Thursday, January 28, 2010

My Thoughts on the State of the Union

By now I bet you've probably read everything you wanted to hear about the State of the Union speech, but if you want my take on it, here it goes. Personally, I was a bit confused, because the TOTUS (Teleprompter Of The United States) kept switching between being an ignorant idiot, and an outright liar. So here's my play-by-play of just the SOTU's highlights:

I hear about them in the letters that I read each night. The toughest to read are those written by children, asking why they have to move from their home, asking when their mom or dad will be able to go back to work.
You can just answer that it's your Administration's economic policies that discourage businesses from hiring their parents.

They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded, but hard work on Main Street isn't.
It's because the Administration was more interested in bailing out Wall Street than in giving tax cuts for Main Street.

It's time the American people get a government that matches their decency, that embodies their strength.
Yes, we'll start doing this in November 2010, and finish in 2012.

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.
But you voted for it.

And if we had allowed the meltdown of the financial system, unemployment might be double what it is today.
No, mister President, you said that if you don't bail them out, unemployment would go over 8%. Well, you had your way, and unemployment is still at 10.2%. So much for your labor market forecasts...

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.
They already paid back, with confiscatory interests rates and fines, which almost bankrupted some smaller banks.

...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.
WHAT???? Are you mocking us, Mr. President? Is the teleprompter playing a prank on you??

Now, because of the steps we took, there are about 2 million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed.
Really? Which ones? Last time I checked, there were about 2 million more American out of work since you took office.

And we're on track to add another 1.5 million jobs to this total by the end of the year.
And probably 1.5 million others will lose your jobs because of your policies.

But government can create the conditions necessary for businesses to expand and hire more workers.
Hint: The only thing Government can do to help businesses expand and hire more people is by reducing regulations and cutting taxes.

... and give rebates to Americans who make their homes more energy efficient
You mean, if my neighbor wants an energy efficient appliance, I should pay for it??

And to encourage these and other businesses to stay within our borders, it is time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas
What?? Is there a tax break if I outsource a job off-shore? How do I get it? Can you give me some specifics?

We can't afford another so-called economic "expansion" like the one from last decade, what some call the "lost decade," where jobs grew more slowly than during any prior expansion, where the income of the average American household declined.
First of all, in the last decade we had the longest period of jobs growth in our entire history. Second, stop using "household"-related statistics, because household sizes is decreasing. Why don't you use simple reference points like "per capita"? Oh, because that income is growing and it doesn't help your populist tirade?

You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse. Meanwhile, China's not waiting to revamp its economy; Germany's not waiting; India's not waiting.
Yes, you're right, they're lowering business and corporate taxes. China is drilling for oil 90 miles from Florida, while you don't let us do it.

You can see the results of last year's investments in clean energy in the [...] California business that will put 1,000 people to work making solar panels.
...Which no one is buying, because if there would be a demand for that, you'll have a lot of businesses building them without any help from the Government.

But to create more of these clean-energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives, and that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country. It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.
Now he's joking again, right? Democrats have been opposing nuclear and oil refineries for DECADES. Do you have any idea when the last nuclear plant or oil refinery was built in the United States??

And, yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America.
Now back to the previous affirmation, will you be fair and provide the exact same incentives to clean energy AND to nuclear and oil drilling businesses?

I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change.
Yes, for example yourself, Mr. President, seem to disagree with the overwhelming evidence that global warming is a hoax.

So tonight, we set a new goal: We will double our exports over the next five years, an increase that will support 2 million jobs in America.
Oh man, did I just hear that? It reminds me of communist Romania, when the Great Leader would decide that we'll double production over 5 years, and then tell us it happened after only 4 years, although there was no factual support for that?

And let's tell another 1 million students that, when they graduate, they will be required to pay only 10 percent of their income on student loans, and all of their debt will be forgiven after 20 years, and forgiven after 10 years if they choose a career in public service, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they chose to go to college.
Did the Obamination really say that? So taxpayers are supposed to subsidize people who want to work for the Government? As if we don't support a bureaucracy that's already way too big and expensive? Listen Obozo. People shouldn't go bankrupt because they went to college. They should go to college because they expect better opportunities (which doesn't include a dead-end do-nothing Government job). And if they think it's not worth it, then nobody's forcing them to go to college, if not going to college will make you better off financially.

And by the way, I want to acknowledge our first lady, Michelle Obama, who this year is creating a national movement to tackle the epidemic of childhood obesity and make kids healthier. Thank you, honey. She gets embarrassed.
Obesity is not a disease, therefore it's not an epidemic, and taxpayers shouldn't be on the hook for other people's bad choices. And by the way, is it me, or did Michelle have the same look on her face that Hillary used to have when Bill was cheating on her?

And according to the Congressional Budget Office, the independent organization that both parties have cited as the official scorekeeper for Congress, our approach would bring down the deficit by as much as $1 trillion over the next two decades.
So this will cost us $1 trillion per year, but will save us $50 billions every year? Is that what you're saying?

Still, this is a complex issue. And the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became. I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people.
Now he's telling us we're stupid.

As temperatures cool, I want everyone to take another look at the plan we've proposed. What??? Did global warming just stop??

But if anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know.
OK, there you go:
- bring down premiums: allow competition across state lines
- bring down the deficit: the deficit is a Government thing, so just jeep the Government out of this altogether
- cover the uninsured: which ones? Poor people: they're covered by Medicaid; Illegals: send them home; People who choose not to get insurance: well, I thought you're pro-choice
- stop insurance company abuses: Reduce regulations so companies don't need to find ways to go around them

So let me start the discussion of government spending by setting the record straight. At the beginning of the last decade, the year 2000, America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion.

By -- by the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program.
So why $8 trillions over 10 years? Meaning $800 billions per year? With two wars, two tax cuts and the expensive prescription drug program, Bush kept the deficit around $3-400 billions. I understand you'll stop the wars, increase taxes and kill the elderly, so why is your deficit doubling or even tripling?

Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security will not be affected, but all other discretionary government programs will. We will continue to go through the budget line by line, page by page, to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work. We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year.
Now he's mocking us again. So he'll keep spending trillion after trillion on his pet projects but thank God he's saving us $20 billions! Can you believe him?? It's like ordering 2 supersize double cheeseburgers with large fries - and a diet coke.

That's what I came to Washington to do. That's why, for the first time in history, my administration posts our White House visitors online.
Yes, I've seen those two visitors online - on YouTube mocking your White House security.

That's why we've excluded lobbyists from policy-making jobs or seats on federal boards and commissions.
Are you lying in our face? Your Administration is filled with lobbyists! From the Attorney General to almost everybody in the Treasury Department, the Secretary of Agriculture, and tons of czars and other jobs!

Tonight, I'm calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single Web site before there's a vote so that the American people can see how their money is being spent.
Would it be the same website which showed thousands of jobs created in districts that don't exist?

But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day.
You're dam' right! So please stop acting like you're still campaigning! Mr. President, you gave 400 speeches in your first year, don't you think it's a tad too much??

The confirmation of well-qualified public servants shouldn't be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual senators.
Are you referring to months of filibustering of Judge Sam Alito? Or to the dozen federal judgeships that were open for 8 years because they couldn't get to an up-or-down vote in the Senate?

I'd like to begin monthly meetings with both Democratic and Republican leadership. I know you can't wait.
Ah! Now you have to do it! For one year you never had at least ONE meeting with the Republican leadership, because you didn't think it necessary, with a large majority in the House and supermajority in the Senate. But now that Scott Brown won, you'll have to do it!

I know that all of us love this country.
No kidding. "Us"? YOU really love this country? Then why do you keep apologizing for it everywhere you go. It's like saying you love your wife, but everytime you'd meet a stranger you'd say sorry that she's fat, sorry that she speaks too much, sorry that she doesn't clean the house. That's not love, Mr. President!

As a candidate, I promised that I would end this war, and that is what I am doing as president.
What exactly do you mean by "end this war"? In my view, you "win" a war, or "lose" a war, that's how it ends. So, can you clarify? Because sorry, but I don't understand this concept of "ending a war".

I've embraced the vision of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan [...]

And at April's Nuclear Security Summit, we will bring 44 nations together here in Washington, D.C., behind a clear goal: securing all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists.
So let's hear, what's the plan on getting Iran ad North Korea on this deal?

And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: They, too, will face growing consequences. That is a promise.
Yo yo yo. What did you say? Is that a threat? Whatchu gonna do, huh? Will you post something on their Facebook? Will you throw Michelle's purse at Ahmadinejad next time you see him at the UN?

Every day, Americans meet their responsibilities to their families and their employers. Time and again, they lend a hand to their neighbors and give back to their country.
Harry Reid is yawning. Janet Napolitano is dozing off.

I campaigned on the promise of change, change we can believe in, the slogan went.
I was playing Modern Warfare 2 the other day and I was imagining a secret operation with a commando unit that would infiltrate the White House basement and neutralize the teleprompter' power generator. Can you imagine that? I can see the President remaining limp like a zombie... or like those drones from Attack of the Clones.

Unfortunately, too many of our citizens have lost faith that our biggest institutions -- our corporations, our media
Oh, that's how you explain the tanking ratings of CNN, or the fact that MSNBC has fewer viewers than the fishing shows on Versus?

We don't quit. I don't quit.
No worries. We'll vote you out.

No comments:

Post a Comment