The State of the Obama-union

The State of the Union address this week, was interesting to say the least. The illustrious President Obama successfully alienated the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, bankers, Wall Street, big corporations, "rich" people, and anyone who doesn't agree with him completely and do as they are told; that was just for starters. Unfortunately, there simply are not enough hours in my day to translate and correct all the lies, half-truths, misdirection and rhetoric launched at the enemies of the state by the Chastiser-in-Chief. Therefore, I will only do so to my favorites.

It's Not My Fault! (The Whiner-in-Chief)

I for one, am a little more than tired of the blame-Bush-for-everything. These are just a few examples of the whining:

"At the beginning of the last decade, the year 2000, America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion. 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. On top of that, the effects of the recession put a $3 trillion hole in our budget. All this was before I walked in the door." This completely ignores the MASSIVE deficit-spending incurred in the short, yet long, year that he has been President. And by the way, if we can't afford that expensive prescription drug program, how do you intend to pay for all health care for every American AND lower the deficit at the same time? Just wondering. Furthermore, tax cuts DO NOT create deficits--too much government spending does.

"Now, even after paying for what we spent on my watch, we'll still face the massive deficit we had when I took office." Waaaahh--here are some tissues. Every new President inherits problems from prior administrations. It's the nature of the beast. When you say, "I'm the President and the buck stops here", do you mean it or not? Stop making excuses and fix it.

My Enemies Will be Punished (The Divider-in-Chief)

"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." Obama gives a lot of lip service to job creation and then hampers and punishes every aspect of our market that creates jobs. I will say again what I have said a million times, corporations do not pay taxes, or fees, or fines, or whatever tricky label the government comes up with. Those are always passed on to their consumers. This arbitrary fee will be imposed on the top 50 banks regardless of whether they took TARP money. It will also be levied whether or not they have paid back their money. It also fails to "penalize" some of the biggest sinners in the bailout: AIG, GM, Chrysler, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Goldman Sachs, etc. What Obama will succeed in doing, by persisting in this personal vendetta is to cause the banks to lend less money to individuals, corporations and small businesses. This will further clog the lending market to the very people who create jobs through buying, manufacturing or opening/expanding their businesses. I agree, that some of the salaries and bonuses are ridiculous, but is not the role of the government to address this, unless we live in communism. The shareholders and Boards of Directors are the ones that must put a stop to this. If they're not smart enough to do that then they deserve to lose money on their investments.

Did He Really Just Say That?! (The Arrogant One-in-Chief)

"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. It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies. 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." The Cap and Trade Bill he is pushing for is completely at odds with everything he said prior. It is also at odds with everything his administration has done, to date, in terms of developing these resources. What are you waiting for? Start a nuclear plant already. Start drilling. Use some of the coal that is one of our most abundant natural resources. You've given over 400 addresses in you first year of office; lets have a little less conversation, a little more action please.

"To close that credibility gap we have to take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue -- to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; to give our people the government they deserve." I was absolutely stunned that he could even say this with a straight face. This, after he spent weeks in behind-closed-doors negotiations with the Democratic caucus, the unions and lobbyists on health care legislation. Even the main-stream media was asking him why it wasn't televised on C-SPAN as promised during his campaign. He has over 30 former lobbyists working in his administration. He had a closed-door meeting with lobbyists the day after his speech to discuss this speech. How dumb does he think we are?

Just when I was recovering from that whopper, he followed it with this one:

"With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests –- including foreign corporations –- to spend without limit in our elections. I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems." First of all, for someone who supposedly studied Constitutional law, he is dead wrong about this recent ruling. The Court did not change any of the restrictions on foreign campaign contributions. Secondly, the Supreme Court attends the State of the Union address as a show of unity in government and as a courtesy to the President. That he had the unmitigated gall to stand there and chastise the Supreme Court for rightfully defending free speech, was almost more than I could stomach. They did their job and ruled correctly based on the Constitution, which Obama is supposed to defend. Thirdly, I find it very interesting that Obama tries at every opportunity to tax the life out of every corporation he can find and at the same time wants to make it impossible for them to have a voice. This line of thinking belies what you really stand for Mr. President--and it ain't freedom. Finally, it was just plain arrogant, rude, cowardly and disrespectful to address the Supreme Court in such a manner.

"I'm also calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark reform. Democrats and Republicans. Democrats and Republicans. You've trimmed some of this spending, you've embraced some meaningful change. But restoring the public trust demands more. For example, some members of Congress post some earmark requests online. 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." Now that the uncontrollable laughter has subsided, may I remind you that you signed an Omnibus spending bill that had over 4,000 earmarks in it? Do you really think we can believe what you just said? I'm sure they'll get posted online just like all the pending bills that were going to be posted for at least 5 days before they're voted on. Oh wait, that didn't happen? But, I thought...but Mr. President, you promised.

"So Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve problems, not run for the hills. And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town -- a supermajority -- then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well. Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership. We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions. So let's show the American people that we can do it together." This one translates into "the people be damned". He is here to push his agenda and does not care what the voters have recently indicated. That's fine--I HOPE he will keep it up and then we will CHANGE every single one of those arrogant so-and-so's in the November election. Oh, and by the way, Mr. Pres., it's the Republicans job to provide checks and balances to the party in power. Their constituents expect them to fight and fight hard for the things they believe in. Sometimes, and in your case nearly every time, that means saying "no". It is a principled "no", not a "no" for "no's" sake. And I realize you think we're all stupid for not just doing as we're commanded and admonished, but you were elected by 52% of the voters, not 100%. The rest of us still have a say in the future of our nation. And that my friend, IS leadership.

My Way or the Highway (The Chief-in-Chief)

"Now, yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I'll issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans." Okay. You refuse to pass it on but you refuse to cut spending either, so which is it really? And just out of curiosity, does "separation of powers" mean anything to you?

"But each time a CEO rewards himself for failure, or a banker puts the rest of us at risk for his own selfish gain, people's doubts grow. Each time lobbyists game the system or politicians tear each other down instead of lifting this country up, we lose faith. The more that TV pundits reduce serious debates to silly arguments, big issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away." Translation--if you were all just as good and wise as me, we wouldn't have these problems. Come, all you mindless lemmings and we'll run off the cliff together.

The Government Must Create Jobs (The Confused-in-Chief)

"Because of the steps we took, there are about two million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed. Two hundred thousand work in construction and clean energy; 300,000 are teachers and other education workers. Tens of thousands are cops, firefighters, correctional officers, first responders. And we're on track to add another one and a half million jobs to this total by the end of the year.

That is why jobs must be our number-one focus in 2010, and that's why I'm calling for a new jobs bill tonight." The numbers used in the speech were shaky at best, based on the false and imaginary numbers being tossed around by this Administration. But it is also worth noting that jobs are being created in the IRS, other government entities and the Census Bureau. In fact, over a million jobs that will last from March to mid-summer will be created for census-taking purposes, but will obviously be short-lived. Furthermore, every single one of these jobs is paid for by tax dollars instead of a business that generates profits. No government job that I know of pays for itself; the salaries are paid by "working Americans" who actually pay taxes. That is hard to sustain for long with real unemployment rates at almost 20%. It sounds great, but reality can be very painful.

"Now, the true engine of job creation in this country will always be America's businesses. But government can create the conditions necessary for businesses to expand and hire more workers." This is actually a true statement--I know, I was surprised too. But everything this President does destroys the "conditions necessary for business to expand". Increased regulation, astronomical taxes, unfunded mandates, fees, etc. are strangling our business climate.

"So tonight, I'm proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat. I'm also proposing a new small business tax credit -– one that will go to over one million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages. While we're at it, let's also eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment, and provide a tax incentive for all large businesses and all small businesses to invest in new plants and equipment." This "tax credit" nonsense has to stop. Giving a $2,000 tax credit to a small business owner to hire a new employee is just nonsense. It costs an employer much, much more than that just to pay the associated FICA and payroll taxes that would go to the government for a minimum wage employee. If he's not generating sufficient profits in his business to pay another employee, all the tax credits in the world will not create a single job. But, the Great and Beneficent Obama will grant you the ability to keep some of your tax dollars if you buy a house, replace windows, buy a car, hire an employee, or refinance your home. But, that will only happen if you can manage to navigate the red tape and jump through the hoops that accompany the tax credits. If he wants to really help, lower taxes for EVERYONE and let them spend their money the way the see fit.

I'll Explain it One More Time for the Stupid Little People (Wisdom-in-Chief)

"I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change. But here's the thing -- even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy-efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future..." The evidence is overwhelming if you're fully entrenched in the Kool-aid Drinkers Climate Association. For the rest of us, there's a lot of holes in the science and skepticism about the real agenda. Check the news lately Mr. President? The UN science bunch has been caught red-handed pushing a personal agenda behind the facade of scientific evidence. But let's not forget, I'm stupid. I'm a flat-earther because I won't just drink the Kool-aid and shutup. Unfortunately for you, I hate Kool-aid.

"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. And I know that with all the lobbying and horse-trading, the process left most Americans wondering, "What's in it for me?" Oddly enough, the last thing I was wondering was "what's in it for me". I've been wondering what would be left of our country and our freedoms if it passes. And no, I don't need you to explain it to me one more time. I understand what is going on with health care and I don't want it. There are a lot of us who just don't want it. The more you talk about it, the more I'm convinced...that I'm right.

First Grade Economics (The Economic Genius-in-Chief)

"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." Unemployment benefits are paid for by the taxpayers, this equals deficit spending. Taxpayers are subsidizing COBRA coverage, this equals deficit spending. And your "tax cuts" are really tax credits, which I've already discussed.

"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 homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college." Let me translate this into a true statement: We cut (some) taxes. We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families (those who already pay not taxes into the system). We cut taxes for small businesses (with tax credits). We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers (with a tax credit--IF you were lucky enough to qualify). We cut taxes for parents (who both work and are forcing the system to take care of their children and qualify for low-income assistance. The rest of us aren't really trying to take care of our children.). We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college (but not the ones that make "too much" money).

"Now, one place to start is serious financial reform. Look, I am not interested in punishing banks. (Right...) I'm interested in protecting our economy. A strong, healthy financial market makes it possible for businesses to access credit and create new jobs. It channels the savings of families into investments that raise incomes. But that can only happen if we guard against the same recklessness that nearly brought down our entire economy. We need to make sure consumers and middle-class (not the poor or the rich, just the middle-class) families have the information they need to make financial decisions. We can't allow financial institutions, including those that take your deposits, to take risks that threaten the whole economy. Next, we need to encourage American innovation. Last year, we made the largest investment in basic research funding in history -- an investment that could lead to the world's cheapest solar cells or treatment that kills cancer cells but leaves healthy ones untouched." The best way to encourage innovation is for the government to get out of the way. Research funding is money forcibly taken from the taxpayers. If people want to create and invent they are going to be much more motivated and successful if they are using their own money or that of investors to whom they are accountable, than they will be with the endless fountain of government research dollars. I know, I know, that takes the control away from the government and I'm sure that's something you just can't live with.

"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. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don't. And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I 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. To help working families, we'll extend our middle-class tax cuts. But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, for investment fund managers, and for those making over $250,000 a year. We just can't afford it." You can't afford it? May I remind Your Presumptuousnous that it's not your money. And really, it's about time you stuck it to those creeps that make over $250,000 a year, because we all know that they aren't "working families". They are vampires who suck the financial blood out of everybody else--they don't hire anyone, they don't ever help anyone else, they don't pay nearly enough taxes, they don't invent or invest or create. And they most certainly don't work.

"Now, I know that some in my own party will argue that we can't address the deficit or freeze government spending when so many are still hurting. And I agree -- which is why this freeze won't take effect until next year -- -- when the economy is stronger. That's how budgeting works." (Laughter) In all the years I have been following politics, I've never seen this happen. The laughter in the room at this statement was not laughter with the President, they were laughing at the President because they simply could not help themselves. I laughed too, but this mentality is anything but laughable. Imagine the following at your house: "Alright kids, it's time to get our finances in order. As you know, our household income is $45,000 a year and we have $120,000 of credit card debt. So it's time to stop spending money. Next year, we are going to cut all Twinkies out of our grocery budget and put that towards our debt. By the time you're 4,723 we'll have it paid off." Seriously.

Oh, the Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies (The Prevaricator-in-Chief)

"Now, this year, we've broken through the stalemate between left and right by launching a national competition to improve our schools. And the idea here is simple: Instead of rewarding failure, we only reward success. Instead of funding the status quo, we only invest in reform -- reform that raises student achievement; inspires students to excel in math and science; and turns around failing schools that steal the future of too many young Americans, from rural communities to the inner city. In the 21st century, the best anti-poverty program around is a world-class education. And in this country, the success of our children cannot depend more on where they live than on their potential." True, but why won't you support school voucher programs? Why won't you break from from your slavish obedience to the NEA? When you do, I'll believe your statement.

"To make college more affordable, this bill will finally end the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that go to banks for student loans. Instead, let's take that money and give families a $10,000 tax credit for four years of college and increase Pell Grants. And let's tell another one 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. And by the way, it's time for colleges and universities to get serious about cutting their own costs -– because they, too, have a responsibility to help solve this problem." My jaw hit the floor on this one. Okay, yet another tax credit (i.e. taxpayer dollars) and then you're going to pay off all the loans...with taxpayer dollars. And cut the deficit. Right. And, while you're telling colleges and universities that they have a responsibility to lower costs, you just wrote them a blank check on the taxpayer's tab. You see, the cost of tuition in this country has grossly outpaced inflation. They have convinced parents that they are responsible to pay for their kid's college education. Parents are expected to save for a lifetime, mortgage their house, drain their savings or whatever else they have to do. We have been dumb enough to buy into this mindset and have thus given them permission to endlessly raise tuition. We as consumers could put an end to this if real market forces were able to work; supply and demand would force universities to get back in the business of educating people and lower their tuition. Instead, between fawning parents and government subsidies, the cost will continue to rise.

"So, as temperatures cool, I want everyone to take another look at the plan we've proposed. There's a reason why many doctors, nurses, and health care experts who know our system best consider this approach a vast improvement over the status quo. 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. Let me know. Let me know. I'm eager to see it." There's also a reason that MOST doctors are completely opposed to this boondoggle. And the Republicans have been completely silenced and shut out of all negotiations on the health care bills. Please don't tell us you want to hear their ideas (of which they have many), because the truth is that you don't give a flying fig.

"We are filling unacceptable gaps revealed by the failed Christmas attack, with better airline security and swifter action on our intelligence. (Ask the Administration to disclose the name of the person who authorized the questioning to end after 50 minutes. Why was a terrorist given Miranda Rights and a lawyer? We got no intel as a result.) That's why we stand with the girl who yearns to go to school in Afghanistan; why we support the human rights of the women marching through the streets of Iran; why we advocate for the young man denied a job by corruption in Guinea. (That's why I've said nothing in support of the people in Iran or Honduras who are fighting for their freedom.) For America must always stand on the side of freedom and human dignity. Always. Abroad, America's greatest source of strength has always been our ideals. The same is true at home. We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we're all created equal; that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it; if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else. (Unless of course you cross me, are a banker, make too much money, or any other reason I can think of to punish you fiscally. Otherwise I believe in equal treatment under the law.)