PDA

View Full Version : Potus sotua



TranaGreg
01-26-2011, 01:40 PM
I haven't started a new thread here yet, so why not this.

Last night's State of the Union Address - no discussion of it yet, I'm surprised. I caught some of it - interesting stuff about focusing on investments in energy, esp. clean energy (though I noted that he included "clean coal" in this). Curious to see what this translates into over the next year or two in terms of legislaton brought forward - and how much support there is for it from across the aisle.

Kevin Seitzer
01-26-2011, 01:57 PM
And here I thought the thread title was in Latin.

Wonderboy
01-26-2011, 02:02 PM
In vino veritas...

SeaDogStat
01-26-2011, 02:19 PM
Lactans est iustus meus ex ingenio praeditos

Fixed

TranaGreg
01-26-2011, 02:20 PM
absolvo.

Don Quixote
01-26-2011, 02:33 PM
Fixed

For the benefit of those here who took a language with practical uses, what does your "fix" mean?

B-Fly
01-26-2011, 02:36 PM
I haven't started a new thread here yet, so why not this.

Last night's State of the Union Address - no discussion of it yet, I'm surprised. I caught some of it - interesting stuff about focusing on investments in energy, esp. clean energy (though I noted that he included "clean coal" in this). Curious to see what this translates into over the next year or two in terms of legislaton brought forward - and how much support there is for it from across the aisle.

I thought it was a decent balancing act considering the shellacking in the November elections but the steady climb in his approval ratings since. He tried to find the areas for investment where he has any chance of shaking free enough funds from the Republican House to make a positive difference, while offering a few issues on which he can show true work across the aisle, e.g., med-mal reform.

Don Quixote
01-26-2011, 02:39 PM
I haven't started a new thread here yet, so why not this.

Last night's State of the Union Address - no discussion of it yet, I'm surprised. I caught some of it - interesting stuff about focusing on investments in energy, esp. clean energy (though I noted that he included "clean coal" in this). Curious to see what this translates into over the next year or two in terms of legislaton brought forward - and how much support there is for it from across the aisle.

I haven't seen/read the whole thing yet, but IMO the "clean coal" reference was a sop to the Congresscritters from coal states. This "clean energy" thing gets brought up every so often, and while I think it's a great idea overall, I'm not sure the technologies involved will ever be practical.

Support from across the aisle? Don't count on it. McConnell is a tough old horse trader (from a coal state) but can be persuaded to at least not obstruct (if the price is right); Boehner has zero imagination and no plan except opposition.

Mithrandir
01-26-2011, 02:47 PM
was that last night?? It was bowling night so i missed it. Priorities baby.

SeaDogStat
01-26-2011, 03:07 PM
For the benefit of those here who took a language with practical uses, what does your "fix" mean?



Sucking is just one of my fine qualities!

..... ;)

chancellor
01-26-2011, 10:36 PM
I haven't started a new thread here yet, so why not this.

Last night's State of the Union Address - no discussion of it yet, I'm surprised. I caught some of it - interesting stuff about focusing on investments in energy, esp. clean energy (though I noted that he included "clean coal" in this). Curious to see what this translates into over the next year or two in terms of legislaton brought forward - and how much support there is for it from across the aisle.

One of his best political speeches in quite a while, IMO. Paul Ryan did a credible job on the rebuttal as well.

Per energy, as I study biofuels more and more, it's pretty obvious they're a short term bridge or a nice way of reducing some of our ridiculous dependence on foreign oil. If we really want to change our petro-based liquid fuels dependency, there's only two routes: coal or nuclear. Wind, solar, and biofuels are a nice to have, but nowhere remotely close to the necessary energy density that coal and nuclear can deliver.

I doubt he'll have little support from across the aisle unless some of these programs are brought forward in conjunction with major cuts in other programs; I suspect he'll have to give the Tea Party GOP members a sacred cow or three they can slay before there'll be any hint of new programs, no matter how "worthy" they may be.

EDIT TO ADD: After reading this: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/01/us-budget-deficit-to-pass-15-trillion-this-year/70317/
I think we need to do major budget slashing, no matter what. $1.5 trillion in debt this year? That's more than any four consecutive years under the Bush administration...ouch.

EDIT2: Best blog comment, referencing CNN coverage of the SOTU: "I’m seeing Eliot Spitzer for the first time as a TV host. It doesn’t seem possible, but I think I find him even creepier on TV than hookers found him in person." - Stephen Green, Vodkapundit.

Judge Jude
01-26-2011, 10:45 PM
Yes, I just took parts of it in, and was impressed. He's hitting that tone that independents love, I think - the polling on this speech was off-the-charts good.

Ryan wasn't as charismatic, but he did ok too. Felt like the boring guy in the office you need to make sure that the "go for it" stuff that everyone likes has a "reality" factor added in.

I think that if Obama wants to focus his priorities for re-election, as Clinton did, he has a great chance to win in 2012. That won't make a lot of far left and far right people happy, but it seems as if the lame duck session and this speech should make it obvious that the path is there for the taking.

The economy already figures to be at least modestly improved by next year, so that may not be a knockout punch. Just bit the bullet and make some adjustments to "entitlements", and he's good to go.

nots
01-27-2011, 03:18 PM
Again, where were these people in the eight years prior to 2008?

With all due respect, it really doesn't matter where 'these people' were prior to 2008. The fact is what is going on now is unsustainable and we need to deal with that instead of arguing over why we are where we are. The prescription drug plan was a mistake, the tax cuts were a mistake etc, etc etc. but the continued waste of money and lives in Afghanistan is sad for there seems to be no purpose to it whatsoever other than to not admit going there was a mistake.
I'm sorry, but I'll withhold my kudos for President Obama until he follows thru and starts to (quickly) end our occupation there.

Wonderboy
01-27-2011, 03:50 PM
The craziest part of all of this was Michelle Bachmann.

Well, that's setting the bar low! I'd hate to see anything where Michell Bachmann wasn't the craziest part of it.

Wonderboy
01-27-2011, 03:51 PM
And just to add, it's going to be very tough to balance the budget so long as the USA is coughing up half the military spending in the entire world. So credit where credit is due -- a tip 'o the hat to the tea party for saying that military spending is on the table for discussion.

Lucky
01-27-2011, 04:24 PM
One of his best political speeches in quite a while, IMO. Paul Ryan did a credible job on the rebuttal as well.

I agree on both counts. Many Obama supporters have been put out with his insistence upon trying to be bi-partisan, but I believe he will continue these efforts for another two years.

Ryan did do a credible job. It seems to me that he will does best when he tries to stick with his own ideas, as opposed to carrying water for others. He is obviously a smart guy, and can be one of our country's leading figures for a long time.

Wonderboy
01-27-2011, 04:46 PM
Ryan did do a credible job. It seems to me that he will does best when he tries to stick with his own ideas, as opposed to carrying water for others. He is obviously a smart guy, and can be one of our country's leading figures for a long time.

Agree -- the GOP could do a lot worse than this guy, who seems to be very intelligent and reasonable.

nots
01-27-2011, 05:01 PM
Agree -- the GOP could do a lot worse than this guy, who seems to be very intelligent and reasonable.

The contrast between Ryan and Bachmann was pronounced to say the least.
I thought Ryan was the most capable Republican at last year's summit with the President as well.

Wonderboy
01-27-2011, 05:25 PM
The contrast between a rational human being and Bachmann was pronounced to say the least.

Fixed.

chancellor
01-27-2011, 10:17 PM
So, yeah Chance, you want to get rid of that terrible deficit? Seems like there's a pretty obvious target here (and kudos to Obama for not wussing out regarding mentioning it). Instead, we get proposals to cut education and the like. Tired of the hypocrisy regarding spending. Again, where were these people in the eight years prior to 2008?

Dude, I'm all over any and all cuts. Cut military spending? You bet. Heck, even Eric Cantor agreed with that before the SOTU speech.

Hypocrisy regarding spending? To get down to Bush-era deficits, we need to cut the present deficit 70 - 75%. That's hardly hypocrisy, that's finally facing reality. It's like a cancer patient who's gone from stage 1 to stage 4...and finally realizes they're sick.

Hornsby
01-27-2011, 10:52 PM
Well, that's setting the bar low! I'd hate to see anything where Michell Bachmann wasn't the craziest part of it.

Up here in Minnesota, we're hoping beyond hope that she somehow decides to run for President in 2012. That way, we'll be done with her, hopefully for good.

B-Fly
01-28-2011, 03:26 PM
The contrast between Ryan and Bachmann was pronounced to say the least.
I thought Ryan was the most capable Republican at last year's summit with the President as well.

I thought he was much better at last year's summit and when putting forth his own deficit tackling proposals than he was in the response to the SOTU. Yes, he was far better than Jindal the previous year, but for someone who has had a lot of very good and very specific ideas on the debt and the deficit, he offered far fewer ideas about actual places to cut than the President did, and the President wasn't specific enough either. Why wasn't a commitment to cutting the defense budget or to taking on entitlements anywhere in Ryan's speech? Why no mention of Simpson-Bowles? I agree with Lucky that this is the guy in the GOP I'd want to work with to attack the real problems we face, but also that he should stop carrying water for the less thoughtful and productive members of his party.