* and Republican response.





Just getting ready for tomorrow night.

2/23/2009 11:28:10 PM

fun drinking game

take a shot every time someone in this thread mentions "socialism"



[Edited on February 23, 2009 at 11:52 PM. Reason : go for it, toots]

2/23/2009 11:45:47 PM

I wanted to make the 911 joke.

2/23/2009 11:49:43 PM

^^ Or change, or hope, or Great Depression, or crisis. Really, there are a metric shit-ton of catch-words floating around this year. Really, you know he is going to lead out with, "the State of our Union is strong" and you should finish off whatever you're drinking right there.

2/24/2009 12:05:33 AM

why has cnn not been using state of the union, and instead just been saying Obama's address to congress

2/24/2009 12:24:28 AM

because the SotU is generally only in january

2/24/2009 12:27:17 AM

true. I just used SotU since that is essentially what it is. Constitutionally, the President is required only to address congress once a year.

2/24/2009 12:43:55 AM

As I understand it, a new President's first SOTU isn't really called a SOTU, because he hasn't been president long enough to know the actual state of the union. I think that's reasonable, because let's face it, every first speech would be either blasting the previous administration or blatantly fellating it.

Still, there's a tradition of an annual speech to a joint session of Congress, so they give one, they just don't call it a "State of the Union" address.

2/24/2009 3:15:35 AM

our CEO just sent out an email describing pay cuts and potential RIF

and then said the company's "fundamentals are strong"

2/24/2009 10:23:22 AM

my guess is he holds up an important board meeting so that he can be there to help out, but then just sits in the corner without saying anything.

also, your company plumber will likely be involved.

2/24/2009 11:34:28 AM

The State of the Union is buying all the banks.

2/24/2009 11:42:16 AM

ttt

2/24/2009 9:01:46 PM

ginsberg needs



[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 9:05 PM. Reason : ]

2/24/2009 9:05:26 PM

god this pomp is annoying

2/24/2009 9:18:17 PM

Really no different from other "State of the Union" addresses.

2/24/2009 9:23:02 PM

They're too happy

All smiles and laughing...it's one big "We're Gonna Fix The Economy!!" party

It's not very comforting...

[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 9:30 PM. Reason : L]

2/24/2009 9:30:02 PM

was this part of the "spendulous" plan?

where have I heard this kind of rhetoric before? Oh, right, right after 9/11

2/24/2009 9:31:58 PM

didnt some german invent the "automobile"

2/24/2009 9:42:08 PM

god I really cant stand nancy pelosi. she really has no idea whats going on...she just knows that every 20 syllables or so she should stand up and clap.

2/24/2009 9:44:32 PM

Yeah, nancy has a huge boner for Obama

2/24/2009 9:45:50 PM

I think she knows exactly what is going on.

[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 9:46 PM. Reason : and that is what scares me]

2/24/2009 9:45:58 PM

Americans can take advantage of the "lower interest rates that this plan has brought about?" WHO THE FUCK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE KIDDING? Your plan didn't bring about those low rates. The fucking collapse of the market did. Jeez.

Hey, we're also gonna create a new agency to give car loans, school loans, and other kinds of loans. That will be a great idea. Just like Fannie and Freddie! That way the next time a financial crisis hits, it won't just be the housing market that tanks... WOOHOO!


No "politics of the moment?" Isn't that what all of this "OMFG WE MUST ACT NOW!!!" shit is all about?

And what was that about the family that had saved up some but still couldn't get a mortgage? You don't fucking learn, do you? Those are the people that SHOULDN'T GET A MORTGAGE, duh! Otherwise, we repeat the same fucking mistakes we made that led us into this mess


seriously, everything he is talking about will just continue the problems we already have.

History shows us that our gov't has always responded with big ideas? Like what? FDR? Oh right, SS is bankrupting us. Oh, and FDR tried to rig the Supreme Court. Or Johnson? Oh, right, he left us even more debt to pay. Yes, let's follow those fine examples...

[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 9:56 PM. Reason : ]

2/24/2009 9:48:03 PM

"recovery plan free of earmarks"

really? who does he think he is kidding?

2/24/2009 9:53:20 PM

did he say "recovery free earmark"?


^ah, right

[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 9:53 PM. Reason : ]

2/24/2009 9:53:26 PM

Quote :

"wasteful and ineffective programs"

all of them?

Quote :

""end tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas""

Great, now they will have to ship twice as many to get the same savings

Quote :

" A tax cut, for 90% of American familes "

Oh boy! $13 a week.

I'm glad people making less than 250k won't see their taxes go up, but really, why does the government feel that it should get 39% of a person's income over 250k?


[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 9:59 PM. Reason : ]

2/24/2009 9:53:46 PM

remember when calling someone a socialist was a big deal?

2/24/2009 9:55:44 PM

Remember when the country wasn't socialist?

I don't, wasn't even close to being born then.

2/24/2009 9:57:30 PM

i like the checks on the way bit

2/24/2009 9:58:27 PM

I can't say it's standing out in any major way. I mean, obviously his delivery is much better than Bush's, and Obama is at least trying to preempt the opposition. But in all of his addresses so far since taking office, he's lacked that "nothing to fear" or "ask not" that I think a lot of people have been expecting.

Good going on the torture thing just now, I was about to say that this national security bit seemed a little tacked on.

Quote :

"I'm glad people making less than 250k won't see their taxes go up, but really, why does the government feel that it should get 39% of a person's income over 250k?"

This is a silly way to put it. Why does the government feel it should get any money from anybody? If you accept that it can and should get a certain amount of money from some people, it's kind of ridiculous to say what you just said. And if you don't accept that government can and should get money from people, then it's still kind of ridiculous to say what you just said.

[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 10:03 PM. Reason : ]

2/24/2009 10:01:04 PM

Is it Bobby's turn to talk yet?

2/24/2009 10:01:20 PM

^^^^ remember when people knew the definition of 'socialism'?
Cause barely anybody in our generation does.

Quote :

"But in all of his addresses so far since taking office, he's lacked that "nothing to fear" or "ask not" that I think a lot of people have been expecting."

well, it's kind of hard to make up those lines on the spot - "hmm.... we need something that people will remember and repeat for generations to come"
It's likely that FDR and JFK (and their writers) didn't come up with those lines for that purpose, and it's questionable if they were instantly memorable lines, or if they became so in later years.

[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 10:03 PM. Reason : . ]

2/24/2009 10:01:47 PM

when the country wasn't socialist?

ah yes, when a slave was a slave and a woman was a woman

none of this fancy modernized world

2/24/2009 10:01:59 PM

wait is the speech still on

i haven't watched any of it

i might turn it on for jindal's response, just to see him make an ass of himself

2/24/2009 10:02:52 PM

I wonder what Chris Matthews is going to say about Obama tonight.

2/24/2009 10:03:26 PM

Quote :

"when a slave was a slave and a woman was a woman"

The side of small government ended up on the same side as racism and intolerance.

Biggest tragedy in the history of this country that the chips fell that way.

2/24/2009 10:05:52 PM

So,

Energy (Global Warming, AIYEEEEEEEEEEEEE)
Healthcare
Education.


Yep, a liberal's wishlist


^ you just might wanna hold off on not calling the big-government people racist or intolerant. Try explaining that calling a white person racist for being white is, well, racist. Try offering an opinion that they don't want to hear. Get back to me on how "tolerant" they are

2/24/2009 10:05:58 PM

Yes, damn those liberals and their obsession with such frivolities as education.

2/24/2009 10:08:19 PM

hmm.... you would think making all 3 of those things would be in the best in interest of everyone. not just Liberals.

^ gg, GOP

[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 10:08 PM. Reason : .]

2/24/2009 10:08:26 PM

so you would. except when you understand that when the gov't gets involved in those things, it invariably fucks them up. If you need proof, well, just look at history


Haha, a man who "never stopped asking what he could do for his country?" And never started calling the police or hospital when he murdered that girl... Give me a fucking break



Tell me, how you gonna bring down the deficit with all this spending? New math?

2/24/2009 10:09:04 PM

Quote :

"when the gov't gets involved in those things, it invariably fucks them up. If you need proof, well, just look at history"

Tell me about all these things that withered and died when government touched them.

2/24/2009 10:12:49 PM

Let's see...

Healthcare: Every gov't mandate has seemed to lead to an increase is prices. Hmmm... pretty simple there.

Education: How's that working out for ya right now? Federal Department of Education? How's that helping out, really?

Energy: How's that foreign-oil independence thing working? Oh, right, we shelved it, via the gov't. Good work.

2/24/2009 10:16:03 PM

Some would argue that the federal government should have no role in the education business and is an issue that is left for the states, regardless of whether the federal government makes things better or worse.

But, the 10th amendment is long dead and America ever having stronger state governments and a weaker federal government is never going to happen.

2/24/2009 10:18:13 PM

Quote :

"you just might wanna hold off on not calling the big-government people racist or intolerant."

I prefer to consider anyone who fundamentally believes in bigger government "dangerously insane", regardless of their opinions on race. Not like it matters anyway... eventually the Democratic and/or Republican party is going to turn the nation into a totalitarian state anyway, the question is just when a charismatic "i have a plan to become a dictator" type ends up winning the popularity contest. Chances are it'll come around the same time as a national crisis so they can suspend public rights with fewer repercussions and less questioning.

2/24/2009 10:18:40 PM

Quote :

"Healthcare: Every gov't mandate has seemed to lead to an increase is prices. Hmmm... pretty simple there. Education: How's that working out for ya right now? Federal Department of Education? How's that helping out, really? Energy: How's that foreign-oil independence thing working? Oh, right, we shelved it, via the gov't. Good work."

and the private sector has done such a good job at attempting to address any of these topics.

oh, right. they would have if the government didn't stop them. yeah, sure.

2/24/2009 10:20:55 PM

hilarious when he says "anyone making under $250k/year will not see any tax increase" and the Republicans don't stand up.

2/24/2009 10:22:08 PM

Quote :

"Tell me, how you gonna bring down the deficit with all this spending? New math?"

http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2009/02/23/fiscal-responsibility-obama-puts-away-the-childish-things-he-found-in-the-white-house/

Actually, Obama's removed all the fuzzy math that previous administrations have been using.

Quote :

"Trick #1: Omitting from future budget estimates the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Every year, for the past 5 years, the expensive wars have continued; and every year the White House and its allies in Congress pretended that this was a surprise. Obama is putting the estimated future costs of the wars into the forecasts right now. Trick #2: Pretending in every succeeding budget forecast that you will allow temporary tax cuts such as the “AMT patch” to expire in a few years, thereby bringing in more tax revenue, even though everyone knows you will renew them when the time comes and this is in fact your declared policy. The White House forecasts will now include honest forecasts of future taxes. Gone also will be the similar trick of pretending in the budget forecasts that the government will in the future cut Medicare payments to doctors even though you have no intention of doing so (because it would result in the doctors dropping out of Medicare). Trick #3: Using as the base line for a promise to “cut the budget deficit in half” an artificially high budget deficit that you yourself proposed. This is what Bush did in the fine print of his promise in the 2004 campaign. (Not that he cut the budget deficit at all, in the end. But we will get to actual policies below. Right now we are just talking about ways to fool the press into reporting misleading claims with a straight face.) Obama has explicitly said that he plans to cut the deficit in half relative to the $1.3 trillion deficit he inherited, not relative to the much higher deficit that will occur in the coming fiscal year as a result of the recession….that is, as a result both of inevitably lost tax receipts and of the fiscal stimulus that Obama correctly deemed necessary to moderate the recession’s severity. This choice of benchmark was brave. After all, he would have been within his rights to say that because he inherited the recession from his predecessor, the corresponding rise in the deficit in 2010 should not count as his responsibility."

All removed.

gg, Obama

2/24/2009 10:24:20 PM

YAY! The GOP token minority member.

2/24/2009 10:25:08 PM

I'm already disappointed in Jindal......

2/24/2009 10:25:13 PM

Jindal doesnt seem like a good speaker at all :x looks like im watching an infomercial...

[Edited on February 24, 2009 at 10:25 PM. Reason : ]

2/24/2009 10:25:37 PM

Quote :

"Energy: How's that foreign-oil independence thing working? Oh, right, we shelved it, via the gov'tReagan Administration. Good work."

ftfy

or are we ready to listen to the "Malaise speech" again

2/24/2009 10:26:16 PM