[OT] State of the Union Address

[SwampD]

Obama espoused his usual crap. All hat and no cattle! Again. Anybody sucked in by his rhetoric is just fooled one more time. His calls for being open and to practise fiscal responsibility are fodder for Jon Stewart. What a POS.

POS huh? Boy, if someone ever called GWB that they were called unamerican and told they hate their country. Short memories I guess.

 

All hat and no cattle as well? At least he's not pretending to be a rancher.

[PASabreFan]

What is there to be conflicted about? We need to erase the religious based fear that somehow ###### men and women are evil. The same people that want to tell you that homosexuals are destroying this country are the same that said blacks are evil and will destroy the country when they take over. It is the basis of organized religion and the republican party, they sell three things, fear, fear and fear.

 

So DeLuca didn't write "gay" or "homosexual," but the filter still removed it. Most of us know him well enough to know he didn't use an offensive term, but what else would others be forced to conclude?

[wonderbread]

Personally I grow weary of the rhetoric more everyday. Its not that I don't support the president its just that its all talk and no substance.

 

However I really enjoyed watching the numerous standing ovations. :blink:

 

The entire speech would have last 25 minutes without all of them.

[end the curse]

Has anyone ever had their political opinion changed in a message board discussion? It only serves to further polarize.

 

Let me summarize:

 

Liberal response: It was an inspiring speech, and I have hope that real change could still come if only the obstructionist, homophobic, fundamentalist Republicans would stop blocking legislation to fix the problems Obama inherited from Bush.

 

Conservative response: It was more of the same empty rhetoric, but the fact remains that he is trying to stuff big government socialism down our throats and bankrupt the country. The election of Brown in Massachusetts proves that Americans want no part of this activism, and it's only a matter of time before the decadent, anti-American, atheist Democrats are run out of power.

[MattPie]

Speaking of Brown in Massachusetts, one of the *very* right folks in another forum were saying exactly what was mentioned, "this shows there's a strong conservative movement happening in this country."

 

The Democrats made the same noises in 2006 and more so in 2008. The population then was not happy with those in charge, and showed it at the ballot box. Now, the people still aren't happy, so they're taking it out on the new people in charge.

[Patty16]

Speaking of Brown in Massachusetts, one of the *very* right folks in another forum were saying exactly what was mentioned, "this shows there's a strong conservative movement happening in this country."

 

The Democrats made the same noises in 2006 and more so in 2008. The population then was not happy with those in charge, and showed it at the ballot box. Now, the people still aren't happy, so they're taking it out on the new people in charge.

 

 

Its hardly a conservative movement. Its an anti incumbent movement, which will hurt weak dems as much as reps. These SOTU addresses are constitutionally mandated and are always the same puff, no matter who is president.

 

Anyone else find it funny that obama talks tax cuts but Reps dont applaud ?

 

No party really does what they say, Dems dont reform and Reps dont cut spending.

[PASabreFan]

Its hardly a conservative movement. Its an anti incumbent movement, which will hurt weak dems as much as reps. These SOTU addresses are constitutionally mandated and are always the same puff, no matter who is president.

 

Anyone else find it funny that obama talks tax cuts but Reps dont applaud ?

 

No party really does what they say, Dems dont reform and Reps dont cut spending.

Very well stated.

 

How many Americans consider themselves liberal or conservative? How many even know what those terms mean? They're just labels meant to divide and conquer. They're brands. Liberal used to be the in thing, and conservative was a dirty word. Conservatives have managed to flip that.

[Patty16]

Very well stated.

 

How many Americans consider themselves liberal or conservative? How many even know what those terms mean? They're just labels meant to divide and conquer. They're brands. Liberal used to be the in thing, and conservative was a dirty word. Conservatives have managed to flip that.

 

 

Theres a quote from Washington's farewell address which reads something like " the two party system on instills tyranny with one party seeking revenge and trying to tear down the other, while the people are left behing"" im paraphrasing but i think it rings true.

 

I mean really think about it? Reps run on smaller govt and fiscal responsibility, yet reagan and bush ran up the deficit and increased size of govt.

Dems run on social issues- health care is one- but never have managed to achieve that.

 

I understand why people flock to parties, but i think if people were more free thinking this country would be better off. Its amazing to travel anywhere outside the US and see how many people havea better understanding of US issues than joe blow on the street. I bet you could ask ten random people in the US who both their senators are they wouldnt know. Power of the people right.

[Eleven]

I listened to a brief bit of the speech on the way home from the game, and I read the full text this morning. I wasn't inspired. I haven't been inspired by a State of the Union address since Clinton was delivering them.

 

I remain hopeful that as his administration progresses, Obama will reverse some damage and make some progress, but I haven't seen it yet.

 

As for some of the remarks above: There always have been, and always will be, a large number of people who make decisions based upon fear, bigotry, and/or hatred. (They used to be called "Democrats." Now, they're called "Republicans." But it's the same group; the Republicans gained this so-called constituency when the Dixiecrats failed and the Republicans took a hard-line stance on reproductive rights.) I don't think all, or even most, Republicans are affiliated with that party for reasons of fear, bigotry, and/or hatred; I know many, many fiscal conservatives with reasonable positions on social issues. But the fact remains that the GOP now is the party with a partial constituency that preaches hatred in the name of "family values." The leaders elected for such reasons very rarely turn out good for the country.

[Hank]

What is there to be conflicted about? We need to erase the religious based fear that somehow ###### men and women are evil. The same people that want to tell you that homosexuals are destroying this country are the same that said blacks are evil and will destroy the country when they take over. It is the basis of organized religion and the republican party, they sell three things, fear, fear and fear.

 

 

You misunderstand me. I believe in live and let live. My concern is more of a logistical/administrative level. Say I get a new private who is openly gay, where do I put him? Men room together, and women room together. The quick answer is that he's a man so he rooms with a man. But is it that easy? I don't know. Sexual preferance is a little different issue than religious denomination or skin color. Can/should I force a straight man to share a room with an openly gay man? We have instances of sexual assault in the Army, we try to prevent it as best we can but it still happens. If I was to put a man and a woman in the same barracks room and there was an incident it would ruin my career. Do I open myself up to the same possibility if I put a gay man and a straight man in the same room? If I give a gay man his own room than I open myself up for an I.G. Complaint. There are so many questions that I don't have answers to.

[Hank]

No discussion on the idea of nuclear power plants?

 

No thoughts on his plan to make repayment of student loans easier for college graduates? How about throwing out a hard date for troop withdraw from Afghanistan?

 

For the record, my absentee wore went to McCain.

[PASabreFan]

Define "openly gay"?

[PASabreFan]

No discussion on the idea of nuclear power plants?

 

No thoughts on his plan to make repayment of student loans easier for college graduates? How about throwing out a hard date for troop withdraw from Afghanistan?

 

For the record, my absentee wore went to McCain.

Interesting Freudian slip! :)

[Hank]

Define "openly gay"?

 

 

A man who says "I am gay" would be my definition.

[...]

I find http://www.factcheck.org/ to be much more neutral and reliable when it comes to backing its claims with factual proof, and I'm looking forward to their review of the State of the Union.

 

The ANNENBERG Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania is the organization behind the FactCheck.org website that is being consulted OFTEN by voters and media personalities alike to help them form opinions on the “truthfulness” of the claims being made by the McCain and Obama political ads as well as statements made on the Campaign Trail and in Presidential and Vice Presidential debates.

 

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Ph.D. is the Director of the ANNENBERG Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania which is the organization BEHIND the FactCheck.org “truthfulness” website.

 

Dr. Jamieson's newest book entitled “Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment” is a MAJOR HIT PIECE against the Conservative voices in the media on television, radio, and in print. View the book’s Table of Contents: http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/echochamber/

 

In Dr. Jamieson’s biography on the APPC website, she states that during the 2004 general election she regularly appeared on “NOW With Bill Moyers” and “The NewsHour,” and throughout the 2008 campaign is appearing regularly on “Bill Moyers Journal.” http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/Bio.aspx?myUsername=kjamieson

 

What’s the bottom line? FactCheck.org is a LEFT-BIASED organization that has sold itself as “Politically NEUTRAL” to America’s voters and media personnel.

 

The fact is, the ANNENBERG Public Policy Center (APPC), the sponsoring agency behind FastCheck.org, is itself supported by the same foundation, the ANNENBERG FOUNDATION, that Bill Ayers secured the 49.2 million dollars from to create the Chicago ANNENBERG Challenge “philanthropic” organization in which Barack Obama was the founding Chairman of the Board for and Ayers served as the grant writer of and co-Chair of for its two operating arms.

[Hank]

The ANNENBERG Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania is the organization behind the FactCheck.org website that is being consulted OFTEN by voters and media personalities alike to help them form opinions on the “truthfulness” of the claims being made by the McCain and Obama political ads as well as statements made on the Campaign Trail and in Presidential and Vice Presidential debates.

 

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Ph.D. is the Director of the ANNENBERG Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania which is the organization BEHIND the FactCheck.org “truthfulness” website.

 

Dr. Jamieson's newest book entitled “Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment” is a MAJOR HIT PIECE against the Conservative voices in the media on television, radio, and in print. View the book’s Table of Contents: http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/echochamber/

 

In Dr. Jamieson’s biography on the APPC website, she states that during the 2004 general election she regularly appeared on “NOW With Bill Moyers” and “The NewsHour,” and throughout the 2008 campaign is appearing regularly on “Bill Moyers Journal.” http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/Bio.aspx?myUsername=kjamieson

 

What’s the bottom line? FactCheck.org is a LEFT-BIASED organization that has sold itself as “Politically NEUTRAL” to America’s voters and media personnel.

 

The fact is, the ANNENBERG Public Policy Center (APPC), the sponsoring agency behind FastCheck.org, is itself supported by the same foundation, the ANNENBERG FOUNDATION, that Bill Ayers secured the 49.2 million dollars from to create the Chicago ANNENBERG Challenge “philanthropic” organization in which Barack Obama was the founding Chairman of the Board for and Ayers served as the grant writer of and co-Chair of for its two operating arms.

 

 

Thank you. Do you have any opinions on any of the topics covered last night?

[nobody]

On the Iraq troop topic: I think what was said was that combat troop would be out by Aug. That would still leave about 50k other troops.

[Patty16]

The ANNENBERG Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania is the organization behind the FactCheck.org website that is being consulted OFTEN by voters and media personalities alike to help them form opinions on the “truthfulness” of the claims being made by the McCain and Obama political ads as well as statements made on the Campaign Trail and in Presidential and Vice Presidential debates.

 

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Ph.D. is the Director of the ANNENBERG Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania which is the organization BEHIND the FactCheck.org “truthfulness” website.

 

Dr. Jamieson's newest book entitled “Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment” is a MAJOR HIT PIECE against the Conservative voices in the media on television, radio, and in print. View the book’s Table of Contents: http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/echochamber/

 

In Dr. Jamieson’s biography on the APPC website, she states that during the 2004 general election she regularly appeared on “NOW With Bill Moyers” and “The NewsHour,” and throughout the 2008 campaign is appearing regularly on “Bill Moyers Journal.” http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/Bio.aspx?myUsername=kjamieson

 

What’s the bottom line? FactCheck.org is a LEFT-BIASED organization that has sold itself as “Politically NEUTRAL” to America’s voters and media personnel.

 

The fact is, the ANNENBERG Public Policy Center (APPC), the sponsoring agency behind FastCheck.org, is itself supported by the same foundation, the ANNENBERG FOUNDATION, that Bill Ayers secured the 49.2 million dollars from to create the Chicago ANNENBERG Challenge “philanthropic” organization in which Barack Obama was the founding Chairman of the Board for and Ayers served as the grant writer of and co-Chair of for its two operating arms.

 

 

really? you prob found that on yahoo answers. .... http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090908220656AAA82yP

 

I take it from your reply you are a diehard foxnewser and all other media outlets are socialists spreading lies to trick people. Factcheck is well respected because it doesnt slant, even foxnews qoutes it. When factcheck shredded Obama's major speech on the economy was it because the boogeyman bill ayers had something to do with it?

 

get a grip. just because you dont agree with the reporting doesnt mean its wrong.

[nfreeman]

Somewhat OT to the original post, but I thought it was pretty funny:

 

 

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent terrorist

threats and have raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved."

Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or

even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the

blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out. Terrorists have been

re-categorized from "Tiresome" to a "Bloody Nuisance." The last time

the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was during the

great fire of 1666.

 

The Scots raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let's get the

Bastards" They don't have any other levels. This is the reason they

have been used on the frontline in the British army for the last 300

years.

 

The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror

alert level from "Run" to "Hide". The only two higher levels in France

are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a

recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively

paralysing the country's military capability. It's not only the French

who are on a heightened level of alert.

 

Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout loudly and excitedly"

to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain: "Ineffective

Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."

 

The Germans also increased their alert state from "Disdainful

Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also

have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose".

 

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual, and the only

threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels .

 

The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to

deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new

Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

 

Americans meanwhile are carrying out pre-emptive strikes, on all of

their allies, just in case.

 

New Zealand has also raised its security levels - from "baaa" to

"BAAAA!". Due to continuing defense cutbacks (the airforce being a

squadron of spotty teenagers flying paper aeroplanes and the navy some

toy boats in the Prime Minister's bath), New Zealand only has one more

level of escalation, which is "#%^$#!, I hope Australia will come and

rescue us". In the event of invasion, New Zealanders will be asked to

gather together in a strategic defensive position called "Bondi".

 

Australia , meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries"

to "She'll be all right, mate". Three more escalation levels remain,

"Crikey!', "I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend" and

"The barbie is cancelled". So far no situation has ever warranted use

of the final escalation level.

[SwampD]

 

 

What’s the bottom line? FactCheck.org is a LEFT-BIASED organization that has sold itself as “Politically NEUTRAL” to America’s voters and media personnel.

 

 

This is correct. It IS a LEFT-BIASED organization. Because the right doesn't deal in facts. :nana:

[Armydoogie]

Anyone have an opinion on Obama's promise to allow openly gay people in thew military?

 

My initial reaction is I don't care as long as they are competent. Than there's a small part of me thats conflicted about it....

 

What do you think Doog?

 

I think you're darned lucky I even stumbled upon this thread, calling me out by name like that. :blink:

 

Since you asked, I think your later post on this topic hits home. I just don't see how there are enough resources to house 6 categories of people separately:

 

1. Guys who like girls. 2. Girls who like guys. (#1+#2="current") 3. Guys who like guys.

4. Girls who like girls. 5. Guys who like both. 6. Girls who like both.

 

The only other option is to have one big "frisky collaborative intercourse session" (o*r*g*y), and house guys and girls (regardless of sexual orientation) together, "Starship Troopers"-style.

 

I'm good either way. :lol:

[grinreaper]

Do you have anything legitimate to contribute to the discussion, Hannity, or are you just going to whine?

 

 

 

See above.

 

 

 

 

Where do you come off saying that what I have to say isn't legitimate? Just because I have a different opinion of Obama than yours, I'm not legitimate and i'm whining? You seem like you are just foolish enough to be sucked into believing his glib words and platitudes so I'll forgive you for your ignorant and baseless attack on me.

[SarasotaSabre]

Full disclosure: I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican; I am a Libertarian who thinks both major parties stink to high heaven and are morally & ethically bankrupt. That said, I found the SOTU address to be lacking in inspiration and content. Much like the Campaigner-in-Chief pre-election & throughout his first year in office, the soaring rhetoric, empty promises, and platitudes rang hollow again to me last night. Actions speak louder than words & this President is a great speaker, but not a leader and a governor who inspires. I for one am sick & tired of the lies & empty promises...i.e., full transparency via C-Span, no lobbyists, no earmarks, ending politics as usual and then doing backroom deals & buying Senate votes. Last night could have been an opp'y for Nobama to come clean & take accountability for these missteps - it was almost like he forgot he was President for a year.

 

You were dealt a bad hand when you inherited the White House, we get it; he doesn't miss a chance to remind us, including last night. Stop playing the blame game - it's your Presidency now. He was confrontational and defiant to a fault- he missed a chance to take ownership of mistakes made & opportunities lost, and he whiffed. All this does is create more division & contention. He also managed to diss the Supreme Court - not smart and a shameful breach of etiquette. He mentioned nothing about tort reform or terrorism - bad idea. Lots of condescending finger-pointing & lecturing - not good.

 

Bottom line: I don't he helped himself. Once again he was so full of contradictions. He claims to want to work together to get things done but then he rejects any and all Republican proposals for healthcare reform. I want him to succeed but to me last night was a chance to regain credibility and he failed. Just stop talking & get the job done. I hate to say this but if Nobama does not move to the center with common-sense solutions (like Clinton) not entirely driven by strident ideology, he will go down as the worst President since Jimmy Carter....mark my words.

[PASabreFan]

He spoke about terrorism.

[Eleven]

He spoke about terrorism.

 

He wore a suit and tie.