The State of the Union Address

While everyone is watching either Sarah Palin on Fox News or Chris Matthews on CNBC, I decided to write my own review of President Obama's speech. I considered leaving off my four pages of notes in order to switch channels to watch Psych, but then I remembered that I am waiting for Neil to watch all of the new shows. USA network has the best shows on TV this year, except for Lost. Thank goodness their winter premier wasn't preempted by the President.

My opinion on President Obama's speech is as follows: I watched Obama's speech during the Kerry/Edwards' Democratic National Convention and I believed him. I was ready to vote for him instead of either of the candidates. That first national speech propelled Obama to popularity despite his relatively recent entrance into national politics. Tonight's speech was as close a repeat of that performance as Obama could get. Except it was better because his ideas have been tempered by this thing called "work experience."

I expected to hear someone shout "He's lying," but Obama learned from that experience. Apparently, Obama decided that someone might actually have the guts to call him out. And that guy, what's his name, decided that maybe the publicity he garnered wasn't as great as he thought it would be.

Obama could sell the proverbial bridge in Brooklyn. Giving his proposals more than a superficial review is difficult and time-consuming. We have to ask ourselves what the reasoning is behind his choice of words, do his ideas divert more power to the federal government, do they follow the reasoning that the federal government knows more than it's citizens do and should, therefore, make decisions for them, is his "third way," this path of enlightenment and of goodwill toward men more than words?

Here are a few points that stuck out to me:

1) The partisanship and pettiness that keeps Washington from solving problems. This is pretty close to a direct quote. The problem I find is that I'm pretty sure the Democratic majority nullifies any vote by the Republicans in an attempt to stop it. Our Republican officials in Washington can scream "No" all they want, they can vote against something (as in healthcare) but it can't stop the Democrats. This means that the partisanship and pettiness comes from either the American people who do not want this version of health care reform or from the Dems in Congress.

2) "The American people need a government that matches their decency." Absolutely! Obama discussed at length the name calling going on in Washington. Especially to the point of name-calling aimed at the People. Will it end?

3) I get the fee on the big banks, but that will trickle down to the individuals who do business with those banks. When people leave en masse those larger banks for a small bank with no fee, is the government going to give up the income from that fee or will they assess the fee on ever smaller institutions to make it up? I understand the outrage against these banks after the housing and lending crisis, but could we not also point out the role of individual members of the government machine that took part in this? Big banks were on Obama's hit list tonight. As was big everything: big-insurance, big-oil, big-business. Is it the right thing to do for this country for the federal government to decide who can operate a business here? Is it possible to find a healthcare solution that protects people from the worst practices of insurance companies but that does not turn big-insurance over to the Federal government's domain? Does the current bill ensure an actual free market solution that would allow the market to punish the insurance companies rather than granting more power to the federal government? Could we allow states to administer health care plans so that people could vote with their feet, moving to a state that provides the program that they prefer? By the way, the latest version of Obamacare did not leave me asking what's in it for me. How offensive. Obama might not have stooped to name-calling, but surely he was suggesting that those who oppose health care are selfish. I am thinking of a plan to send to Obama. If you have any suggestions, send them my way. I'll give you your props somewhere. It's not healthcare reform I'm opposed to; it's this current version of it!

4) Tax cuts. How many times did Obama say that phrase tonight? I thought he was a liberal. I never knew the liberals were in favor of tax cuts. It sounds like a great idea. Business as the engine of job creation and the tax cuts from small businesses received great applause from everyone. Wal-Mart, a company that employs how many people, with insurance, and offers low prices, doesn't deserve a tax cut, though? They're not doing enough to stimulate job growth and the economy? It's because they run main street businesses out of business. It's not possible to compete with China, and I'm sure at least a few things in Wal-Mart come from China. What if the federal government leveled the playing field for small businesses? Made their insurance costs less expensive? Gave them tax credits to hire new employees? Decreased their tax burden and the capital gains tax for those who finance them? Would all of this help the small business owner to compete with Wal-Mart? What about unions? How can small business compete with unions? Will the federal government allow these businesses that produce green jobs or keep their jobs in the US to benefit from the tax break to operate outside the jurisdiction of unions? I noticed that Obama only once mentioned Labor tonight.

5) Hard decisions on opening new offshore areas for drilling. Sarah Palin, what? Did Obama mean that? Also, is he going to give incentives to these new green manufacturing plants but saddle the owners with union requirements? We cannot compete with China (my new favorite country) with the saddlebags of union, tax, and legal requirements that businesses have to carry.

6) Education: As someone who regularly considers homeschooling my children, I agree that something needs to be done to improve education. There are amazing teachers and administrators out there, but there are those who are less than desirable. It makes sense to me that a national effort on reforming education would allow for the greatest of efficiency and information to be utilized. Let's not reinvent the wheel here in every school across the country. Two phrases come to mind: "problem-focused learning" and "truth from the facts." What are the actual best practices when it comes to education? How can we make plans that meet the needs of all students regardless of their ethnic or socio-economic background? Or just like China is attempting with the revitalization of their economy, is it possible for the federal government to frame the forest and to allow the trees to grow into their own shape? Isn't that what we have now? Surely we can find a school that works, transplant the exact model to a school in a different region, with students from similar socio-economic backgrounds, to see if the same results are achieved.

7) Are people so stupid that they can't figure out that their children are obese? Do they require intervention by the federal government? When the federal government pays for your healthcare, they can control what you put into your mouth because they will foot the bill for your diabetes medicines, etc. Does the federal government realize that poorly educated people who are obese might be too busy to cook at home or to exercise regularly? Will Obama's attempt to help the middle class family lead to France's 35 hour work week and mandatory month of paid vacation? How does that fit in with helping small business to generate jobs?

8) The war in Iraq will be over in 8 months! "Support for the elections," etc, will constitute a peace-keeping force stationed at and around the new American mega-embassy in Iraq. My guess is that the remainder of the troops will come home to rest for a year before they head to Afghanistan. I think Neil fielded more traumas in his FOB than any similar bases in Iraq, combined. I might be exaggerating, but not by much, so Obama seems to be right: the war in Iraq is drawing to a close. What happens when the majority of our forces pull out is left to be seen. Iran and Pakistan loom over the horizon. Did you notice the absense of applause from the military brass when Obama mentioned the end of the war and gays in the military?

9) I wonder why the bipartisan fiscal commission idea received no applause, even though Obama seemed to expect it, and was blocked yesterday by the Senate? What was wrong with the idea, and why did it take an Executive Order to make it happen? Transparency would be nice.

10) Massachusetts last week was not an example of campaign fever starting early.

11) Is our current state of unrest equivalent to the transformative moments in our nation's history? If so, how do we know which way to go from here? If everyone can make convincing arguments, how do we know who is telling the truth and who knows best?

12) Those who abide by our law should be protected by it. Notice that unlawful enemy combatants, regardless of whether they are Mirandized or give a forced confession, are not entitled to the same protection as our law-abiding soldiers, airmen, sailors and marines should receive in carrying out this war. A busted face delivered in the course of war does not constitute torture or assault anymore than being a community organizer and professor constitutes sufficient experience to be the head of the free world.