President Obama at Chamber of Commerce 2/7/11

I listened to the speech, and here is one thing that popped out at me: He referred to FDR marshaling business leaders in the late 1930's to change over to making war materiel, and that they had the greatest expansion ever known. He said that we can do it again. The elephant in the room is that they had a war coming on, one for national survival, and we do not. We only have big spenders who won't reign themselves in, spending us into oblivion. I feel another observation coming on... in my next comment.

Jobs trail demand, in the economy. When the economy picks up, jobs will be required, and they will be added. What our President suggested and requested was production before demand. That's against the "just in time" models we implemented in the 1990's, and is a high-risk approach for business. It won't happen, unless we lose our business minds (in which case, it might as well not happen at all).

One last thing: He also lamented that technology is created here, then built overseas. Very good observation. What he fails to address is why. The reason is cost: if cost for labor, regulatory compliance, healthcare, etc. is higher here than overseas (not to mention wages), any smart business will get things made where it costs them less, even considering shipping and customs/local taxes. He did address regulations, but left loopholes so big as to render his proposals ineffective, since most of the regs were put in place for "good reasons". Those reasons are still there, so the regs will stay, no matter how crippling they are to business and jobs.

A guy named James wrote this in reply:

I'm surprised(not really because the government never takes direct routes toward a solution or takes the common sense action) that with the call from both sides to cut spending that they haven't made the decision to sit down and go through ...every single entity that the government spends money on and see where things can't be cut. Several duplicate or even triplicate agencies exist doing basically the same thing. Cut one or two of those agencies and make the one left over more efficient.

I believe they need to do the same thing with each regulation they put into effect as well. In fact, each and every thing the government does at any time needs to be revisited every five or ten years to make sure the reason for it's implementation is still justified and that it is doing what it is supposed to do without harming anyone or anything.

Government's basic job is to ensure protection from enemies foreign and domestic. Then there is the job to ensure the greater good is protected in this country.
Taxing the crap out of anyone in this country isn't exactly providing for the greater good because even the millionaires and billionaires are citizens in this country. They have the power and resources to take their money elsewhere, as we have seen.

So I replied this:
James, you must understand Obamaspeak. When he talks about getting rid of useless regulations, consider what "use" he might consider enough to keep it. If milk is considered as dangerous as petroleum, then the EPA can impose the same rules... on dairy farmers as on Exxon for storage of their products. If a regulation has the effect of redistributing wealth, it is therefore useful (to Obama). If a regulation has the effect of stopping burning of anything, which he considers to be warming the atmosphere, that Reg is thus useful.

When it comes to cutting spending, there is the baseline, and that is a projected growth based on last year's budget, plus inflation. Then they talk about cutting from that, or any increase. One other key thing is that Congress critters always want to cut the other guy's program, not their own. When you replace the Constitution with Congressional whims, there is no consistent basis for justifying spending. Thus, whoever is in power will spend whatever they can get passed and signed into law. If we get back to basics, and follow the Constitution, what we spend our tax dollars on will become clear, and the budget will shrink, because the Constitution doesn't provide for so many things we spend our money on now. Both parties are guilty of this type of spending, which is why there is a popular uprising against both parties in our country.

State of the Union

This is what I wrote during the 2010 State of the Union as my first attempt at "Live Blogging". I am going back and cleaning it up over the next few days, so bear with me.

Populist Theme

A government of decency is what we need. Rails against the bank bailout. It's clearly an attempt to get on the people's side.
Demonize the banks - This is a slight of hand, as only those banks who have not paid back teh money should be paying this, but he is talking about getting money back from all big banks, even those who have already paid their money back. This will not fly with most Americans, because we are not stupid!

He listed a host of groups for whom he cut taxes 8 million - He sounds again like a Republican, boasting about all the groups that "got cuts". Does this mean that there are no tax increases coming?

I think that he was expecting applause from GOP. Got a tepid bit. I suspect this was not on the teleprompter, because his tone changed, his timing changed, and then reverted when he moved on.
He emphasized that they have not raised income taxes - not a single dime! The taxes have not gone into effect yet might be a better way to put it. Allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire is a tax increase, and they expire this year.

He praised the 2009 Recovery and Reinvestment Act for the jobs it has created. Economists on both left and right agree it is helping. He feels our pain, but how can that be if we are out of the recession? But more must be done, so that's why jobs must be our focus in 2010, so he called for another new jobs bill tonight. Harry Reid was bored, yawned around this time.

He acknowledged that the engine of job creation will always be America's businesses, and says Government can create environment where they can grow. He even explained that entrepreneurs make money and grow the economy by taking risks. Banks are lending to big business, but not small. Small business owners need help, so he proposes to use $30B of TARP for community banks to encourage loans. Is it legal to use TARP money without further approval from Congress? Small business tax credit proposed.

He proposed to eliminate capital gains taxes for all small business, then rushed through a laundry list of tax cuts for big business. They sounded like nuanced, targeted, and limited cuts, not general cuts so everyone could benefit. Also, if he was excited about this proposal, he would have spent more time on it, not rushed through it. I doubt the Democrats support this initiative, let's wait and see.

He then moved on to propose a high-speed rail corridor with more TARP funds. He said that would create jobs and improve our infrastructure. He did not mention waiving the environmental studies, or any other regulations that will delay the implementation of all such major building projects. this sounded good, but these types of projects take years to design and approve, purchase land, and decades to complete.

He mentioned clean energy jobs, as a way to keep us ahead, and keep jobs her in the USA.

He proposed to cut taxes for companies that keep jobs here, and slash tax breaks for those that ship them over seas. This is easier said than done, because it is the many taxes and regulations here that drive companies (read jobs) off-shore. How can we remove those regulations and axes for those who stay here? House supposedly has already, and he wants the Senate to do the same.

Here he tried to channel Bill Clinton, and explain how he felt their pain. He challenged the Congress to put a bill on my desk right away, though even that won't make up for 7 million jobs lost.

He says (but doesn't explain exactly how) this recovery won't be like the expansion in "the lost decade", the 2000's won't be duplicated. No bubble, no speculation. He seems to blame risk taking for the recent recession, though the risk was both facilitated and encouraged by the federal government. He says that gridlock not good. We can't put future on hold. He says we have been waiting for decades, but China is not waiting, Germany is not, India is not waiting to improve their education. They are making more investment in math, infrastructure, etc, so should we. He says he will not accept 2d place for the USA. This is his justification to keep on spending on things he thinks are necessary. This is a weak argument to me, because if we are drowning in debt, no matter how good our infrastructure is, we will fail. Also, we used to spend less than we do now, and we got good education, so money is not the key to better education.

It was a bit unusual to hear him criticize a Supreme Court decision. Alito said "no way, not true" when President Obama mentioned corporations, even foreign corporations will have undue influence on the elections by pouring money into campaigns. He must not have read the decision, because the decision did not allow donations to campaigns, only that corporations could spend money on candidates and issues directly, not to campaigns. I have to agree with Justice Alito.

Now he says it is time to get serious about things that do financial reform. He claims it is not about punishing banks, but rather to guard against same recklessness that nearly brought down our economy. Can't allow banks to take risk with your money. It's the main theme of populism, We vs. them, and he tries to sound tough by saying forcefully that he won't sign bill if it doesn't provide true reform.

He claims that in 2009 he made the largest investment in green technology, and there is no area better than energy. He pointed to a NC company that makes batteries, a Ca company that makes solar cells, he suggests building nuclear power plants (GOP cheered) open new off-shore oil and gas drilling, invest in clean coal technology, bio fuel, and even cap & trade. He think climate change (Laughter) incentives are the right thing to do, and we can lead the global economy by doing the most in these areas. I thought cap & trade was dead, and discredited.

He wants to export more of our goods, so we can support more jobs in our country. He amorphously says he wants to double exports in 5 yrs, to create more jobs. Doesn't exactly say how, but it sounds good. Details include reform of export controls consistent with security concerns. He says he will make our trade partners play by the rules (what does that mean, if they have different rules in their country?). He says he will expand on the Doha agreement, with South Korea, Panama, and others. No details here, so I doubt it will get done.

He plans to invest in new skills through education. We must reward success, instead of rewarding failure or status quo. The best anti-poverty program is world class education. This is nice sounding pious words, but without details and broad support, nothing will get done on this initiative either.

Eric Lamont Hill seems to be out in audience.

He proposes a $10k tax credit for families for 4 yr college education. When they graduate, they will only have to pay 10% of their income if they choose a public career, and will be forgiven the balance in 10 years. This type of targeted benefit is not generally helpful, and will not restart the economy. It will play to a sliver of the population.

increase retirement deductions, so we can step up nest eggs.

To relieve the burden on middle class, still need HCR. big cheers.

clear a few things up: didn't choose to tackle HCR for politics. Rather, because of those who are at risk of losing their coverage. protect us from worst practices of HC insurance cos. Michelle O, (he rushed thru that part). same story as before, keep HCI, keep docs, nothing new here.

still, it's complex, and he takes his share of the blame, and with all the lobbying, horse trading, what's in it for me? more would have lost their HCC, premiums go up, lose coverage, all the bad stuff he always says. He won't walk away, neither should those in that chamber.

so as temps cool, look again at plan they proposed. solicited more input. but let us finish the job (effectively shutting out GOP ideas now). Reduce our deficit, but it's not enough to dig us out of the hole we are in.

At 2000, budget surplus. $1T when he came in. 2 wars, expensive drug program, tax cuts. Slamming GOP, essentially. blaming Bush for his adding $1T to national debt. says we must tighten our belts, as people do in families. Proposing specific steps to pay for debt. freeze for 3 yrs.

Now the loopholes: entitlement not included, will use veto if necessary to enforce. continue to go line by line? when did they start it? please!!

cutting tax cuts for wealthy people (oil people, CEO's, rich). Can't just be a gimmick, so restore pay-go in senate.

tried that, helped get us into this crisis. Rather than fight same battle, try something new. He is calling his idea common sense, a novel concept. he is facing a deficit of doubt. must close credibility gap.

I believe he is causing the C gap. he talks about bi-partisan, and posting all earmarks online. I thought they were going to end earmarks?

He says he's not naive? please! Always will be philosophical differences. Must not block just because they can? Can't run a political campaign every day? then when will he stop doing so?

Saying things that are not true is not ok. election year, the spirit of campaign fever is here. Must solve problem, Democrats, not run for the hills. if GOP insists that 60 votes r needed, they must take responsibility too now. No GOP clapping.

This week, he will address GOP - wants it to be monthly. joke fell flat (may not have been on teleprompter.

not interested in re-litigating the past. committed to our country's defense. let's leave that all behind, and make things better for the world. He must have been talking about the prosecution f the Bush team.

Now he claims he is fixing gaps revealed by the Xmas day bomber. Killed many Al Qaeda leaders. reward good governance, and rights of all Afghans. smattering of clapping.

Promises to end this war, will have all combat troops out by this August, and will support that Iraqi govt for the promotion of regional peace. Big clapping.

Tonight all our men/women in uniform have to know that they (didn't read it right) have our support. We will support them when they come home. why we made largest increase in Veterans n decades. I notices he stumbles a lot in this section of the speech. It is not a natural topic for him.

will bring 44 nations together here to work on nuclear weapons. Hinting at Iran, talking about isolating them. Promises they will face growing consequences. Engagement to sustain lasting global recovery. Climate change. DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TO FEED THEMSELVES.

We stand with FREEDOM ABROAD, AND AT HOME. UNITY IN DIVERSITY, DRAWING ON the promises enshrined in the Constitution. Once again prosecuting civil rights violations. Strengthened laws to protect right, will work with Congress to repeal laws that kick gays from military.

Equal pay
immigration laws. tepid clapping.

immigrants are same as rest of us. not GOP or Dem values, are American values.

Again with the divisive caricatures of the bankers, the CEOs that take advantage fo the folks.

Not sure if they believe in "Change we can believe in", but he can't do it alone. People are losing confidence in him. He's challenging people to make decisions to do what is needed to keep the dream alive for their kids & grandkids. (quiet as a pin drop). Admin has had setbacks, but optimism in core of American people lives on. lives on in htose whose' neighbors who are still employed. All the Americans that helped in Haiti, those who didn't know. (still quiet for pin drop).

we don't quit, I don't quit, let's carry the dream forward.

70 minutes of speech. Now to go back and clean up what I wrote.
highlights:
Blame Bush for every thing bad, and reject GOP solutions.
Channeled Clinton in "I feel your pain".
Cap & Trade still a priority.
Healthcare reform still needs to get done, can't jsut drop it for fiscal.
Cut taxes on 95% of Americans, not raised taxes one dime.
Green jobs.
Gays in military acceptance openly.
End war in Iraq.
Education reform.
Doubled down on the existing positions, no pivot or move to the center.

Missing themes/mentions:

1. Apology for anything. Accepting his share of blame is not an apology.
2. Decision to charge Christmas Day Underwear Bomber as criminal.
3. Closing Gitmo.
4. Plan to recover bailout money form auto makers, and to spin them off from Government ownership.
5. Police who took down Hassan (shooter) at Fort Hood. They were next to Michelle Obama in gallery.
6. Israelis who helped much in Haiti. Were not in the list.
   

Republican Response

many blacks in background at VA House chamber.
jobs are top priority.

Don't pile on regulation to kill jobs.
Refers to Tho. Jefferson in beginnign, and often.
Jobs lost last year, debt to double in 5 yrs, triple in 10.

Freeze is laudable, but must reconsider proper role and level of government at every level.
excessive govt threatens our future.

relsuts, not srhetoric.

Much common ground:
HC system - don't turn it over to the fed govt.
GOp has plan to do common sense reforms,
by acros state lines,
tort reforms,
our proposals are available online: FB, twitter.
Blessed with vast naturala resources, must use all.
can agree on nukes, but not cap n trade.
now is time to lower energy prices and create jobs.

education: much agreement here.
need t compete in global economy.
child's intellect, not zip code determines results.

military. agree on 30k to Afghanistan

Scott Brown said: "we should not be spending our tax dollars to defend terrorists, but rahter to defeat them".
disagree with treating as criminals terrorists. as Scott Brown said. big applause.

can't guarantee outcomes, btu can guarantee opportunities.

Many americans are concerned abotu greater control bu feds on business, so top down control should not be expanded. govt closer to the people governs best. big applause.

freely choosing to help is best, thanx for compassion for HAITI.

some are afraid not land of promise. where opportunity is absent, create it.
where limited, expand it, where denied, open it to all.

forefathers pledged their lives, fortunes, sacred honor. we shoudl do the same.

Joe trippi:
went to American people with not quitting.
pivoted against Washington, though he IS Washington.
He will run against Washington this year.

Bob BECKEL;
put Gop on the mark, will have to take sides.
took on GOP
Obama will see more partisanship from GOP

Palin:
In a word: lecture. not leading.
fundamental disconnect between what people are expecting and what he is doing.
He could have implemented these common sense reforms last year, but didn't.
Drilling offshore is now his idea, though it was a GOP idea for long time.

Steve Hayes:
dignity for countries, but what about Iran last year?

Barack's Big Speech

Unless you are not politically attuned, you probably have heard of the speech that Barack Obama made today, 24 July 2008. You may have even heard some of the speech. Depending on your perspective, you might think it was brilliant, or you might think it was out of place.
Why might some think it was brilliant? let me see if I can look at this from the liberal perspective. If you are a liberal and know anything about history, you might think that a great man, going to Berlin and giving a speech is great in the tradition of John F. Kennedy in 1963, and maybe even as Ronald Reagan did in 1987. While the allusion to Reagan might not sit well with too many on the Left, both he and JFK spoke eloquently about a wall coming down. They addressed the issue of their day, and confronted it head-on, with clarity and courage. Barack Obama did the same thing, in the same way with today's issues. He alluded to many moments to tear down many walls, including those of racism, sexism, global warming, and equality of wealth. He said that this is the moment to tackle all these large issues, and they are in the opinion of many people, inarguably the most important things to be confronted.
Barack has the courage to mention them, the courage to challenge the world to join with us in a fight that is too large for any one country to win. Barack is the one, the savior, who will address the most important issues of our times. He will bring the war in Iraq to a close.
One must admit, he looked presidential as he stood at the podium, addressing hundreds of thousands of people. He also delivered the speech with eloquence and conviction, looking like a true statesman. Now that he has capped his world tour with this speech, Barack Obama can simply return home, bask in the glow of the media attention he well deserves for standing up to the forces of stagnation, for presenting bold new initiatives that will benefit the citizens of the world!

If you listened to this from another perspective, that of a Conservative, you heard a very different speech. Some key points stood out to those of this viewpoint, especially that of citizenship. Give the man his due, he did say he was a "Proud Citizen of America", but he also said he was a "Citizen of the World". That American pride was more of a fig leaf as he then blasted away at the country he says he is proud of. The speech entails a lot of things but two things are key to the issues at hand: First, a President must be first, last, and always a citizen to the United States of America. While we live in the world, our first concern must be the good of America, because America is not evil, and wishes no evil on those it shares the world with. Being a citizen of someplace implies that your loyalty is there, not in the contrasting or different place. For example, a French citizen is first concerned with and loyal to France. He may consider what is good for China as well, but his first concern is always with France and how what he does affects France. So it must be for Americans, especially the President. The second thing is that he is not yet the President of the Untied States of America. He may challenge the German people, and by extension, all of the European people, but if he loses his bid to become President, there is little chance he will be back over to take up the fight he is challenging them to today. This highlights the arrogance of addressing a people at a historic sight when you are not yet the victor in your own political battle. Both John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan were President when they made their historic speeches. They were positioned to speak for the American people, as they had been voted into leadership through the established process, and had been in office more than two years. Barack Obama has a lack of understanding of American Exceptionalism. Presidents Kennedy and Reagan had a proper view of America as great, a global contributor, and a positive force in the world. I'm not so sure Obama sees the United States that way, though he thinks he can turn America in the right direction again.

Aside from the assumption that he has the authority to challenge Europeans to fight with us for the things he has not yet been given a mandate to do, there is the issue of proving global warming. He mentioned the oceans rising, the ice melting as a result of the cars being driven and fuels being burned around the globe. It is not yet a proven fact that global warming is occurring, and it is even less sure that man-made processes are contributing to said warming. There is recent evidence that smoke from industrial power generation may have clouded the sky, contributing to global cooling. While violence in Darfur and other places is real, and proven, it is not simply because of people not getting along, it is a sort of war. There are political forces at work that drive all such bloodshed, and resolving those issues is not as easy as just talking to the affected parties. Palestinians and Israelites are not ready to just split the difference and settle down, no matter who proposes the idea. They are fighting for their homelands, from each other's perspective. Hamas is committed to the destruction of Israel, and there is no middle ground.
When he talks about tearing down borders, he is inviting non-Americans to share the wealth that Americans have worked hard to establish over the centuries, to take advantage of opportunities that they have not earned nor even truly understand. America is more than a job bank. It is more than a place to get government paid health care. There is a process by which a set number of immigrants, as decided by the people through their representative have the right to become Americans, and the chance to share in the American dream. The right to become citizens is not just to be given out carelessly, as those like Barack Obama would allow to cross our borders with the intent of getting as much benefit as they possibly can.
One final item Barack Obama threw into the speech that would infuriate those with a Conservative perspective is that the war in Iraq is to be "drawn to a close", with no mention of winning. Here Mr. Obama stands in the shadow of an obelisk made in tribute to Hitler and his war effort, with no acknowledgment that the peace in Germany came after we won World War II. There, in Berlin, the method of achieving lasting peace should have been foremost in Barack Obama's mind, yet he didn't even mention winning in Iraq. He seemed intent on scoring points by pledging to get us out of Iraq, as though getting out were the best thing for the citizens of the world. If he had only acknowledged that we are winning in Iraq, and that we can finish the job, then leave when a lasting peace, as there is now in Germany, he would have truly spoken momentous words. Yet the history of Germany, which he touched on but did not cover adequately, teaches us that if we win, as we did in WW I, and then leave the country without the ability to repair and support itself, it would end up in the hands of tyrannical dictators (Hitler?). If after the tactical victory in Iraq, as there was in Germany after the second World War, yet we allow a non-democratic rule to take hold of part or all of the recently vanquished foe, the part of the country under such influence would suffer as badly as before the war. Recall how the Russians ran, ruled and ruined East Germany, surrounded Berlin, and tried to strangle Democracy as it sprouted in the fertile soil of post WWII Germany. It took over 30 years to get that right, and Iran would like to do the same to Iraq after the second Gulf War. If Iraqi society has the infrastructure and freedom in place to support itself, the police and the military to defend itself, Iranian-influenced Muslim extremists would fight to rule part or all of Iraq, with dire consequences. The blood of the many brave soldiers, men and women, spilled in Iraq would have been made to be in vain. Countries do not just "bring a war to a close". It's not a sports season, or a retail shopping center that gives up and moves on. Wars are won or lost, no matter what people say. We won the Vietnam war, but then ultimately the South Vietnamese lost it when we withdrew and allowed the enemy poised across the border to come in and take over.

I was disappointed that Barack Obama did not visit the injured soldiers in Germany who had no doubt been prepared to see him. Democrats often say they support the troops, though they do not support the war. Here was a golden opportunity to do just that, and Mr. Obama turned it down. It is amazing to me when political figures fall into their own stereotypes, and prove there is a basis for them. I'm sure this did not win him many new supporters among the military in his quest to become the Commander in Chief, the President of these United States. No matter the reason, and they certainly will spin him one good one when they realize the impact of such a gaffe, a person who is in the area, and has a heart of concern for the troops would have made the visit. If he had such a desire, and it is his campaign, there is no reason they could not have done it. Schedules can be adjusted, less important people can be rescheduled, flights can be delayed. In my mind, this reveals the true nature of Barack Obama: concerned about political speeches, and not concerned about the troops.

One last point: if it was incumbent on Americans to teach their children a foreign language, why did Senator Obama not try to deliver the speech in German? And was it widely published that the crowd that heard Senator Obama's speech was lured to the venue by a free concert immediately preceding his speech?