is even remotely in the same class as these events and the people in them is beyond the pale.

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 the devastation remains. One in 10 Americans still cannot find work. Many businesses have shuttered. Home values have declined. Small towns and rural communities have been hit especially hard. And for those who’d already known poverty, life has become that much harder.

Poor Obama. What? You didn’t know what you were getting into for the 2+ years as a candidate. Stop your whining girly boy and man up.

So wait, the storm has passed but the devastation remains? So you and the Democrat Congress haven’t been doing your job then. A full year and you still don’t know what to do? A full year and over 10% of the working population is unemployed.

Didn’t you tell us “Now is the time to jumpstart job creation” back on February 24, 2009? That’s called failure of the highest degree Mr. President.

So we face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope -– what they deserve -– is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics. For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories, different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared: a job that pays the bills; a chance to get ahead; most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.

Let me educate you Mr. President. It’s very simple. Americans want Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness and Limited Government – All four of them.

What the American people DEMAND can be found within the very documents our great Founding Fathers wrote.

The Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

You feelin’ us yet Barry? We don’t hope and deserve from Government. We the People instruct and direct you and Congress.

If there’s any doubt left in that pea-brain head of yours Mr. President, let me erase it permanently.

The 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Got that Mr. Prez? The powers not enumerated to the Federal Government are reserved to the States or the People.

Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same banks that helped cause this crisis. It was not easy to do. And if there’s one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans, and everybody in between, it’s that we all hated the bank bailout. I hated it. I hated it. You hated it. It was about as popular as a root canal.

But when I ran for President, I promised I wouldn’t just do what was popular -– I would do what was necessary. And if we had allowed the meltdown of the financial system, unemployment might be double what it is today. More businesses would certainly have closed. More homes would have surely been lost.

So I supported the last administration’s efforts to create the financial rescue program. And when we took that program over, we made it more transparent and more accountable. And as a result, the markets are now stabilized, and we’ve recovered most of the money we spent on the banks. Most but not all.

To recover the rest, I’ve proposed a fee on the biggest banks. Now, I know Wall Street isn’t keen on this idea. But if these firms can afford to hand out big bonuses again, they can afford a modest fee to pay back the taxpayers who rescued them in their time of need.

If you hated it the bank bail out but had to do it then why didn’t you put strict regulations on what the banks could and could not do? You didn’t. You supported it. Why? Because that was an in for you into getting control of the financial industry. You’re such a good little Statist.

You made the financial rescue program more transparent and more accountable? Are you delusional? One only had to watch the testimony of Geithner and Paulson yesterday to see just how opaque and unaccountable you and Congress are.

Again, you are completely disconnected from reality. Main Street is also not keen on your bank tax scheme. In fact, it’s unconstitutional. Don’t take my word for it though. Just read the Constitution.

Article 1 Section 9 Clause 3: “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” Get it? Yet? Prez?

Now, as we stabilized the financial system, we also took steps to get our economy growing again, save as many jobs as possible, and help Americans who had become unemployed.

That’s why we extended or increased unemployment benefits for more than 18 million Americans; made health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families who get their coverage through COBRA; and passed 25 different tax cuts.

Now, let me repeat: We cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time home buyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college.

I thought I’d get some applause on that one.

As a result, millions of Americans had more to spend on gas and food and other necessities, all of which helped businesses keep more workers. And we haven’t raised income taxes by a single dime on a single person. Not a single dime.

Mr. President, show me directly the mathematical computations you used in determining the jobs you saved. Show me, in spreadsheet form, the exact jobs, the companies that have these jobs, the exact dollar amount of each job, the individual titles of each job, and whether each job was a government or private sector job.

Barry, every one of your “tax cuts” is a redistribution of wealth.

Now, let me repeat: You’re tax cut for 95% of the working families is a federal check from taxpaying Americans to non-taxpaying Americans. Additionally, you forgot to tell 8 million people that on April 15th they will be paying that “tax cut” back to the Federal Government. You also forgot to tell Americans that it’s temporary.

Look at every one of the items Obama calls a “tax cut” and what you’ll find is Big Government redistributing taxpayer’s wealth.

As for not raising income taxes? Why haven’t you committed to lowering income taxes across the board permanently Mr. President? Why haven’t you committed to permanently reducing federal spending and eliminating useless departments of the Federal Government? Why haven’t you committed to lowering the highest corporate income tax in the world, ours Mr. President?

So let’s be clear Mr. President: You can spew your rhetoric all day long but your actions haven’t netted the results you’ve talked about. Results, Mr. President, results.

Okay folks, that’s it for today. Don’t miss Part 2 tomorrow. You’ll get to find out what SOTUS stands for.

Share and Enjoy:

This entry was posted by Fleckman on January 28, 2010 at 8:26 am, and is filled under Politics. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.

Peter Fleckenstein

Spuds.
1st let me educate you again. This country is not a Democracy. It's a Republic. Got that? Good!

Next I've never sd my life has become a living hell. Those were your words. I'm also not paid to write any of this.

Next - When you link to Repub Presidents vs Democrat Presidents you should understand something. Congress writes the laws. Go ahead and take a look at when Dems & Repubs had control of Congress. A different picture emerges than the false one ur trying to paint.

You see things improving? LMAO!! Based on what projections? The deficit being tripled by Obama in 1 year? Or perhaps the the Debt growing exponentially. Get real.

Next - I can see your Bush Derangement Syndrome very clearly like all the rest of your posts here. Nice try. Hmmm let's see, who's the Secretary of Treasury? Why it's Timmy G!

Next - I've been banning a lot of spammers lately. You have access to my site statistics? Nope. So again you're talking out of your butt.

I knew I recognized you from the past. You're a blog troller. Instead of talking directly and discussing the post directly you come after me personally. You're a stalker. That's why you were banned before.

Obviously you changed your email and ip address to get back in here and do more of the same.

You're right, this is your last post and you are banned.

You're also wrong. Joe is not banned.

Go stalk someone else Spuds.

SpudsMcKenzie

Peter, I would really be interested in knowing how your life has become such a living hell, since Obama took office. Especially, after going through what we did in the previous administration. Personally, a see things improving and I'm actually hopeful for the future for the first time in probably 10 years.

I noticed your blog started almost immediately after Obama took office. Is it just a personal beef against the Democratic Party? Are you a sore loser? Are you paid to do this? What? I just can't understand how people can be so negative about things, even before they have a chance to happen. You may not agree with their policies. But believe it or not the Democratic party is not as bad as you think it is. Yes, they spend money on things you may not like. Yes, they do not lower taxes like the Republican party. But, if you look at history, they are somewhat successful at lower are national debt, at least as a percentage of GDP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_publ...). A better graph is here, broken down by presidency (http://zfacts.com/p/318.html).

And they are somewhat successful at creating jobs:
Harry S. Truman (Democrat): increase of 2.95 percent a year
Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican): increase of 0.50 percent a year
John F. Kennedy (Democrat): increase of 2.03 percent a year
Lyndon B. Johnson (Democrat): increase of 3.88 percent a year
Richard M. Nixon (Republican): increase of 2.16 percent a year
Gerald R. Ford (Republican): increase of 0.86 percent a year
Jimmy Carter (Democrat): increase of 3.45 percent a year
Ronald Reagan (Republican): increase of 2.46 percent a year
George H.W. Bush (Republican): increase of 0.40 percent a year
Bill Clinton (Democrat): increase of 2.86 percent a year
George W. Bush (Republican): increase of 0.01 percent a year
Barack Obama (Democrat): decrease of 3.0 percent a year

This was taken from an article at politifact.com (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/stateme...). I know you don't like them, but they are non-partison.

And, regarding your little blurb on AIG. The AIG bailout was initiated under George W. Bush's administration, by Henry Paulson (Bush's Secretary of Treasury) and Timothy Geithner (the Federal Reserve President at the time). So, I wouldn't exactly be calling out Obama on this.

As for the tax cuts, or more specifically, the expiration of the tax cuts for people of $250,000. Doesn't personally matter to me, I don't make that much. I think it's fiscally responsible to let them retire. I also think it's good that they are extending the cuts to the middle class. The middle class feeds the economy. In fact, Bush himself, should have repealed the tax cuts as soon as the war started. You don't start an expensive war in cut taxes! That's stupid. How did he plan on paying for it. This simple fact is, he didn't care. Let the next administration handle it. He knew a Democrat would probably get elected, history shows this. He know taxes would have to be raised, all of them do. So the Democrats come in, raise taxes, get the debt under control, and then get thrown out because they raised taxes. It's a never ending cycle. And, it's a shame. You keep speaking about the Dems spending too much, but, in fact, over the last couple of decades its the Republicans who have been increasing our debt. Look at "Pay as You Go". It was working, our debt was declining, and then Bush let it expire and immediately we had budget deficits again, and the debt started to increase. Congress voted on this yesterday, and guess what, it was a party line vote 60-39. The party line vote, may have been because of the spending limit increase, but who knows. And before you say a-ha, the spending limit increases have historically been part line. During Bush administration the spending limit was raised 7 times, 5 by the Republican congress, 2 by the Democrat congress, each time by a party line vote. I do think, however, that if the bill did not include the spending increase it still would have been a party line vote. Why the Republicans can't stand pay-as-you go is beyond me. I would figure requiring spending to be budge-neutral would be a good thing.

Anyway, last post for me. I don't have the time for it, after all I get "paid" to do a different job. I'm probably going to get banned again anyway. By the way, I've noticed that you have been banning alot of people, including myself once. Why is this?

Anyway, I beg all of you reading this stuff, please, please, do research. Don't just watch FOX News. Don't listen just to Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, et all. Watch CNN, gasp, I know it's liberal, but does offer a counter argument. Read non-conservative fact checking sites, like factcheck.org or politifact.com. It's not anywhere remotely as bad as this guy is making it sound. Calm down. Remember, this is a Democracy. Things will change if you don't like it. It always has. Balance of power is a good thing. We should expect and accept and even hope for party changes in Washington. It keeps things in check. We would all be better off if anger and hate (and racism) didn't take over our politics too. Remember, this is the 21st century not the 19th century. We should be better than this. Learn from our past. Move forward.

And Joe, bravo, good reply. You're a much better orator than I. I tend to rant incoherently. You'll probably get banned though.

Joe

Hello, I add your blog to my google reader, and read it alongside other political blogs and news (from all parts of the political spectrum)

However, I found this post to be too biased and unwarranted for me to pass up a chance to comment. To take a look at most of your points one by one:

When you attack his introduction:
This is attack is, in my opinion, completely out of the blue. I find nothing really wrong in his introduction, he's just talking about how there can be uncertainty in times of crises, where people may question the likelihood of a positive outcome, but we as Americans can always pull through.
Try this: pretend Glenn Beck said those very same lines and ask yourself how you would interpret them if Beck had said them.

On Obama's "whining":
Where does Obama whine? I see this as a counter to many of the pundits who blame all of the economic problems on Obama, and now Obama's saying he has the drive to try and fix the country.
Also, on jobs: unemployment in general lags behind other figures that try and evaluate the state of an economy. That's why Bernanke can say that "the worst is over" while still looking at record high unemployment rates. (of course, whether Bernanke is correct is a different story, but I'm just pointing out how economists see it, most of whom have spent a lot more time studying markets and whatnot more than you or I ever will)

On what Americans want:
First, not all Americans want limited government. Some people want to have a "safety net" provided by the government.
Second, "The aspirations they hold are shared: a job that pays the bills; a chance to get ahead; most of all, the ability to give their children a better life," sounds very much like something an average American would want, or do some not want to give their children a better life?
Third, America is a Republic. The people don't make laws, they choose people to make laws for them. But you always could propose an idea for nationwide propositions or something.
Forth: "pea-head brain" is just juvenile. One of the reasons why I like your blog is that it can express its view with cold anger, but with that the anger just becomes hot.
Fifth: If you think Obama is infringing the Constitution and your rights, you could always sue. It's the American way!

On the bank bailouts:
Yeah, I didn't like the bank bailouts either, and all of Congress is being very hypocritical about them.
However, I do think they need to be regulated. The OTC Derivative market is larger than the world wealth, and such exchanges are done completely behind closed doors. Even though I'd rather the government not be the one to regulate this market, someone still should. Even Alan Greenspan cited non-regulation of the OTC Derivative market as one of the main reasons for the recent economic collapse.
Finally, I'm not too sure what you're referring to with the "ex post facto" law... neither regulations nor taxation qualifies as an ex post facto law...

On the tax cuts:
As someone who is a proponent of small government, I can't believe you're attacking tax cuts of any form. You just label it with a buzzword: "redistribution of wealth."
I typed many different arguments to fill this space, but I realized each was just as futile as the last.

No matter how much evidence I provide, or how logical my arguments are, for this topic and many others, you will stubbornly cling to your statements that all that Obama does is bad. I have disagreed and agreed with a multitude of the policy decisions by many different presidents, but never have I thought that one single person had only malicious intent.

I used to think of your blog as a forum for one man's opinions, giving a new perspective on the way the world works, but now I am beginning to see you as simply a Glenn Beck fanboy.

Peter Fleckenstein

We're all entitled to freedom of speech. It's good to see that you're exercising yours.

I'll respond to your entire comment with a quote from you:

"... but now I am beginning to see you as simply a Glenn Beck fanboy"

So much for juvenile huh Joe?

Joe

I guess I should have figured you were just going to take one quote from my long response to your blog entry and attack it.

Besides, when I say "Glenn Beck fanboy" I was making an allusion to how consistently throughout your entry you just attacked Obama not on the basis of what he said, but you thought he meant. You say Obama supported the same points of views as Glenn Beck says he supports (ie Big Government, Americans feed on hope alone, Obama can't fix the economy, etc), when in reality, there's little textual basis (from the speech) for your argument.

SOTUS Part 1

Tweetin’

Blogroll