President Obama State of the Union

Okay, I did not get to see the speech first hand as I had my own civic duty tonight; Hamburg City Council meeting. I did read the speech and here are my likes and dislikes:

"It's no secret that those of us here tonight have had our differences over the last two years. The debates have been contentious; we have fought fiercely for our beliefs. And that's a good thing. That's what a robust democracy demands. That's what helps set us apart as a nation." – I agree. We can have and must have "contentious" debate on the topics that divide us ideologically. Then we need to find a middle ground. Hopefully pundits on both sides of the aisle listened to this as they are the polarizing group.

"At stake right now is not who wins the next election – after all, we just had an election." – Funny, I recall the recently elected President saying that "elections have consequences." Those words spoke by Obama was meant to be a poke in the eye of Republicans and fueled partisan politics.

"Two years after the worst recession most of us have ever known, the stock market has come roaring back. Corporate profits are up." – True but this is not due to his Stimulus Package; rather it's due to companies shedding jobs, inventories and other cost cutting measures. Too bad the Democratic led Congress didn't take note by increasing the National Debt by more than $3 Trillion.

"What's more, we are the first nation to be founded for the sake of an idea – the idea that each of us deserves the chance to shape our own destiny." – Bingo! The idea was a nation of a limited Central government and the empowerment of States. The trouble is that we have seen the power of the Central government increase while State Rights have been eroded. The latest is the Health Care Mandate.

"Our free enterprise system is what drives innovation" – Exactly! So why did we have TARP and the GM Bailout? I understand that not all of this was implemented by Obama but he has not shied away from trying to turn TARP into a slush fund.

"Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas." – I like this idea. President Obama can start by overturning President Carter's ban on reusing spent nuclear rods as the technology has improved to the point that allows France to reuse their spent rods thus reducing nuclear waste.

"That responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our homes and communities……Our schools share this responsibility. When a child walks into a classroom, it should be a place of high expectations and high performance. But too many schools don't meet this test….'If you show us the most innovative plans to improve teacher quality and student achievement, we'll show you the money.'" – I agree here. The trouble is the teachers Unions. For a long time I thought teachers needed higher pay but after hearing about the benefits they get after retiring my view has changed. Message to Teachers: Do you want the money now or do you want the benefits later?

"Now, I strongly believe that we should take on, once and for all, the issue of illegal immigration. I am prepared to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows. I know that debate will be difficult and take time. But tonight, let's agree to make that effort. And let's stop expelling talented, responsible young people who can staff our research labs, start new businesses, and further enrich this nation." – Sounds like Amnesty to me. We need to enforced our laws and apply the 14^th Amendment as it was intended and anchor babies was not it.

"Over the last two years, we have begun rebuilding for the 21st century, a project that has meant thousands of good jobs for the hard-hit construction industry. Tonight, I'm proposing that we redouble these efforts." – Does this mean another Trillion Dollar Stimulus package? Wasn't the last one suppose to keep unemployment under 8%?

"So tonight, I'm asking Democrats and Republicans to simplify the system" – I agree. I know he was talking more about Corporate taxes but it applies to all of us. It is time for a flat tax with no tax credits. We all use the roads, the waterways, and the security of our military so we all need to pay a share.

"To help businesses sell more products abroad, we set a goal of doubling our exports by 2014 – because the more we export, the more jobs we create at home." – I am all for this but let's not do it via another QE.

"Now, I've heard rumors that a few of you have some concerns about the new health care law. So let me be the first to say that anything can be improved. If you have ideas about how to improve this law by making care better or more affordable, I am eager to work with you. We can start right now by correcting a flaw in the legislation that has placed an unnecessary bookkeeping burden on small businesses." – Okay, if President Obama is serious then let's remove the mandate, create true tort reform, and allow the purchase of insurance across state lines.

"So tonight, I am proposing that starting this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years. This would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, and will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was president." – Heard this one before, I believe last year he said that we reduce deficit by more than $200 billion over the next decade. We need to put all the sacred cows on the table. Cut military spending, education and entitlement programs.

"The bipartisan Fiscal Commission I created last year made this crystal clear. I don't agree with all their proposals, but they made important progress. And their conclusion is that the only way to tackle our deficit is to cut excessive spending wherever we find it – in domestic spending, defense spending, health care spending, and spending through tax breaks and loopholes." – Didn't Obama start the speech requesting civility and cooperation? Then why not implement the Fiscal Commission's suggestions? I don't agree with them all either then again I am not asking for bipartisanship.

"And if we truly care about our deficit, we simply cannot afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans." – Agreed. If we are to truly take care of the deficit we all need to pitch in. Scrap the current tax code and replace it with a flat tax that has not tax credits. Although we did cut SSN withholding by 2% for 2011.

"In fact, the best thing we could do on taxes for all Americans is to simplify the individual tax code. This will be a tough job, but members of both parties have expressed interest in doing this, and I am prepared to join them." – AGREED!!! Flat Tax with no tax credits. Done!

"In the coming year, we will also work to rebuild people's faith in the institution of government. Because you deserve to know exactly how and where your tax dollars are being spent, you will be able to go to a website and get that information for the very first time in history. Because you deserve to know when your elected officials are meeting with lobbyists, I ask Congress to do what the White House has already done: put that information online. And because the American people deserve to know that special interests aren't larding up legislation with pet projects, both parties in Congress should know this: if a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it." – Didn't President Obama say that all bills passed would be posted online for at least five days before he'd sign them into law? Plus, didn't he say that he would sign any bill that wasn't paid for? He broke both of those within days of saying it. Why are we to believe he will veto a bill that has earmarks within it?

Well that is my take on the speech. Now it's time to listen to the pundits!!!

“I forgot he was black tonight for an hour”: Racist Comment?

Okay, let me get this right, Chris Matthews host of Hardball on MSNBC said after President Obama gave his State of the Union address that, "I was trying to think about who he was tonight. It is interesting that he is post-racial. I forgot he was black tonight for an hour." Then went onto say that Americans forgot he was black tonight because of the breadth and scope of his speech and "seduction". Am I missing something? Imagine if Rush, Hannity, or any other Conservative pundit had called Obama "post-racial" or "forgot he was black". The kicker was the chuckle from Olbermann, who was off camera, as Matthews made his comments. Besides "Post-racial", what is that?

As I admitted in my previous blog entry, I was not able to watch the speech live but I did go back and listened to it. I apologize that I did not gathering in Obama's lack of blackness as Matthews had. I saw a President attempting to run to the middle all the while shouting back at the past. I saw a President attacking the Supreme Court for a decision that had nothing to do with foreign corporate campaign financing as the President wants us to believe. I saw a President desperately trying to keep his poll number alive.

Not once did I think, "Man, President Obama is not black." The trouble I have with Matthews statement, especially after his town hall meeting two weeks ago, is that he evoked race into a situation that did not require it. Everyone in the world knows that the President of the United States is black. Perhaps Matthews felt this way because President Obama, as Sen. Reid points out, does not always speak in a "Negro dialect". Actually, I wished Obama had used the "Negro dialect" last night because his speech lacked emotion and conviction. I saw a man angry with America. Americans have spoken loud and clear that they do not want Democrat health care reform via the town hall meetings, the Tea Party movement and the vote in Massachusetts.

Perhaps that anger is bubbling over after the recent defeats of Democrat strongholds as Americans are growing tired of big government which grew under the Bush administration. President Obama promised hope and change to which he has not delivered on. I agree with President Obama that change "will not happen overnight" and "it will not be easy" but when it is done in the secrecy of the Oval Office I take offense and question his sincerity. I am willing to give President Obama the benefit of the doubt and hope he will guide America to a brighter future. What I see instead is a man bent on growing government and spending money that our grandchildren's children haven't even earned yet. Obama has been given everything in life and now adversity presents itself; he does not like it. Maybe that is why Matthews "forgot he was black"?

Ta'Nehesi Coates attempted to gloss over Matthews words in her article by saying, "I think it's worth noting that Chris Matthews wasn't trying to take a shot at anybody. But I think its most worth noting that 'I forgot Obama was black' – in all its iterations – is something that white people should stop saying, if only because it's really dishonest." Coates added, "Chris Matthews didn't forget Barack Obama was black. Chris Matthews was white" (http://www.thegrio.com/politics/chris-matthews-to-thegrio-no-regrets-on-forgot-obama-was-black-remark.php). Why are we focused so much on color of a person skin and not on their skills and/or experience? Barack Obama is our President, for better or worse, and he, like any other President, ought to be challenged when the direction of the country is not right or when being deceived.

Why do we allow Matthews to go unchecked in his comments? Where is the outrage from the White House or Jesse Jackson or Rev. Sharpton or even the black community? Is it perhaps because Matthews is a mouthpiece of the left that he gets a pass?

President Obama’s State of the Union address

Last night President Obama addressed a joint session of Congress by giving the annual State of the Union address. Unfortunately I was not able to watch it as I was out trying to build my business but I did take a moment to read what the Star Tribune had to report. While I recognize this is just one source, even though they do import from other sources, I think they do an adequate job at hitting the high points. I will write more on this topic once I have more other outlets read. That being said, I did see a tidbit in the Star Tribune that caught my eye on what President Obama said last night. President Obama has a renewed focus on jobs and the creation of new jobs.

The area that President Obama plans, or suggests that Congress, focus in on is passing legislation aimed at the green sector. Even though reports from Europe have accurately displayed that green jobs are a net loss, I do applaud President Obama for doing something. The question will be is if he will have the political clout to pull it off after spending it on failed races, a failed bid for the Olympics, and on the Stimulus package that has save nothing. Another aspect of the article about Obama's speech that caught my eye was the announcement of spending freeze to take place in 2011.

In building my business this week I have heard the speeding freeze talked about on various radio stations. My understanding, prior to reading the Star Tribune this morning, that the spending freeze was going to take place this year and last three years and be only freezing 18% of the overall budget. When I first heard that President Obama was looking to enact a spending freeze it made me happy then I heard what was being frozen and that baffled me. As I wondered how he'd be able to get health care, energy, and job bills passed without spending more money but after last night's speech and the announcement of the freeze not taking hold until 2011 I found my answer.

So the plan is then to increase spending this year to heights never seen before and then freeze it at that level. Sounds great but hasn't anyone learned that expansion of government and increased spending does not create sustainable jobs nor does it turn around the economy? I did notice that President Obama mentioned his inheritance, an inheritance similar to President Reagan, and I asked myself why this is relevant. The man ran on hope, change and transparency which not one element has been implemented in this administration. Do not get me wrong, I applaud Obama for looking to freeze the budget but that is just not enough to turn around our economy. More to come but I thought I'd get the ball rolling. What are your thoughts on President Obama's speech? What are your thoughts on his first year in office? What do you think we need to do to move the country forward?

I recognize that the anonymous posting is getting a little out of hand as of late. I hope those that post will continue to post not as anonymous but as another more identifiable name. Please remind yourself that we want to have open, honest and respectful dialogue on The Hamburg Post.

Who is lying: Pelosi or CIA?

House Speaker Pelosi just needs to shut up. In her press conference last week she made the claim that the CIA “misled” her in September of 2002 and was not told that water boarding was being done, especially on Abu Zubaydah. Friday, after Speaker Pelosi’s grandstand, CIA Director Leon Panetta stated, “CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing ‘the enhanced techniques that have been employed’”.

According the law of the land, it is a crime to lie or mislead Congress. If this is the case, why is it okay then for Speaker Pelosi is able to stand there and lie to the American Public? The surprising message being lost here is the lack of defense of Speaker Pelosi by the White House. Why might this be?

Perhaps it is because the CIA did let Congress know of the techniques being used to ferret out information. On CNN’s State of the Union, Rep. John Boehner said, “If the speaker is accusing the CIA and other intelligence officials of lying or misleading the Congress, then she should come forward with evidence and turn that over to the Justice Department so they be prosecuted. And if that is not the case, I think she ought to apologize to our intelligence professionals around the world.”

As I am writing a promo came on MSNBC for Hardball. Chris Matthews’s teaser put forth the question if the Republican Party is using the Pelosi CIA attack as a distraction to Bush era policy. Now, I understand that Chris Matthews is a commentary but many people in our realm feel he is a news reporter. Why doesn’t the liberal media focus on Pelosi’s retort to CIA Panetta’s charge that she was given full disclosure?

Speaker Pelosi shifted her focus from the CIA to the Bush administration when she put out the statement last Friday, “My criticism of the manner in which the Bush administration did not appropriately inform Congress is separate from my respect for those in the intelligence community who work to keep our country safe.” Really? Is Speaker Pelosi for real? As it has been reported, she first claimed that she was never briefed only to later soften her stance then to an outright blast of the CIA.

It was the role of the CIA to inform Congress of the techniques used, which according to CIA Panetta was done in September 2002. I would love to see a truth commission as it will bring to light to truth. My only concern is if the media will report the facts and not add their bias.