Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Live blog: Obama lays out broad agenda

10:31 p.m.
President Obama finished a 71-minute speech having hit the high notes on a host of major policy initiatives -- from health care and financial reform to Afghanistan and nuclear proliferation. He acknowledged repeatedly that he and his party are in the midst of trying political times but sought to project determination to see through what he has started and continue pursuing ambitious goals. He criticized Republicans for their past record and their alleged obstructionism, but also called for bipartisanship moving forward. Was Obama's speech a success? Is he in any better position now, politically or substantively, than he was when the evening began? Sound off in the comments section below.

-- Ben Pershing


Who goes first on immigration reform? | 10:13 p.m.

Obama finished a section of his speech on civil rights by saying "we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system - to secure our borders, enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nations."

But advocates of comprehensive immigration reform in Congress say they are waiting for more direct and specific cues from the White House before they press forward. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is working with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on a compromise reform proposal, but lawmakers are typically wary of such a politically tricky issue in an election year. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has said he wants to tackle the issue this year, but hasn't said exactly when. He is waiting for a cue from Obama. And the House doesn't want to act until the Senate does. So who will go first?

-- Ben Pershing


Obama calls for repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell' | 10:13 p.m.
"This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."

In response, the Human Rights Campaign will launch its "Voices of Honor" campaign on Wednesday, with plans to mobilize veterans and build campaigns in states with lawmakers that will be critical to final votes on a repeal in the House and Senate.

"The Commander in Chief sent a clear message tonight that in a time of war, what matters is that our men and women get the job done -- not whether they're gay or straight," HRC President Joe Solmonese said Wednesday night.

"Our country simply cannot afford this discriminatory law that hurts military readiness by denying patriotic men and women the opportunity to serve," Solmonese said.

--Ed O'Keefe


Obama lauds progress in Iraq and Afghanistan | 10:13 p.m.
"In Afghanistan, we are increasing our troops and training Afghan Security Forces so they can begin to take the lead in July of 2011, and our troops can begin to come home. We will reward good governance, reduce corruption, and support the rights of all Afghans - men and women alike. We are joined by allies and partners who have increased their own commitment, and who will come together tomorrow in London to reaffirm our common purpose."

"Increasing troops" does not quite explain that President Obama has boosted troops by more than 50,000 since he became president, bringing total U.S. troops to 98,000 and total allied troops to 138,000. This number actually tops the 110,000 forces the former Soviet Union had in Afghanistan in the 1980s--and Obama soon will have more troops in Iraq and Afghanistan than former president George W. Bush ever had in the two theaters. Obama's claim that "we are joined by allies and partners" does not mentions that the contributions from those allies have fallen far short of expectations.

Many experts would dispute Obama's claim that Afghan forces can "begin to take the lead in July of 2011." The president has said that that is the date when U.S. troops in the current surge will begin to come home, but few believe the ill-equipped, ill-trained and large illiterate Afghan forces will be in position to take charge so quickly.

--Glenn Kessler


Obama's mixed record on diplomatic outreach | 10:10 p.m.
"These diplomatic efforts have also strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of these weapons. That is why North Korea now faces increased isolation, and stronger sanctions - sanctions that are being vigorously enforced. That is why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated. And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: they, too, will face growing consequences."

President Obama skips over lightly the fact that his efforts to engage rogue nations have largely fallen flat. North Korea last year tested a nuclear weapon and tested missiles, and Obama has been unable to coax it back to six-nation disarmament talks. And Iran has proven deeply disappointing to administration officials. Obama issued an unusual message on Persian New Year, wrote two letters to the Supreme Leader and made a bold offer to assist Iran with a ailing medical research reactor. Yet his outreach to end three decades of estrangement has been greeted with indifference or scorn by Tehran's leaders. Obama claims the "international community is more united" but does not mention that China, a veto-wielding member of the UN Security Council, is highly skeptical of new sanctions.

--Glenn Kessler


Obama calls for unity against foreign threats | 10:01
"So let's put aside the schoolyard taunts about who is tough. Let's reject the false choice between protecting our people and upholding our values."

The reference to "schoolyard taunts" is a subtle shot at former vice president Richard Cheney, who has been criticizing Obama since the start of his administration for banning torture, promising to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and disregarding the phrase "war on terror."

Obama does not mention that he failed to meet his goal of closing Gitmo within one year -- something he touted when he addressed a joint session of Congress on Feb. 24, 2009, shortly after he took office.

--Glenn Kessler


Debt commission faces uphill task, battle | 10:01 p.m.
"That's why I've called for a bipartisan, Fiscal Commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. This can't be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The Commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. Yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I will issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans."

A commission created by executive order has huge credibility problems, even among Democrats who support the idea. To date, Obama and House leaders have been unable to assure deficit hawks that the recommendations of a presidentially-appointed committee would be given an up-or-down vote in Congress.

A larger problem is the threat by key Republicans to boycott the panel. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), an ardent advocate of a fiscal commission, has derided a presidentially-appointed panel as little more than an effort to give Democrats political cover on the deficit in the runup to this fall's elections. No matter the form of the commission, it would not make its recommendations until after the elections, and lawmakers would not have to take a position on potentially painful tax hikes and spending cuts in popular social programs until the end of this year.

--Lori Montgomery


Obama spending freeze could have limited impact | 9:53 p.m.
"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 to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work. We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year."

Obama's spending freeze effects only about one-seventh of the nation's $3.5 trillion budget. It would save only about $15 billion next year and only about $250 billion over the next decade. His line-by-line savings -- which are subject to congressional disapproval -- might add another $20 billion.

Compare those numbers to this year's projected budget deficit of $1.35 trillion, and to the forecast of deficits in excess of $9 trillion over the next decade and you can see why many observers call these proposals mostly symbolic. They would do nothing to restrain the biggest drivers of the national budget deficit, the entitlement programs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. However, cutting government spending is a winner politically and probably a necessary move for Democrats who are going to have to start talking about raising taxes if they are serious about deficit-reduction.

--Lori Montgomery


Obama argues to eliminate tax cuts to combat deficit | 9:51 p.m.
"But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, investment fund managers, and those making over $250,000 a year. We just can't afford it. "

These ideas are retreads from last year's budget, which never saw action in Congress. Obama has proposed eliminating tax breaks for oil companies and taxing the income of hedge fund managers at the higher income tax rate rather than the lower capital gains rate. He has also vowed to permit the tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration to expire to families who make over $250,000 a year.

While lawmakers have not moved on the first two proposals, they are likely to proceed with the third. The Bush tax cuts are set to expire at the end of this year, and Democrats have made clear that families earning more than $250,000 and individuals earning more than $200,000 will pay higher taxes on income and capital gains in 2011.

--Lori Montgomery


Obama criticizes Supreme Court decision on campaign finance | 9:44 p.m.
After discussing other government reform proposals, Obama wades into the subject of campaign finance by addressing the landmark Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision by the Supreme Court:

"Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections. Well 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 that's why I'm urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong."

While Democrats and government watchdog groups were dismayed by the Citizens United decision, there has been little consensus on what, if anything, opponents of the ruling can do on the legislative front to reverse its effects. But the specific issue Obama referenced Wednesday -- whether the U.S. subsidiaries of foreign-owned corporations can spend money on American election campaigns -- is all but certain to be the subject of action in Congress. Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) has said "we cannot allow foreign interests to spend millions of dollars to influence our nation's elections in ways that further their agendas at the expense of our citizens."

There is some debate within the campaign finance community over which foreign entities are already prohibited from spending on U.S. elections by existing FEC rules, and whether the Citizens United ruling really opens the floodgates on that front the way some critics claim. Regardless, Democrats openly admit that they like the politics of this issue and are eager to bring it to a vote and force Republicans -- most of whom cheered the Citizens United ruling -- to pick a side.

-- Ben Pershing


Obama takes on higher ed | 10:26 p.m.
"And 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."

This is a brief but unmistakable shot across the bow that will surely make college administrators across the country sit up straight. After years of focusing federal financial aid efforts simply on helping students afford the rising cost of tuition, the government has in recent years started putting pressure on college administrators to make more of an effort on their end to restrain cost increases. But the powerful higher education lobby has so far resisted any legislation or regulation to codify limitations on tuition increases or greater disclosure of college costs and outcomes. And in the absence of new legislation or regulations, it is quite possible that any increases in federal financial aid that the administration is able to secure will simply give colleges and universities more leeway to further raise their prices without fear of losing students.

--Alec MacGillis


"And let's tell another one million students that when they graduate, they will be required to pay only ten percent of their income on student loans, and all of their debt will be forgiven after twenty years - and forgiven after ten years if they choose a career in public service."

Given the audience Obama is addressing, it's worth asking -- which jobs would fall under the umbrella of "public service?" Would Congress pass a bill saying you can get your student loans forgiven for serving in Congress? How about president? Or education secretary?

-- Ben Pershing


Obama credits stimulus with job creation, retention | 9:38 p.m. "Because of the steps we took, there are about two million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed; 200,000 work in construction and clean energy. 300,000 are teachers and other education workers. Tens of thousands are cops, firefighters, correctional officers, and first responders. And we are on track to add another one and a half million jobs to this total by the end of the year."

There is no doubt that the hundreds of billions in stimulus money spent so far have kept thousands of public employees on the job and percolated through the economy to encourage the hiring of thousands more in the private sector. However, there is dispute about the precise numbers that the administration claims for the stimulus. Obama here is combining two different sets of numbers. The two million estimate for total jobs created or saved is the estimate produced by the macroeconomic formulas used by White House economists, using the total amount of money spent to gauge roughly how many jobs such a sum would likely produce. The figure is not far out of line with what outside economists have hazarded, but it is just an estimate. The 200,000 and 300,000 numbers for the specific types of jobs, meanwhile, is based on the actual reports that the administration has gotten back from recipients of stimulus money saying how they have used the money. Many questions have been raised about the reliability of these reports, and some economists and good-government advocates say the administration perhaps went a step too far in trying to come up with a precise job count, a nearly impossible endeavor that may have undermined the credibility of its broader effort to be transparent about how the stimulus money is being used.

--Alec MacGillis


Obama pushes energy bill | 9:34 p.m.
While the odds for passing a climate and energy bill in the Senate remain steep, President Obama offered concessions to Republicans on both offshore drilling and nuclear power Wednesday night in an effort to muster support for a cap on greenhouse gas emissions.

"I know there have been questions about whether we can afford such changes in a tough economy; and I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change," he said. "But even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future - because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy. And America must be that nation."

The president said he was committed to expanding domestic energy production, on what sounded like the GOP's terms. "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."

--Juliet Eilperin


Obama makes pivot to jobs | 9:31 p.m.
"People are out of work. They are hurting. They need our help. And I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay."

The House has already approved spending more than $150 billion on a jobs bill; the Senate is mulling a smaller package of about $80 billion that includes tax breaks for business, aid to cash-strapped state and local governments and a further expansion of the social safety net. While Democrats have yet to agree on how aggressively to pursue this initiative, it's clear that this legislation has emerged as their next big priority, a measure that holds out hope of providing a legislative victory in the absence of a health care bill.

--Lori Montgomery


Obama touts tax cuts | 9:28 p.m.
"Let me repeat: We cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95% 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. As a result, millions of Americans had more to spend on gas, and food, and other necessities, all of which helped businesses keep more workers. And we haven't raised income taxes by a single dime on a single person. Not a single dime."

Obama is correct: the administration did cut taxes for most families as part of the $787 billion stimulus package, which included more than $100 billion in "making work pay" tax cuts for lower and middle income families -- $800 for families and $400 for individuals. The reason that he has to emphasize the tax cut tonight, though, is that many people are unaware they received it, because it was spread out across people's paychecks instead of given in a single lump sum. The thinking was that this approach would make people more likely to spend the money, instead of squirreling it away. But the downside is that many taxpayers may not even be aware they got the tax cut.

Meanwhile, while there have not yet been any income tax increases passed, Obama has proposed raising income taxes on the wealthy in coming years closer to their levels under President Clinton. And he has come out for the proposal in the Senate's health care bill to tax health insurance plans above a certain threshold of value. While this would likely result in many employers shifting to lower-cost plans, some employees could see the tax passed on to them in the form of higher premiums.

--Alec MacGillis


Obama proposes tax increase on international corporations | 9:21 p.m.
"And to encourage these and other businesses to stay within our borders, it's time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs in the United States of America."

Obama refers here to his plan to raise taxes on international corporations by more than $200 billion over the next decade, a proposal that went nowhere in Congress after he laid it out last year. The idea is unlikely to win approval in an election year, either, and even some of the most liberal Democrats, such as House Ways and Means Committee chairman Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) say they would only consider such a big tax hike on business in the context of comprehensive tax reform.

--Lori Montgomery


Obama touts economic recovery | 9:17 p.m.
"And after two years of recession, the economy is growing again. Retirement funds have started to gain back some of their value. Businesses are beginning to invest again, and slowly some are starting to hire again."

The Dow Jones Industrial Average has soared more than 30 percent above the depths reached last March, but President Obama avoids mentioning how this stock market rise has enriched Wall Street traders and banks. Instead he simply mentions "retirement funds" -- the 401k plans that now form the bedrock of many Americans' post-retirement piggybanks -- have gained back "some of their value." Politically, it does not help to celebrate Wall Street gains, especially when even Americans who have 401k plans have too little money in them to enjoy a secure retirement.

--Glenn Kessler


Obama touts economic recovery | 9:17 p.m.
"One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression. So we acted - immediately and aggressively. And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed."

Officially, the recession has ended. And while the administration has absorbed much criticism for its economic stimulus package, there is wide agreement among independent analysts that the package -- now pegged at $862 billion by congressional budget analysts -- contributed mightily to the recovery. In addition, the hugely unpopular $700 billion bank bailout, enacted in the final days of the Bush administration, also appears to have helped to avert the collapse of the financial sector. And congressional budget analysts now say that effort is likely to cost taxpayers only $100 billion.

As angry as voters may be about the economy and 10 percent unemployment, there is much evidence that the U.S. government - under both Bush and Obama - did indeed avert catastrophe with its actions.

--Lori Montgomery


'We face big and difficult challenges' | 9:14 p.m.
"We face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope - what they deserve - is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics. For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds and different stories and different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared. A job that pays the bill. A chance to get ahead. Most of all, the ability to give their children a better life."

The president's sentiments are undoubtedly shared by many Americans frustrated by the partisan gridlock that has come to characterize Congress. They imply that the Republicans have been obstructionists and they have stood in almost unanimous opposition to the president's major initiatives. But that view obscures a basic fact: Democrats run Washington. Even after Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown is sworn into the Senate, the Democratic caucus will enjoy a 59-41 advantage in the Senate. They also have a 78-member edge in the House. Of course, the now-routine threat of filibuster requires 60 votes to move legislation in the Senate, but that is an advantage Democrats have enjoyed for many months. Nonetheless, much of Obama's ambitious first-year agenda is unfulfilled. Intense partisanship is not a new feature in Congress, and it is a president's job to break through it, particularly when he has such a huge advantage. Consequently, it is fair to say that the congressional Democrats are also to blame for the presidentħ legislative problems.

--Michael Fletcher


HUD's Donovan pulls 'designated survivor' duty | 9:04
Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan will serve as the Cabinet's "designated survivor," White House officials said moments before the speech.

This means Donovan will be shuttled away to an undisclosed location to assume control of the federal government in the event of a catastrophic event at the U.S. Capitol Wednesday night. (Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is in London for a meeting on battling radicalization in Yemen, and then another, on Thursday on development and security in Afghanistan.)

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. served as "designated survivor" last year and was the third attorney general in recent history to stay away from a big speech.

--Ed O'Keefe


Obama tackles earmarks | 8:47 p.m.
"I'm also calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark reform. You have trimmed some of this spending and embraced some meaningful change. But restoring the public trust demands more. . . . Tonight, I'm calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single website before there's a vote so that the American people can see how their money is being spent," Obama will say, according to excerpts.

This is a response to the general anxiety over government spending and the particular uproar over the $410 billion omnibus spending bill that Obama signed in March, a bill that had carried over from prior to his administration and that included about 8,500 earmarks -- spending for specific projects, outside normal appropriations -- worth a total of $7.7 billion. After assuming control of the House in 2006, Democrats instituted rules promising more disclosure of earmark requests, but only a minority of members are diligent about posting their requests.

Obama posted his requests as a senator from Illinois during the presidential campaign in 2007, and his administration made a show out of barring earmarks from the $787 billion stimulus package passed in February, over the objections of many House members who argued that they would have a better sense of how target money in their districts than federal and state bureaucrats who would otherwise be channeling the funds.

But he has in the past also warned against overstating the role of earmarks in driving federal spending. During one presidential debate, he responded sharply to John McCain's declaration that reducing earmarks would balance the federal budget, now at $3.5 trillion.

"Well, Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused. . . . And he's also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these kinds of requests," Obama said. "But let's be clear: Earmarks account for $18 billion in last year's budget. Senator McCain is proposing -- and this is a fundamental difference between us -- $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion."

Tonight, in seeking to rebut Republican claims that he is a big spender, Obama is playing up the role of earmarks, without the perspective he offered against McCain.

--Alec MacGillis


Though House guidelines do call on members to post their earmarks online, Obama is correct to say that not all lawmakers do so. Some members have not complied with the rules, and others do disclose their requests but scatter them all over their official Web sites or use language that is difficult to understand. So the creation of a single site containing every request written in uniform fashion would indeed be a step toward increased transparency. As for the earmarks that actually do make it into appropriations bills -- as opposed to just requests -- those are already disclosed in one place by the Appropriations Committee, in a statement that accompanies each spending bill.

-- Ben Pershing


Obama proposes stricter rules for lobbyists | 8:44 p.m.
"And that's why we've excluded lobbyists from policy-making jobs or seats on federal boards and commissions. But we cannot stop there. It's time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my Administration or Congress. And it's time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office," the president will say, according to advance excerpts.

The administration has tightened restrictions on lobbyists, barring federal officials talking to registered lobbyists about projects funded by federal stimulus money, and blocking lobbyists from working for the administration or even from serving on hundreds of little-known federal panels. But some good-government advocates say the rules, while well-intended, have limited value and unintended consequences. Some Washington power brokers skirt the rules by simply declining to register as lobbyists, even though their day to day work is often hard to distinguish from lobbying. Former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, for instance, works for a major Washington lobbying firm, Alston & Bird, but manages to technically navigate around the rules that would require him to register as a lobbyist. The declining tally of registered lobbyists ever since Congress passed lobbying reforms in 2007 suggests that many other lobbying firms have taken a similar approach, keeping as few as possible of their staff on the actual lobbyist rolls. Meanwhile, the rules have meant that the White House has had to turn away some well-regarded people who lobby on behalf of non-corporate causes, such as Human Rights Watch's Tom Malinowski.

And limiting how much lobbyists can give to candidates for federal office will not address the new dynamic created by last week's Supreme Court ruling, which would allow corporations to spend as much as they want on campaign advertisements. The ruling did not address limits on individual campaign contributions, which capped donations at $2,300 during the 2008 cycle. Even if all lobbyists are giving at the $2,300 maximum, that pales in comparison to the impact that a major corporation could have by spending millions on their own ads in a given election.

--Alec MacGillis

The way forward on health care reform? | 8:25 p.m.
"I will not walk away from these Americans. And neither should the people in this chamber," President Obama will say according to excerpts of the speech released by the White House.

Though Obama is signaling his intent to carry on with health reform, the campaign remains in tatters after last week's Republican victory in the Massachusetts Senate special election. Shell shocked senators want the house to approve the bill the Senate passed on Christmas Eve, along with a second bill with fixes that would need only 51 votes in the senate. House members are talking about dismantling the health care package and passing popular reforms, such as an end to the insurance industry's anti-trust exemption, piecemeal. Meanwhile, the white House is pondering the possibility of starting over with a scaled back bill that achieves a fraction of the measure that was so close to final passage.

Without further clarity from Obama on how to proceed, congressional Democrats have little hope of bringing the yearlong health debate to a final resolution.

-- Lori Montgomery


President Obama takes the podium on Capitol Hill tonight for his first state of the union address. Washington Post reporters who cover the president, Congress, politics and policy will be your guides to the action, offering live analysis and fact-checking starting at 8:30 p.m. ET.

State of the Union starts at 9 p.m.

By 44 Editor  |  January 27, 2010; 10:13 PM ET
Categories:  44 The Obama Presidency , Live Blog , State of the Union  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama on financial reform: Fee on big banks, consumer protection
Next: How long was that State of the Union speech?

Comments

Maybe if the healthcare bill goes through Nancy Pelosi will be able to get medical attention for the the case of really painful piles she obviously has.
The constant leaping to her feet and hysterical clapping is really distracting and now she has Joe Biden reluctantly following her.

What does she hope to obtain by it other than make herself look ridiculous, much like a teenager in love with her idol.
Get it together Nancy and stop looking like a slave.

Posted by: irish_unicorn6 | January 28, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Wrong, kurthunt! You are parroting the PROPAGANDA that was used to put a Marxist like Obama in power.

Informed Americans KNOW that the U.S. financial crisis was NOT created by Bush. It’s the Democrats and their socialist agenda and fraudulent institutions (ACORN, Fanny Mae, Freddy Mac) who are most responsible for our current financial problems.

In spite of nefarious fiscal policies initiated and advocated mostly by Democrats like Carter, we were doing OK until the Democrats gained control of Congress and pushed for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans, which are at the heart of today’s financial crisis.

Every action taken by Obama has further harmed us, and his Obamacare and cap and trade SCAMS would be the nails on the coffin of the U.S. economy.

Here’s a 2004 video of Democrats refusing to help Republicans prevent the crisis: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&feature=related

Democrats (including Obama) CREATED the crisis! See the video if you don't believe it!

Posted by: AntonioSosa | January 28, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Somehow it was left out that the President stated that all combat troops would be removed from Iraq by the end of this year. That's a big move and it will save a few billion dollars. Nobody mentions it anywhere in the paper. Why is that? That's a lot of lives and money save. Also the President was very critical of Iran and promised action against their nuclear policies.

Posted by: clairevb | January 28, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Wow, a lot of angry people here. If you make under $250,000 a year and you are a Republican, you have your head up your ass. If these Republican leaders could make you clean their toilet, they would do it. They don't care about anyone but themselves, and its this loving attitude that got us into this recession. It is not Bush's direct fault that the financial crisis happened, but certainly the administration turned a blind eye on what was going on. So, here comes someone who is trying to make a difference, for YOU, but people can't handle change. Small minds fear even small changes in their world, so big changes...It's catastrophe! Oh and I love the post from eastersurveying.You say, "this is like putting a high school dropout in charge of a major corporation" and then proceed with the worst run-on sentence in history filled with misspelled words despite a built in spell check. Maybe you should have put a high school dropout in charge of your post.

Posted by: will_ptld | January 28, 2010 6:32 AM | Report abuse

this is like puttin a high school dropout in charge of a major corporation,the guy has never had a real job,i am one of millions of small business owners,who are really hurting,and all we want is to not be taxed to death and be left the hell alone,the cap and trade will kill small business,and how long after a health care bill is passed,will it take for the gov to have a law passed where it is another payroll deduction,small business needs to be rewarded for giving people a job,a sliding scale of tax breaks,based on the number of employees,have you ever seen anyone on wellfare create a job for someone else?small business people take a risk every day,and should be rewarded,the reason you go out on a limb,is because thats where the fruit is,the gov should be in charge of defending this country,and leave everything else up to the states,Social secuity is broke,the post office is broke,welfare is broke,freddie mac is broke,how many more examples to you need to see before you relize that private business can do it better and cheaper.the bottom line is that private business has to operate in the black,because if they don't then they are out of business,and there is another one to take there place,free market cannot compete with social well fare,most new laws that are passed,are all about getting votes,its not about what is best for the country

Posted by: eastersurveying | January 28, 2010 5:33 AM | Report abuse

No one wants to go first on immigration because there's no solution that will make everyone happy. No matter what anyone does, there's going to be a lot of biased shrieking, and no one who works in political leadership wants to deal with it. This is one of those issues that drives people to frothing with selective ignorance & unrealistic ideas, much less the sheer racial hate that masquerades within these heinous arguments for "solutions" to the "problem".

Posted by: Nymous | January 28, 2010 4:35 AM | Report abuse

...and one more time, a little more elaboration from a friends book...

"Economic Schizophrenia or Moment of Transformation?

Here, at the fork in the road where conservative encounters liberal, lies the contradiction at the core of our economy. Here is the weak spot. It is liberals thinking their way is complete and conservatives thinking the same preventing either from noticing and confronting the contradiction that is seen from the perspective of the nation as a whole, that led—and will lead again if not paid attention to--to the breakdown of the economy. And as robust as is the overall history of our American economy, as much as this book should thus be thought of as a proposal for refinement upon something that is already pretty darn good, this should not lead us astray. The contradiction, unacknowledged as such, denied, leaves in the wake of that denial, a structural vulnerability in the foundation of the economy, that was ultimately behind the developments that led to the inevitable collapse we experienced almost a year ago. And it will collapse again, and again, and again, if this contradiction/structural vulnerability is not given due priority. The massive wealth we have accumulated as a nation, the political power this wealth has brought us, while both good things, should not like Narcissus looking at his own image in the water of the pond so amaze us that we can no longer confront our culture’s most serious weaknesses.

And so it makes no sense to argue, as many do, that the two party system was intentionally designed so that citizens of our one nation would need to choose between two mutually exclusive and thus contradictory positions. The founding fathers were brilliant, wise, men--they did not intentionally design a system with such inbred logical extremity such that what half of America would argue is the solution the other half would argue is precisely the problem. What has happened in our economy in this past year, I am arguing, can be most usefully looked at as a kind of schizophrenic break--that that break occurred because there is, and has been for a long time, a structural vulnerability that can be seen—again when realizing that we are indeed one nation--in the contradiction of these mutually exclusive conservative and liberal approaches to the economy.

But there is much truth, as Obama administration Chief of Staff Raum Emmanuel was recently quoted as saying, in “never letting a good crisis go to waste.” Whatever he may or may not have meant, there is indeed much hope in this contradiction. The irony is that the same conservative-liberal fork in the road is also the meeting point, the turning point, the place of integration between them. The full awareness of the contradictory nature of their positions is the beginning point of a new, deeper, more complex and thus practical model of economics—and again, that without which another collapse is inevitable."

Posted by: polepino | January 28, 2010 1:22 AM | Report abuse

people?

EVERY state of union is just BULLSHT.

obama, just like bush, and just like clinton.. LIE ABOUT HOW WONDERFUL THEY ARE.... and then CONGRESS, who are a bunch of sleaze bags that shouldn't be their to begin with... start STANDING UP AND CLAPPING...

the state of the union is the biggest pile of sht during a year.

f obama.

f congress.

now.. let's get these worthless pieces of garbage that jumped up like fags at a grease monkey contest to actually do something???

that would be PRICELESS.

definitely a kodak moment.

Posted by: AuthoritativeAuthoritarian | January 28, 2010 1:17 AM | Report abuse

Watching a late replay of the speech, I noticed Obama calling for Congress to "work for the people" and not for "personal gain", so why did dems put together a healthcare bill that taxes the entire nation but excludes Nebraska, Louisiana and the Unions? Sounds like an effort for at least two Senators and a President to gain personal power.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 28, 2010 1:05 AM | Report abuse

Wow, I can't believe so many Republicans are making negative comments. Two years ago they wanted to hang everyone who disagreed with the President. Said it was anti-American. Now we have a President who pleads with everyone to work together for America and warns them that government is not being negative. Guess he didn't look up "negative" in the dictionary or he would have seen a picture of a big elephant.

Posted by: MayorEd | January 28, 2010 1:01 AM | Report abuse

heatherczerniak,

"Did anyone notice that one whole side of the room kept standing up and applauding and the other half just sat there unimpressed?"

Yes, I did notice. It looked suspiciously like Bush's last SOTU address, only in reverse, where the Repubs cheered and the Dems sat on their hands.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 28, 2010 12:57 AM | Report abuse

State of the Union Address:

President Obama's appeal to everyone but the kitchen sink reminds me of the Bibical Ezekiel when he asked the four winds to breath life into the dried bones of the dead.

Posted by: osramirez | January 28, 2010 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Once again, the REAL issue is this:

"The founding fathers were brilliant, wise, men--they did not intentionally design a system with such inbred logical extremity such that what half of America would argue is the solution the other half would argue is precisely the problem."

Posted by: polepino | January 28, 2010 12:43 AM | Report abuse

shigiusa, our most important issue right now is to defend our country and our future -- and the future of our children and grandchildren -- from U.S. hating Marxists like Obama, and from Marxist SCAMS like Obamacare and cap and trade.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | January 27, 2010 11:55 PM | Report abuse


Never has this Nation had to endure such an Insecure Petty Arrogant Deceitful President. Barry is Weak, Defensive, Indecisive, Arrogant and shows Zero Leadership. He demeans the office he holds.

Posted by: jas7751 | January 27, 2010 11:53 PM | Report abuse

Those of You Who Hate President Obama...

Move To Canada, The U.K., Germany, France, Italy, Greece, Portugal, The Netherlands, Switzerland, Brazil, Iceland or Greenland...

My Bad, Their All [Socialist Nations]

Hahahahaha

I Bet You All Said Bush-Cheney were Genius's based on Two Tough Talking Cowards, Hiding Behind the Projection of being Tough, while those who do the Living and Dying, are sent to Sacrifice for Corporate America.

Thank You Bush-Cheney.

Thanks For Your Fiscally Sound Policies and Borrowing from Communist-Socialist China to Finance our 2 Wars and Owning Government Bonds as well as Stocks in our Major Corporations.

Thanks George and Dick for Giving Corporate Americans Tax Breaks and Tax Incentives to leave American Workers for China, India, Mexico, Canada, Russia, Viet Nam and Other Countries.

Thanks George and Dick, Thanks for Not Paying for our 2 Wars and Medi-care Advantage and Medi-Care Pert [D]

Posted by: omaarsblade | January 27, 2010 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Anyone fact checking the big guy on lobbyists?

Eric Holder, attorney general nominee, was registered to lobby until 2004 on behalf of clients including Global Crossing, a bankrupt telecommunications firm [now confirmed].
Tom Vilsack, secretary of agriculture nominee, was registered to lobby as recently as last year on behalf of the National Education Association.
William Lynn, deputy defense secretary nominee, was registered to lobby as recently as last year for defense contractor Raytheon, where he was a top executive.
William Corr, deputy health and human services secretary nominee, was registered to lobby until last year for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a non-profit that pushes to limit tobacco use.
David Hayes, deputy interior secretary nominee, was registered to lobby until 2006 for clients, including the regional utility San Diego Gas & Electric.
Mark Patterson, chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, was registered to lobby as recently as last year for financial giant Goldman Sachs.
Ron Klain, chief of staff to Vice President Joe Biden, was registered to lobby until 2005 for clients, including the Coalition for Asbestos Resolution, U.S. Airways, Airborne Express and drug-maker ImClone.
Mona Sutphen, deputy White House chief of staff, was registered to lobby for clients, including Angliss International in 2003.
Melody Barnes, domestic policy council director, lobbied in 2003 and 2004 for liberal advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the American Constitution Society and the Center for Reproductive Rights.
Cecilia Munoz, White House director of intergovernmental affairs, was a lobbyist as recently as last year for the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group.
Patrick Gaspard, White House political affairs director, was a lobbyist for the Service Employees International Union.
Michael Strautmanis, chief of staff to the president’s assistant for intergovernmental relations, lobbied for the American Association of Justice from 2001 until 2005.

Posted by: Cornell1984 | January 27, 2010 11:47 PM | Report abuse

President Obama again said he has banned torture. But his security team defies him.

U.S. SILENTLY TORTURES, IMPAIRS AMERICANS WITH CELL TOWER MICROWAVES, SAYS VETERAN JOURNALIST

• Regional Homeland Security- administered fusion centers use a nationwide microwave/laser electromagnetic radiation "directed energy" weapon system to silently torture, impair, subjugate unconstitutionally "targeted" Americans and their families -- an American genocide hiding in plain sight.

• Victims' own cell phones may be used to target them.

• How a young FBI agent's 'I believe you' gave victim the faith to go public.

For the full story:

http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves OR http://NowPublic.com/scrivener (see "stories" list).

Posted by: scrivener50 | January 27, 2010 11:44 PM | Report abuse

Obama's hollow focus on jobs is a farce. The President is still hopelessly committed to the continuation of our disastrous free trade policy, which is the root of our staggering job loss and rapid economic decline. Wall Street and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce must be mollified with his address tonight.

Obama puts at the head of his trade policy goals, that old dead horse from the Bush and Clinton Administrations of increasing our EXPORTS. Our problem is too many imports, stupid. And while someone wisely advised him to avoid mentioning the words "free trade agreement", he rather surrepticiously signaled his support to move forward with improving trade relations with Korea, Colombia, Peru, etc.

With globalization guru Larry Summers in control of economic policy and free trade ideologues like Austin Goolsby at his side, he will continue to preside over continuing erosion of our job base which all agree is at the core of our rapid economic decline. This guy is a DUD! Just as bad as Bush!

Posted by: whachmacallit | January 27, 2010 11:44 PM | Report abuse

Will we please, all of us, all of us, put our important issues first rather than fighting in not necessary ones?

Please help our president to to do his job, which is his main basic responsibility,

Let us be wise. We are loosing a lot domestically and worldwide because of shortsighted issues.

Posted by: shigiusa | January 27, 2010 11:36 PM | Report abuse

Joe "The bobble-head" Biden approved 100%

Posted by: houston123 | January 27, 2010 11:33 PM | Report abuse

In what was almost a throwaway line, Obama referred to "climate change initiatives" without specifying what any of those initiatives may be. Chances are good that they include opposition to offshore drilling for oil and gas and a complete unknown; the amount of our national resources he is willing to dedicate to preventing climate change.

While I agree that we should do all we can to clean up our air, as well as our soil, wetlands, rivers and seas, at the risk of being called a "denier," a study I've read by a scientist at Woods Hole NOAA has convinced me of two things, 1. that not "all" scientists subscribe to the theory of global warming, and 2. that, based on the study, those who do may be looking at too short a time span, i.e.,, on the past couple of centuries as evidence to support their theories while the author of this study, entitled "Are We on the Verge of a New Little Ice Age?," looks at climate changes over the past several million years for evidence to pose his question and his apparent belief that we are close to the end of an "interglacial period" of which ther have been several, typically lasting 10,000 to 12,000 years, and which have punctuated much longer, usually aound 100,000 years, glacial periods.

Posted by: woodbriar | January 27, 2010 11:33 PM | Report abuse

Joe "The bobble-head" Biden approved 100%

Posted by: houston123 | January 27, 2010 11:32 PM | Report abuse

shadow9 wrote, "There is one major difference of course. Obama actually writes the speeches that he reads from the teleprompter"


AA replied:

oh give me a friggin break. go do some research before you post such an asinine comment as that. good lord....
------------------------------------

Tell me what you consider research AA. Tuning into Glenn Beck everyday to watch him scribble nonsensical conspiracy theories on a chalkboard? President Obama writes his own speeches. You are a reality-denying fool for claiming otherwise.

Posted by: Shadow9 | January 27, 2010 11:26 PM | Report abuse

I liked the reference to Bull Run.

Posted by: camasca | January 27, 2010 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama is completely OUT OF TOUCH. He does NOT understand that we do NOT want to swallow his job-killing, economy-killing SCAMS like Obamacare and cap and trade.

Obama does NOT understand that we do NOT want him to further empower himself and government at our expense and at the expense of our children and grandchildren.

Obama does understand that his Hugo Chavez-like takeovers are disgusting to us.

Obama does understand that we do NOT believe him, that we do NOT trust him, that his policies are terrifying because socialism/Marxism is terrifying.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | January 27, 2010 11:19 PM | Report abuse

shadow9 wrote, "There is one major difference of course. Obama actually writes the speeches that he reads from the teleprompter"

---------------------

oh give me a friggin break. go do some research before you post such an asinine comment as that. good lord....

Posted by: AuthoritativeAuthoritarian | January 27, 2010 11:18 PM | Report abuse

I'm sorry, but I didn't buy a word he said! Did anyone notice that one whole side of the room kept standing up and applauding and the other half just sat there unimpressed? As much as I despise Republicans, I honestly thought the Republican response afterward was better than the long-winded pep rally. It's like the half that applauded were doing so on cue just to make Obama look good.

"I don't quit!" OK, but when are you going to get started?

Posted by: heatherczerniak | January 27, 2010 11:16 PM | Report abuse

"his speech was 71 MINUTES LONG!?!?

i didn't think a teleprompter could RUN that long"
--------------------------------------
You would think all these Obama-haters have only now discovered the amazing invention known as the teleprompter. Do yourselves a favor and youtube any one of Bush's SOTU addresses and tell me whether or not he used a teleprompter too.

There is one major difference of course. Obama actually writes the speeches that he reads from the teleprompter, while Bush had his speeches written for him by the same people who handled Sarah Palin in the 2008 campaign.

Posted by: Shadow9 | January 27, 2010 11:11 PM | Report abuse

obama declared tonight, "I don't quit".

hmmmm...

hey obama, would you reconsider if we asked really politely?

:D

Posted by: AuthoritativeAuthoritarian | January 27, 2010 11:11 PM | Report abuse

You are right, DaMan2, not only the GOP but all thinking Americans have the duty to defend our country and our future from U.S. hating Marxists like Obama and his comrades and from Marxist SCAMS like Obamacare and cap and trades.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | January 27, 2010 11:09 PM | Report abuse

President Obama touched upon this idea in parts of his speech but the following quote alludes to the political climate in the USA at this point in time to a tee:

"The founding fathers were brilliant, wise, men--they did not intentionally design a system with such inbred logical extremity such that what half of America would argue is the solution the other half would argue is precisely the problem."

Posted by: polepino | January 27, 2010 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Obama, once again, showed us that he is a narcissistic, lying, blame-pointing, underhanded, partisan, swaggering, arrogant, lip-flapping joke. His goal is to destroy our country. He has no love of it - or of Americans. Why would he want to do such a thing? He seems like a regular Joe. It's his ideology...a kid that was abandoned by both parents...who resented his white grandparents...studied with extremists...and came away with the idea that he is "THE SAVIOR"...that our Constitution just needs his interpretation and revision.

"Obama studied the Cloward-Piven Strategy of Manufactured Crisis in Political Science classes at Columbia University.

The Cloward-Piven Strategy is to overcommit government, growing it past the point of sustainability by causing crises. This, while developing an organized proletariat of dependent classes and applying them to disrupt society and revolt against American freedoms. All, to ring in the new "egalitarian" (neo-Marxist) state. That would be a big "change
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Quite a drum roll you have. Do the same research on GW if you really want dirt and figure out how such an egalitarian and worthless person HE is an still be elected (especially his interpretation of the Constitution he called "just a piece of paper ") GW is really a BAD joke !!

Posted by: RPLCO | January 27, 2010 11:07 PM | Report abuse

"The dems #1 priority in '07 when they took power, as the housing, banking, wall street, and the economy was about to crumble...was...."

Ending the war in Iraq. That is the singular issue they ran on to take back the House and Senate from the Republicans. Well, that and the fact that they didn't belong to the same party as the historically unpopular George W. Bush.

Why do you keep mentioning Roger Clemens? Was he the Secretary of Defense that was forced to resign as a result of the Dem victory in 2006?

And for the record, Wall Street and the housing market were not crumbling in Jan 2007 when Pelosi picked up the Speaker's gavel. The cracks started appearing later that summer and NO ONE on either side did anything significant about it until 2008 when Bear Stearns went under.

You mention Dodd's venality, which is a fair point. But what about all those Republican appointees who were asleep at the switch at the Fed and the SEC in 2007/2008? If you want to claim to be above the partisan fray then please assign appropriate blame to both sides, not just one. Otherwise, it sounds too much like a sanctimonious TeaPartyer who is loudly screaming "vote them all out in November", while knowing full well they plan to vote a straight Republican ticket.

Posted by: Shadow9 | January 27, 2010 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Compromising on bad policy is not good for the country. Saying 'no' to bad policy that harms the country is patriotic. The GOP has an obligation not to coooperate with this President's agenda which will harm the country and our people.

Posted by: DaMan2 | January 27, 2010 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Did the Repulican just plagiarize the President's speech?

Posted by: zippergyrl1 | January 27, 2010 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Fusion is 1 to 2 years away at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

Exxon is the world's largest corporation at 500 billion.

When fusion hits- ? Exxon stock will TANK.

The markets are HINGED to energy. Limited resources.

Fusion is an unlimited resource.

Everything changes with fusion.

Coal and oil are DEAD in the water with fusion - and fusion at Livermore runs on water from the ocean.

I no longer CARE about the financial crisis, I suspect Lehman died on oil futures getting caught at $150 a barrel contracts.

We've ALL suffered 100+ years of oil.

With fusion 1 to 2 years away ?

Why are we not funding Lawrence Livermore with even 10 billion -BEANS - and the payoff ?

We can power HUGE greenhouses to grow quality food, we can power air conditioning, we can power cars, we can power home heating, appliances, new robotics to perform tasks - ALL at ZERO cost as fusion returns MORE energy than you put in.

NEAR zero at least - so long as some yayhoo corporate greed hold on Washington doesn't get ahold of this technology.

We are about to advance Western Civilization with fusion, the future is VERY bright.

We can power large universities with fusion energy.

Why are we still living in 1910 when it's 2010.

I do not understand.

Hans Timmer of World bank points out that emerging green technologies are the only future for US.

I argue investment into fast tracking fusion at Livermore is the BEST bet we can have as a species.

High speed rail requires great energy, fusion can provide that.

Not 25 years away, 1 to 2 years.

Think about it.

What kind of world do YOU want to reach for.

Oil and Coal lobbied congress costing you pulmonary health and your children's health ?

Or REACH for fusion.

We raised a BOATLOAD of money for Haiti- how is it we can not fast track fusion at Livermore ?

This will change our lives for the better forever, and it's RIGHT around the corner.

THERE IS hope people.

Hang in there...

Clean coal is a lie - fusion gives you MORE energy OUT than in - which do YOU want ?

You can't commoditize unlimited energy resources. We are about to start living COLLECTIVELY as a species with fusion the way I see it - it's comparable to what FIRE did for civilization.

WAKE UP- and be prepared for big changes for the better.

When Exxon stock collapses when fusion is successful in 1 to 2 years ? World markets will have to adjust- FOR the better, but it will be a nightmare in the interim.

Prepare.

Tim Miltz

Posted by: MyFellowAmericans | January 27, 2010 10:59 PM | Report abuse

his speech was 71 MINUTES LONG!?!?

i didn't think a teleprompter could RUN that long!!!!

=O

Posted by: AuthoritativeAuthoritarian | January 27, 2010 10:57 PM | Report abuse

He Kicked A!! On Both Sides Of The Isle....

Now He Must Deliver and Going Forward, he Must Be as Transparent as Possible.

I'm With Him, Still.

Its been a Year, Not 3 Years, it Took 8 Years to Destroy this Nation's Economy, it will Take Years to Recover.

Lets be Patient.

Onward and Upward...America !!

Onward and Upward !!

Posted by: omaarsblade | January 27, 2010 10:56 PM | Report abuse

How do you rate President Obama's State of the Union Speech? Poll

http://www.youpolls.com/default.asp


.

Posted by: usadblake | January 27, 2010 10:55 PM | Report abuse

not4n, Democrats and Republicans are NOT the same.

The differences between Republicans and Democrats have never been greater, mainly because the Democratic party is currently controlled by “progressives” (Marxists) like Obama and his comrades. The differences have NEVER been greater:

-- Controlled by “progressives” (Marxists), Democrats have lied, manipulated, intimidated, coerced and BRIBED (at our expense) everyone who can be bribed to force us to swallow prosperity-killing, job-killing, freedom-killing scams like Obamacare and cap and trade.

-- Democrats are ashamed of the U.S. and try to lower the U.S. to the level of failed socialist countries.

-- Democrats increase the deficit, tax us more and more, destroy the economy, destroy jobs, and pretend to create mythical jobs in districts that don't even exist.

-- Democrats protect terrorists and other U.S. enemies and endanger our soldiers and Americans in general.

-- Democrats are destroying our economy, our freedoms, our future, and our country, while apologizing to the world for not doing it faster!

* Republicans, on the other hand, try to defend us from prosperity-killing, job-killing, freedom-killing scams like Obamacare and cap and trade. They did just that in the Senate.

* Republicans are PROUD of the U.S. and want to restore democracy, freedom and prosperity to the U.S.

* Republicans endeavor to achieve fiscal responsibility, improve the economy, create REAL jobs, help the U.S. become energy independent.

* Republicans help our soldiers protect Americans from terrorists and other U.S. enemies.

* Republicans defend our economy, our freedoms, our future, and our country; and DO NOT APOLOGIZE to commie dictators for doing it.

As we could see in the Senate, Republicans did NOT cave in to the lies, manipulation, intimidation, coercion and BRIBERY of Obama and his comrades. They will always have our gratitude and support as long as they defend us from U.S. hating Marxists like Obama and Marxist scams like Obamacare.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | January 27, 2010 10:54 PM | Report abuse

http://www.Allbyer.com
Hi,Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,2010 New Year's gift you ready?Here are the most popular, most stylish and avantgarde shoes,handbags,Tshirts,jacket,Tracksuitw ect...NIKE SHOX,JORDAN SHOES 1-24,AF,DUNK,SB,PUMA ,R4,NZ,OZ,T1-TL3)$35HANDBGAS(COACH,L V, DG, ED HARDY) $35TSHIRTS (POLO ,ED HARDY, LACOSTE) $16 New to Hong Kong : Winter Dress
--- NHL Jersey Woman $ 40 --- NFL Jersey $35--- NBA Jersey $ 34 --- MLB Jersey $ 35--- Jordan Six Ring_m $36 --- Air Yeezy_m $ 45--- T-Shirt_m $ 25 --- Jacket_m $ 36
--- Hoody_m $ 50 --- Manicure Set $20 ... Company launched New Year carnival as long as the purchase of up to 200, both exquisite gift, surprise here, do not miss, welcome friends from all circles to come to order..,For details, please consult
http://www.Allbyer.com
........♫
....♫
..♪
........♬

...♪......♪

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

Posted by: eyrtiuyoluerhyitertyutu | January 27, 2010 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Promises, promises, and more promises. Obviously, Plouffe is watching Obama's back again. The campaign has restarted.

Hope someone will track all the money that Obama promised to gift tonight. Will that money meet the same fate as the money in the stimulus bill?

And so tired of the Bush bashing. The Democrats have controlled Congress since 2006, and since Carter's administration, they have been the cheerleaders for the CRA, Fannie, and Freddie--the primary culprits for the mortgage meltdown.

Posted by: judithod | January 27, 2010 10:52 PM | Report abuse

iseasygoing, thank you for reminding us that it's Republicans who have NOT been manipulated and BRIBED, who have had the courage to said NO:
NO to Marxist scams like Obamacare and cap and trade
NO to higher deficits that are destroying the future of our children and grandchildren
NO to government takeovers
NO to siding with terrorists and helping them at the expense of American people
NO to having the corrupt United Nations deciding what the U.S. should and should not do
NO to Saul Alinsky's culture of lies, manipulation, intimidation, coercion, bribery, fraud, corruption and death
NO to trampling on the U.S. Constitution
NO to imitating the strategies of the Marxist thugs who are destroying Latin America
NO to all of Obama's scams that are destroying America
YES to REAL reform to improve health care
YES to fiscal and personal responsibility
YES to governments of laws rather than of men
YES to defending Americans from terrorists and other U.S. enemies
YES to respecting the U.S. Constitution
YES to energy independence
YES to freedom, including freedom OF religion (not FROM religion)
YES to patriotism
YES to prosperity

Posted by: AntonioSosa | January 27, 2010 10:49 PM | Report abuse

Anyone up for re-election that has been in office for more than two terms needs to be replaced. Whether the be Dem or Rpe's.

Posted by: not4n | January 27, 2010 10:48 PM | Report abuse

joe4150, thinking Americans are grateful to Republican Senators, who did NOT cave in to the lies, manipulation, intimidation, coercion and BRIBES from Obama and his comrades.

By their strong stand against Obama’s culture of corruption and death, our Republican Senators gave us an outstanding example of courage and integrity.

Demonized and vilified by Obama’s operatives and lemmings, patriotic and HONEST Republican Senators voted against the criminal Obamacare scam. They did NOT cave in!

Republican Senators are not perfect, but they will always have our gratitude and support as long as they defend us from U.S. hating Marxists like Obama and Marxist scams like Obamacare.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | January 27, 2010 10:46 PM | Report abuse

The President of the United States of America came out and said what needed to be said that we need to do what needs to be done. Washington needs to change its ways. The republican party of NO needs to stop saying no to the American people and do the job of the people. I hope they do that. It is time for many of the above to stop sipping the tea of hate and mistrust, to stop sipping the tea of hate mistrust and anti Americanism. It's time for the republicans to wake up and smell the coffee. We have an economy to fix and two wars to win and a neighbor to help, it is time for cynicism to end.

Posted by: iseasygoing | January 27, 2010 10:43 PM | Report abuse

Notice how McDonnell has a yellow top right and black top left, but all in the laughing crowd are fat, white, old.

Posted by: washingtonpost31 | January 27, 2010 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Obama, once again, showed us that he is a narcissistic, lying, blame-pointing, underhanded, partisan, swaggering, arrogant, lip-flapping joke. His goal is to destroy our country. He has no love of it - or of Americans. Why would he want to do such a thing? He seems like a regular Joe. It's his ideology...a kid that was abandoned by both parents...who resented his white grandparents...studied with extremists...and came away with the idea that he is "THE SAVIOR"...that our Constitution just needs his interpretation and revision.

"Obama studied the Cloward-Piven Strategy of Manufactured Crisis in Political Science classes at Columbia University.

The Cloward-Piven Strategy is to overcommit government, growing it past the point of sustainability by causing crises. This, while developing an organized proletariat of dependent classes and applying them to disrupt society and revolt against American freedoms. All, to ring in the new "egalitarian" (neo-Marxist) state. That would be a big "change."

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaEducation.htm

It sounds radical. But, hey - you heard him. You've seen him this past year. We've all lived out the consequences of his decisions...and now our children and grandchildren will be - unless we stop this dimestore politician.

Posted by: easttxisfreaky | January 27, 2010 10:41 PM | Report abuse

>

The dems #1 priority in '07 when they took power, as the housing, banking, wall street, and the economy was about to crumble...was Roger Clemons. Please tell me you don't think they have any responsibility?

Taking bribes from Countrywide (Dodd, Conrad) instead of overseeing a crumbling housing market is not leadership. Protecting lawyers, pharma, insurance companies, labor unions, etc with backroom deals is not leadership.

Posted by: Tostitos | January 27, 2010 10:40 PM | Report abuse

actually.. i'm thinking the presidential TELEPROMPTER is the LIAR.

obama doesn't have a brain. he just reads what it tells him to.

pretty weird, huh?

Posted by: AuthoritativeAuthoritarian | January 27, 2010 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Emulating his comrades Hugo Chavez and the rest of the Marxist thugs who are destroying Latin America, Obama continues his strategy of lies, manipulation, intimidation and coercion to shove MARXIST SCAMS down our throats.

He has not given up in forcing his Obamacare and cap and trade SCAMS on us!

Fortunately, most Americans have NOT been dumbed down! Most Americans are NOT sheeple! Most Americans are ready to defend their FREEDOM and the freedom of their children and grandchildren from the abomination of Obama's criminal scams and socialism/Marxism.

Posted by: AntonioSosa | January 27, 2010 10:38 PM | Report abuse

So,the best most honest summary of Der Leader Barack Hussein Obama's Failed Joke
of a State of the Union Address is this:

Obama reads teleprompter = Pack Of Lies!

Posted by: redheadclaudine | January 27, 2010 10:37 PM | Report abuse

the headline reads, "Obama's claim that "we are joined by allies and partners" does not mention that the contributions from those allies have fallen far short of expectations."

-------------------------

why? my guess is because obama is a FRAUD, and a LYING sack of SHT.

but then.. that's only my opinion. your mileage may vary.


Posted by: AuthoritativeAuthoritarian | January 27, 2010 10:31 PM | Report abuse

Now Axlerod is whining about the Republicans not cooperating with the Democrats on anything. Apparently Axlerod slept through the 2000-2006 period when the Dems conducted the same obstructionist tactics that they are accusing the Republicans of doing now.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 10:29 PM | Report abuse

good speech. dealt with a number of tough issues and didn't shy away from anything. it's refreshing to have a president dealing with these issues rather than running us into the ground.

Posted by: dcresident12 | January 27, 2010 10:28 PM | Report abuse

Frozen at what? Will the budget be adjusted back to '08 levels? Or will this merely lock in all the increases?

Posted by: chickster | January 27, 2010 10:28 PM | Report abuse

Well he said we gave the banks money and now its time for them to give it back - I wonder if he plans on doing the same with the UAW? Especially since the banks he wants to tax extra have already paid back what they got...

Posted by: spott518 | January 27, 2010 10:24 PM | Report abuse

Now he's moved on to Haiti, but I still have to ask, Why are all of these politicians and celebrities only concerned with suffering in Haiti after the earthquake, when it has been going on there for the past 20 years, and it is only when there is a major news story (an earthquake) and the media is on the scene, that these people decide it is time to become humanitarians?

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Why does Pelosi always look like she is wetting her pants with glee when around POTUS? She looks like a 3rd grader at her first meeting with anyone of authority.

Posted by: not4n | January 27, 2010 10:21 PM | Report abuse

I've discovered the Obama tic. I'm listening while doing other things and a persistent click every time the President pauses started to bug me. It's because he keeps clasping his hands and putting them down on the podium. And now it's driving me nuts.

Posted by: auntiemare | January 27, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

>

Both sides are idots. Hard not to blame Bush and repubs since they controlled everything from 2000-2006. But what did the dems do when they got control? Red flags on housing, leverage on wall street, economy, budget...? No, they investigated Roger Clemons and put it on TV. Oil, at 50 when they took control went to 150 just 18 months later. Gas prices when Obama was elcected? $1.80. Today, $2.80 Those of you who blindly defend either party are part of what is wrong with this country. Both parties are power and ideology hungry.....and it hurts this country. Let's get rid of all of them.

Posted by: Tostitos | January 27, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

What a sick joke this man continues to be on the country that believed his misleading words and voted him into office. He's all talk and no positive action for the country. He's all promises and no legitimate follow-through. Many of his statements are tantamount to falsehoods that the traditional media refuse to challenge.

Posted by: DoTheRightThing | January 27, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

"Is biden nodding in agreement or falling asleep?"

BOTH.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Is biden nodding in agreement or falling asleep?

Posted by: spott518 | January 27, 2010 10:18 PM | Report abuse

Now Obama is claiming that he's gone from a "bystander to an advocate in the fight against climate chgange". Someone please tell this moron that the Climate Change hoax has been exposed, by the e-mails from East Anglia and others around the world. Even algore has been totally discredited. Obama is still hanging on to the fantasy. Obama claims that he has a department prosecuting human rights violations, when is he going to go after the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation, and Janet Incompetano for her false slander of veterans?

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 10:15 PM | Report abuse

A surprisingly good speech. And lest anyone say, "yeah he's a great talker but he can't govern", I've long believed that if you can't *say* a thing, you don't *understand* it.

President Obama understands a great deal.

The speech is too long.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | January 27, 2010 10:14 PM | Report abuse

THe greatest challenge we face is three more years of this imbecile.

God, what a mistake this country made in November 2008!

Posted by: DCer1 | January 27, 2010 10:14 PM | Report abuse

This is a President who has fulfilled few if any of of his campaign promises. So what does he do? Doubles down on his promises.

Does he think we are stupid?

Posted by: theduke89 | January 27, 2010 10:13 PM | Report abuse

President Obama has no class. He lies and slanders with a glib tongue, damning a man so much greater than himself that it makes it difficult to listen to him. Obama is a communitee organizer, he is not a polished gentleman of class and dignity and it shows. George W. Bush is such a man of class, graciousness and digniity and I miss the gentile manner in which he addressed the country.

Obama still does not get it. He figures that he and his progressive buddies know better than anyone else. He stands there tonight insulting the Republicans publicly like some junior manager at 7-ll on nightshift. Ugh! Disgusting, indeed.

He wants cooperation from the Republicans, but intends to give no quarter on his side. Obama believes that cooperation means capitulation to his side of the issue. That is no the way to 'lead' Obama, that is the mindset of a petty dictator. No-one in America is buying it, never have, never will. You will not pervail. You see, progressives consist of only 20% of this country and this economy. Damned little to think they can lead the rest of the country around by the nose, it just won't happen. Dream on, but one must awake in the morning and smell the coffee. It is usually at this time that the cobwebs clear from the head and the mind is free to think clearly. Mr. President, I do hope you wake up and soon. You are too young, too inexperienced, too ill-prepared to run a country as great as this nation. You are bringing great harm to our shores, we pray for you.

Posted by: prossers7 | January 27, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse


The moment when the camera pans over to Harry Reid's YAWWWN about 3 minutes into the speech sums up this whole thing-----


YAPPPP, YAPPPPP, YAPPPPPPPPPPP

More Talk, No Action---


We will believe it when we SEEEEEE ITTTT.

Posted by: misssymoto | January 27, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Republicans deride Obama for saying "It's Bush's fault." But you know what, he's right, it IS Bush's fault.... and Reagan's and Republicans at large... for the past thirty years.

Remember, Obama's been in office for one year. This mess is three decades in the making. He's not a magician, he's not the Messiah - he never said he was - the Republican said that.

The truth hurts.

Posted by: kurthunt | January 27, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Where does this guy think he is, in a beginning college speech class, trying to impress the underclassmen andwomen? What an arrogant jerk. This guy is such a smart aleck - and the Hypocrats seems to be eating up. Well, what can you expect? They've accomplished absolutely NOTHING this past year. Anyone foolish enough to believe anything he or she hears tonight deserves this jerk!

Posted by: georges2 | January 27, 2010 10:10 PM | Report abuse

This speech is strengthening my resolve to oppose the nonsense put forward in this speech. Now he's not blaming Bush, he's taking credit for Bush's victory in iraq. It's too bad he things all Americans are as unintelligent as he is.

Posted by: spott518 | January 27, 2010 10:07 PM | Report abuse

A lot of the same promises as last year. He must think Americans are really stupid. Still refuses to take any responsibility for anything. He has no clue what leadership really means because he has never done it. It is a lot easier to attack others than to lead Americans.

Unsure healthcare costs, Cap & trade, increasing taxes, high debt, anti-business rhetoric, more regulations, etc aren't what we need to stimulate an economy.

Posted by: Tostitos | January 27, 2010 10:05 PM | Report abuse

Obama said during the campaign that he would veto earmarks, now he's asking Congress to slow down on the very earmarks he falsely claimed he would veto. Obama is the man who has been in campaign mode since he entered the Oval office, tonight he says that there is too much campaigning in DC! He did get it correct that the Dems have the largest majority in decades. Too bad they still haven't done anything with their majority. Obama, tha man who has been running around the world telling everyone how screwed up we are as a country, now talks tough about national security. What a joke.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 10:05 PM | Report abuse

"He seems to forget that under Bush the economy did great for 6 years, and then really dropped when the democrats took congress."
-----------------------------------------
Another hilarious post. The economy did great in 2001-2002? Really, that's news. And what was the amount of net job creation during Bush's first term? As for his second term, have you heard yet about this thing called the housing market bubble that nearly brought the global financial system to a halt in late 2008? Are you saying the bubble was entirely created from Nov 2006 onwards? How exactly did those Democratic Congressmen create that bubble again? I'd love to hear an explanation.

p.s. you don't by any chance watch Sean Hannity on a regular basis, do you?

Posted by: Shadow9 | January 27, 2010 10:03 PM | Report abuse

I had to laugh at the Post's headline:

"there is wide agreement among independent analysts that the package contributed mightily to the recovery."

But they don't explain which independent analysts, and... *WHAT* recovery.

I guess the partisan Post thinks if they say it often enough, people will believe it.

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | January 27, 2010 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Typical bad speech ~

He blames his audience. He blames Bush. He blames the kale in his spinach soup.

After more than a year it's all his fault.

BTW, as long as the Democrats keep the locks on the doors of the committee rooms changed so Republicans can't get in to the meetings, it will be real difficult for the Republicans to deal with them.

The principles of leadership require that the Democrats lead even if they don't want to.

It's just a damned shame for them that life is too tough, but it is, and we're not going to get any improvement as long as the Democrats keep blaming everything on Bush.

Posted by: muawiyah | January 27, 2010 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Standing O on that last dig to the GOP. They were instrumental in creating this mess and they've done nothing to relieve it. Obama is right they don't want to help they're own workforce and all citizens except the wealthy (that would be them).

I love Obama. Though I can hear the right wing tearing him a new one. I think he's right in everything he's said. At least the GOP is being cordial mostly.

He's right about the supreme court decision and who was responsible to seeding the court with activist conservative judges?

I'm reveling in the silence and dourness of the republicans.

There's some nasty people posting here. You're either racist or evil to the core, not sure which probably both and gun owners too.

Posted by: davidbronx | January 27, 2010 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Standing O on that last dig to the GOP. They were instrumental in creating this mess and they've done nothing to relieve it. Obama is right they don't want to help they're own workforce and all citizens except the wealthy (that would be them).

I love Obama. Though I can hear the right wing tearing him a new one. I think he's right in everything he's said. At least the GOP is being cordial mostly.

He's right about the supreme court decision and who was responsible to seeding the court with activist conservative judges?

I'm reveling in the silence and dourness of the republicans.

There's some nasty people posting here. You're either racist or evil to the core, not sure which probably both and gun owners too.

Posted by: davidbronx | January 27, 2010 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Standing O on that last dig to the GOP. They were instrumental in creating this mess and they've done nothing to relieve it. Obama is right they don't want to help they're own workforce and all citizens except the wealthy (that would be them).

I love Obama. Though I can hear the right wing tearing him a new one. I think he's right in everything he's said. At least the GOP is being cordial mostly.

He's right about the supreme court decision and who was responsible to seeding the court with activist conservative judges?

I'm reveling in the silence and dourness of the republicans.

There's some nasty people posting here. You're either racist or evil to the core, not sure which probably both and gun owners too.

Posted by: davidbronx | January 27, 2010 10:00 PM | Report abuse

I am appalled at the Republican members of this Congress!! NEVER in 50 years have I seen such unified negativism!! Never have seen a group of people who refuse to compromise on ANYTHING! How could ANYONE vote for any Republicans when all they can do is say no to everything the President proposes? How could ANYONE vote for Republicans when they refuse to applaud ANYTHING the President of the United States says in a State of the Union speech? Is this what our country has come to?

Posted by: joe4150 | January 27, 2010 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Ok, so now he's blaming the supreme court for protecting free speech - you know - the type of speech that would have kept him from becoming president.

Posted by: spott518 | January 27, 2010 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Yeah - why didn't lincoln post his visitors online? What's up with that?

Posted by: spott518 | January 27, 2010 9:58 PM | Report abuse

"a lot of us have 401k's that are 101k's thanks to your Administration and BS."

------------------------------------
Then you must be the world's most godawful retail investor my friend. 1) Either you pulled your money out when the markets first imploded in 2008 during the Bush Presidency and your 401k is now at the same value it was when Obama become President. 2) Or you kept your money in and you have realized a 30%-40% gain since the time Obama become President in Jan 2009.

How did your 401k manage to lose value in 2009??? Please tell us what genuis investment decisions you made for that to have happened.

Posted by: Shadow9 | January 27, 2010 9:57 PM | Report abuse

He seems to forget that under Bush the economy did great for 6 years, and then really dropped when the democrats took congress.

Posted by: spott518 | January 27, 2010 9:56 PM | Report abuse

It is truely sad watching Obama wallow so deeply in over his head. Viewing such total incompetence is really sad to see.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 9:56 PM | Report abuse

The bipartisan fiscal commission is a way to get republican fingerprints on a disasterous democratic proposal. 10 democrats and 8 republicans disagree, but it's still "bipartisan".

Posted by: spott518 | January 27, 2010 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Boy the Republicans are such a dour old lot. Have they yet tried to work with the Democrats. No, mostly they sit and stew that the lost the last election. Body language is everything and they the Republicans are sitting their like children who just lost a ball game.

His speech has been great, his points about health and education are valid. We need a healthy educated workforce but for some reason the conservatives and Republicans in this country hate to help the workforce they just like to exploit us and some of us are smart enough to see it.

He shored up the economy that the GOP should take a bit of responsibility for 8 years of a GOP regime and 6 years of congress and they got nothing done to benefit us other sending our kids to war needlessly.

Now that the Republicans gave us the worst deficit in our history they want to get all prudent on our butts. Yeah right. Hypocrites.

Obama is good in my book and the rest of you can do what we did during the Reign of King George and Prince Dick.

Posted by: davidbronx | January 27, 2010 9:53 PM | Report abuse

What a liar - it's hard to keep listening to this narcisstic buffoon.

Posted by: spott518 | January 27, 2010 9:52 PM | Report abuse

What a liar - it's hard to keep listening to this narcisstic buffoon.

Posted by: spott518 | January 27, 2010 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Who believes this guy?

Posted by: logicprevails | January 27, 2010 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Now obama is falling back on his "It's Bush's fault" excuse.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Is Biden really just a smiling dope, or does he just naturally look that way?

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Curious, Obama now says he favors retirement savings accounts, but when he was running for office he was dead set against them. Bush championed these accounts and the Dems howled because it would undermine Social Security. But now that Obama says he like the idea, all of a sudden the Dems like Bush's/Obamas idea. More of Barry's BS.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Yes, we do. We face long and difficult challenges. It's a long time until 2010 and it's a difficult challenge for me to keep from vomiting just knowing that this joker is the President of the United States.

Posted by: georges2 | January 27, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

i can't stand watching state of the unions.

why?

well....

1) the president LIES ABOUT EVERYTHING

and

2) i can't stand watching the worthless SUCK UP congress as they stand and applaud everything..

and oh yea..

these past few years?

3) watching that FRAUD nancy "fancy panties" pelosi, as she sits there smiling and humming along with her new joni butterfly.

this gov't sucks.

Posted by: AuthoritativeAuthoritarian | January 27, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

I really have to wonder, why Obamas state of the union speech is in direct opposition to all of the policies he has been pushing all year? It seems that he is trying appear to move to the center in preparation to con the public, leading up to the mid term elections. The question now, is whether or not the people will be stupid enought to buy into his BS.

Posted by: jonweiss1 | January 27, 2010 9:42 PM | Report abuse

"We face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope - what they deserve - is for all of us..."

Who's "We," Kimosabe?

Cut welfare, cut-out the 18 month "extended unemployment benefits," cut out the spending of "Obama cash from Obama's stash" stimulus money, go after Franklin Raines, AIG, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, GM and Chrysler for the TARP money and quit beating-up on bankers.

A lot of us have 401k's that are 101k's thanks to your Administration and BS.

Time for government to go on a diet and it starts in the White House!

Posted by: Computer_Forensics_Expert_Computer_Expert_Witness | January 27, 2010 9:41 PM | Report abuse

thanks to Obama, Pelosi and Reid we have truly become a banana republic. Isn't political correctness great!!!

Posted by: djrhood | January 27, 2010 9:39 PM | Report abuse


Barry Soetoro Smoke and Mirrors. His capacity of Deceit & Arrogance never seizes to amaze.

Posted by: jas7751 | January 27, 2010 9:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama obviously cannot completely abandon health care tonight, but it's a savvy move in making it more a broad goal of his entire term rather than the most important issue to tackle immediately. It must be about jobs, jobs, jobs.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | January 27, 2010 9:27 PM | Report abuse

He said the unemployed "don't understand", but, alas, they do understand and they blame him, not Wall Street, particularly if they have a 401(k) that's dropped into the dumper.

They know who is responsible, and who has been playing with himself for over a year avoiding the economy and employment.

Now he's going to try a legislative trick that'll leave the Democrats eternally bickering over creating Green Jobs, or creating Government Jobs, or creating Shovel Ready jobs, or creating........

Hey, I don't need to tell people here what the Democrats will be doing as their short attention spans prevent them thinking beyond the days' business, or sometimes lunch.

Posted by: muawiyah | January 27, 2010 9:26 PM | Report abuse


This Administration's disastrous economic policy is either intentionally designed to weaken America or simply ignorant runaway Liberalism predictably imploding. Knowing who Barry is (or at least as much as is known) and his Shadow Govt of Communist Czars one has to wonder which it is.

Posted by: jas7751 | January 27, 2010 9:19 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2010 The Washington Post Company