Analysis: Obama to Republicans - Can we just move on?

Comments (31)
artvet2 wrote:

Seems to me we don’t need any new [promises, Mr. President. How about just keeping the old ones you so glibly made – like cutting the deficit in half, or like raising the minimum wage to $9.50 by 2011? Or, maybe even like the one of bringing the nation together instead of separating it into have and have-nots, enemies versus friends, rich versus poor, us versus them. You were eklected to lead the entire country, not just those who fawn after you.

Feb 13, 2013 6:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
AZreb wrote:

Since the Democrats are so focused on votes from the Hispanics, it would appear that they are the ones who are putting party above national needs.

Feb 13, 2013 7:16am EST  --  Report as abuse
justinolcb wrote:

whispers to the crowd… those are Mr Obama’s spending cuts that he suggested and he put on the table not Republicans – he’s the one who agreed to these conditions, he’s the one who continues to manufacture crisis after crisis (because he’s incompetent and has never created a job in his life) and don’t forget his priority is not a balanced budget nor job creation, its wealth re-distribution and that will take your money from you and give it to other people – by very definition!

Feb 13, 2013 7:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
John1980 wrote:

I guess ‘eating our peas’ means spending like there is no tomorrow and avoiding any sort of fiscal responsibility. Obama signed the sequester into law himself. So much for change we can believe in. Hypocrite.

Feb 13, 2013 7:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

Mr. Obama is as lame a duck as you’ll ever find, even if he doesn’t yet realize it.

Republicans are not going to raise raise revenues (taxes) one penny for the remainder of his term.

Feb 13, 2013 8:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
YRaj wrote:

Seems to me the anti-Obama crowd is really bitter at a president who brought us out from what could have easily been the 2nd depression if we allowed the Republicans to have their way, also on the verge of ending 2 ways both started by Republicons, not forgetting he got Bin Laden, taking revenge for Americans.
Go back to your bunkers and continue predicting the demise of the world under Obama…you are old news now. This President’s second term is going to be amazing.

Feb 13, 2013 8:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
byrond2 wrote:

It’s funny how anyone who criticizes Obama is considered a republican. Anyone with any intelligence might see that many liberals think he’s taking us down the road to, well, not necessarily ruin but perhaps stagnant doldrums.

Feb 13, 2013 8:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
Beauciel wrote:

I’m not sure it mattered what President Obama layed out in the SOTU speech. The Republican Party just says, “NO!” I heard a commentator say, “If Obama says cookies are good, Republicans will say, No they aren’t.” The Republican Party wants America to fail. We have fallen behind the rest of the world by almost every measure over the past 12 years. They just scream, “Cut spending!” We will not catch up in education, infrastructure, and overall quality of life by just cutting spending. With the lowest taxes in 50 years on 99% of the people, America will continue falling behind the rest of the world. It takes two to tango and the Republicans are dancing by themselves, unwilling to cooperate on any issue, as America falls further and further behind.

Feb 13, 2013 9:16am EST  --  Report as abuse
byrond2 wrote:

Beauciel, America is actually better off then the Euro Zone right now, and of course better than China, etc for many reasons. The primary issue is that while the US is the largest economy in the world while having a relatively small population, we have massive wealth inequality, lack universal healthcare, have the largest prion population in the world per capita, and have a fair amount of poverty. I don’t hear Obama speaking about those, much if at all, and don’t confuse Obamacare with universal healthcare. So why is he so much different than the GOP if he’s not willing to speak for these causes?

Feb 13, 2013 9:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
John1980 wrote:

Fact is, the only reason GDP has not been contracting for the last 3 years is because Government spending has increased 20% to support it. Our economy is a Socialist one. Anyone that doesn’t see that is fooling themselves.

Feb 13, 2013 9:45am EST  --  Report as abuse
John1980 wrote:

Fact is, the only reason GDP has not been contracting for the last 3 years is because Government spending has increased 20% to support it. Our economy is a Socialist one. Anyone that doesn’t see that is fooling themselves.

Feb 13, 2013 9:45am EST  --  Report as abuse
Raelyn wrote:

Obama is not the one sho sent tens of thousands of jobs overseas and opened headquarters in foreign tax-saving countries — leaving tens of thousands unemployed for the government to support with unemployment, food stamps, etc. The employed with good jobs are the backbone of our economy — they are who buy cars, homes, furniture, etc. — but they cannot when those jobs go to Africa or the Far East.

Feb 13, 2013 10:03am EST  --  Report as abuse
byrond2 wrote:

John, France is a socialist democracy. America is far from socialist. We are quickly becoming a country of extreme wealth inequality like Mexico and Brazil. Maybe during the next four years we will get there. You will see this better if you ever get rich in America.

Feb 13, 2013 10:06am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

As the full consequences of our current monetary policy comes home over the few years, $9/hr will have less purchasing power than $6/hr did when this president took office. In the end, it should be a win for employers, provided anyone can actually afford their goods and services, a win for the Democratic party, and a perceived win for idiots who don’t see the big picture.

Feb 13, 2013 10:25am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

@John1980 – Not just our economy. Most of the ‘New America’ Obama talks about is very socialist in ideology, even if they don’t call it by that name. The values that made America a superpower have mostly been lost in the latest generations. It’s going to be hard, if not impossible, to recover from ‘Generation Me’.

Feb 13, 2013 10:28am EST  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

Well at least Obama is reaching out and trying something new. All the Republicans are promising is basically the same cut taxes and cut spending, exactly what George W Bush did during his 8-years in office and look what that got us, the worst economy in 50-years.

You can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig.

Feb 13, 2013 10:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

Reuters you are acting like cutting the defect is a bad thing. What a joke.

Feb 13, 2013 10:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
cbj wrote:

Beauciel,
If you remember the history of current events, the US has been ‘falling behind’ for much longer.
It was falling behind in the 1800′s when the US created the Chinese Exclusion Act to counter the supposed wage depression the ‘Coolies’ caused. (Side Note) This did not get repealed until 1943 with the Magnuson Act which (ha ha ha) allowed China a yearly immigration quota of 150.
While there are many more instances of the US falling behind none is as frightening as the US government involvement in and support of Eugenics (the social movement which desired to improve the plight of the (government diagnosed unsuitable) population through selective breeding and sterilization). This really means that the poor were poor because they were geneticlly disposed to remain poor because they were mentally (or otherwise) deficient.
(Side Note) Woodrow Wilson was a huge supporter of Eugenics to the point that 31 States had enforced sterilization laws. Also, the inventor of Keynesian economics (the program that is behind the current economic folly), John Maynard Keynes was a huge supporter
Another ‘wonderful government program’ with the intentions of doing that which is best for society as a whole.
Eugenics was the cornerstone of almost every ‘progressive’ movement of the late 19th to early 20th century to the point that it is called “The Progressive Era”.
So, in brief, the entire concept of the “US falling behind” is an old saw that has been used by governments throughout history in order to create enough fear so they can ramrod any program that they see fit.
The curtain was pulled back far enough so that even you should understand when Rahm Emanuel stated so bluntly “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before”.
Political cynicism in action.
In truth, more evil has been done to humanity at large unintentionally by governments than could ever be done on purpose.

Feb 13, 2013 10:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
4ngry4merican wrote:

justinolcb wrote: “he’s incompetent and has never created a job in his life”

He’s created over 4.4 million jobs. You really do hate facts, don’t you?

Feb 13, 2013 12:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
pbgd wrote:

The President proposes — the Congress disposes.

Feb 13, 2013 1:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
spca wrote:

i wish we could move on for four more years and get the king dethroned .

Feb 13, 2013 1:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
spca wrote:

i wish we could move on for four more years and get the king dethroned .

Feb 13, 2013 1:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

@4ngry4merican – Actually, there has been a net increase of about 300,000 jobs in America since Obama took office. He’s replaced about 4 million high paying jobs with McJobs, though. Another interesting fact. If you include government jobs, there are actually 400,000 fewer people working today than when he took office.

Feb 13, 2013 2:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:

No. Pot Kettle Black.

Feb 13, 2013 2:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MikeyLikesIt wrote:

@4ngry4merican

Obama created 4.4 million jobs? Like personally? And how much have these jobs cost us? Well if you look at deficit spending alone it would seem that each job has cost us around 1.1 million dollars each, but then that doesn’t count the hundreds of billions in “stimulus” spending and the hundreds of billions in Fed pumping.

John1980 has it spot on. The past couple of years of “growth” has almost been entirely supported by unsustainable government spending and the Fed keeping interest rates suppressed. Look what happened when we cut spending just a little bit, GDP tanked!

When the government finally has to shut off the money pumps (and eventually it will) we are going to be in for a lot of pain.

Feb 13, 2013 2:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bates148 wrote:

@4ngry4merican A lot of jobs created under Mr Obama’s watch are part-time or jobs with no benefits. The US is suffering from underemployment (see http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/19/us/many-american-workers-are-underemployed-and-underpaid.html?_r=0 ) On Mr Obama’s first day, the unemployment rate was 7.9%, it then increased and now it’s back at 7.9%. Most of new jobs since then pay less, have fewer or no benefits and are often temporary. Yes, we all hate these facts.

Feb 13, 2013 3:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JL4 wrote:

It’s the companies that create jobs and decide whether they will be part-time, full-time, temporary, and how much they’ll pay. Companies are creating “McJobs”, because it’s cheaper than paying full-time wages with healthcare benefits. Don’t you guys get it? You must be too busy, with the three part-time jobs you have to hold to make ends meet, to read.

But who has “the facts”? The poster who writes that his facts are true, and Obama didn’t create any jobs, or the poster who writes that Obama DID create jobs, but they weren’t good ones, or the poster who drones on about Eugenics of all things.

Feb 13, 2013 3:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JL4 wrote:

It’s the companies that create jobs and decide whether they will be part-time, full-time, temporary, and how much they’ll pay. Companies are creating “McJobs”, because it’s cheaper than paying full-time wages with healthcare benefits. Don’t you guys get it? You must be too busy, with the three part-time jobs you have to hold to make ends meet, to read.

But who has “the facts”? The poster who writes that his facts are true, and Obama didn’t create any jobs, or the poster who writes that Obama DID create jobs, but they weren’t good ones, or the poster who drones on about Eugenics of all things.

Feb 13, 2013 3:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@bates, yes the unemployment rate in Jan 2009 was basically the same as it is now (actually I think it was 7.8% but would have to look that one up), but the BIG difference is ,which you are either just ignorant of or being willfully ignorant of, that in Dec 2008 and Jan 2009 the economy was losing on the order of ~750K jobs a month and another great depression was looming. The economy was a downward spiral in Jan 2009, now we are at least growing a little and adding on the order of 150K-200K job GAINS a month.

Feb 13, 2013 3:40pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cbj wrote:

And the unemployment was at 4.4 % in May of 2007 after several years of Bush. So whats your point?
If you don’t understand that each and every SOTU address is little more than a huge PR stunt then you really have little to add to the conversation.
Every POTUS must walk between thumping their chest at how much good they have done so far and sigh over how much further there is yet to go. Reagan was a master at this, Clinton was as well. As a matter of fact I challange you to find any SOTU address where the POTUS said we could loosen our collective belts regrdless of how well the economy was doing. They always (each and every one) explains how the ‘other party’ is holding up progress and how it is time for us all to pull in one direction, towards one direction (anyone else remember that ‘shinning city on a hill’ or ‘thousand points of light’ and you knuckleheads keep falling for it. It doesn’t matter which side is in power . . . the end result is the same . . .they exist to get and maintain power and the public exists to be occasionally sheared . . . for their own good of course.

Feb 14, 2013 3:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cbj wrote:

JL4 my ‘drone’ on Eugenics was simply to illustrate that history shows that every politician must have some sort of ‘crisis’ inorder to pass their agenda of so called ‘good works’. The more good that they want to do the larger and more infamous the crisis must be.
This has been done through out time and is a proven method.
As I stated Rahm Emanuel was even bold enough to baldly state as much.
The facts are that if you look at the history of unemployment stats in December of 1982 unemployment is listed at 10.8% and the highest it shows for this so called near depression is a flat 10% in October of 2009.
(Bureau of Labor Statistics)
So, my drone (had you been paying attention) did have a point. The government (regardless of which party is in power) will use whatever crisis is at hand and magnify its importance (or reduce as needed) to fit their agenda.
If the right really was interested in less government why does it always grow under their watch? Same with the left.

Feb 14, 2013 4:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.