State of the Union

All I can say about tonight's State of the Union Address is........we NEED, and I mean, REALLY NEED, a woman for President! Just like old Forest Gump said, "And that's all I have to say about that."
 

Jackie22 said:
Daily Beast: SOTU Sneak Peek: Obama to Hit Citizens United

Reportedly, another new initiative Obama is going to be announcing at tonight’s speech will attempt to rein in secret campaign money.

Many of President Obama’s policy priorities have been showcased, but he’s surely kept a few surprises to unveil in his State of the Union address Tuesday evening. Among them, sources say, is a major push to rein in the flood of secret money capturing our democracy and making a mockery of one-person, one-vote. With his approval rating now nudging 50 percent, Obama may be in the midst of a fourth-quarter comeback as he reclaims the high ground on his campaign promises and seeks to restore his credentials as an activist outsider shaking up Washington.

It was five SOTUs ago when Obama said the Supreme Court in its Citizens United ruling “reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign companies—to spend without limits in our elections.” Cameras zeroed in on Justice Samuel Alito, seated directly in front of Obama in the House Chamber, mouthing the word “wrong.” Alito had voted with the majority the previous week in the Court’s 5-4 decision.

Thursday is the fifth anniversary of Citizens United, and reformers have been told that the president may announce executive action in his SOTU speech that would require businesses contracting with the government to disclose political contributions after contracts have been awarded. This would ensure that the contracting process is blind, but also give the public (and the media) the information needed to connect the dots to look for backroom deals or conflicts of interest.

This should be a no-brainer for anyone wondering how the wheels get greased for government contracts, and it will be a significant breakthrough in exposing the influence of campaign contributions whether or not Obama announces executive action in the SOTU itself, or in the days following. Republicans once supported disclosure, but since Citizens United opened up more vehicles for money given anonymously, the GOP has taken a hands-off approach. Democrats, who once opposed disclosure as not going far enough, are now its biggest advocates.



Three guesses who just happens to have multi-million dollar contracts with the Department of Defense? The federal-government-hating Koch Brothers, that's who! They have tens of millions of dollars in defense contracts with the federal government, and so does Rushie-boy Limbaugh. He has a federal government contract that allows his hate-fest-show to be broadcast on the American Forces Network.


Hee hee hee........:clap:
Click to expand...

You are forgetting to tell about millionaires like Sorros, and others, that dump money on to the Democrat party stuff just like you claim the Koch's dump money on the Republicans. Also for got to tell about GE, a major manufacturer, that somehow escapes from paying much at all into taxes but are one of the Democrats big supporters.

Money goes both ways and should be controlled, contained, publicized, in order to put all this crap going around into proper perspective. Maybe Obama has a good money plan. Worth a listen tonight.
 

We don't have anything like this event over here unless you include the Governor General (or the Queen if she is in the country which she usually isn't) reading a set speech at the opening of parliament each year. The speech is written by the government of the day to outline their agenda for legislation.

There is very little pomp and only polite applause. It passes unnoticed by the populace.

However, we do get news of the State of the Union address. ABC radio this morning said that most of it was already leaked, that it was ambitious for an end of term president and would most likely provoke Pavlovian rage from the Republicans.

Do report in detail all that happens for us out-of-towners.
 
Dame Warrigal said:
We don't have anything like this event over here unless you include the Governor General (or the Queen if she is in the country which she usually isn't) reading a set speech at the opening of parliament each year. The speech is written by the government of the day to outline their agenda for legislation.

There is very little pomp and only polite applause. It passes unnoticed by the populace.

However, we do get news of the State of the Union address. ABC radio this morning said that most of it was already leaked, that it was ambitious for an end of term president and would most likely provoke Pavlovian rage from the Republicans.

Do report in detail all that happens for us out-of-towners.
Click to expand...

Be assured you'll hear a lot about it tomorrow. But you should consider watching at least a portion on video, because it's really very entertaining as pure political theater. You have Michelle Obama in the audience sitting next to several "special guests", you have John Boehner the Republican House Speaker sitting immediately behind the President as he speaks, you have countless applause lines some of which even the Republicans feel obliged to stand up for. Sure the Brits do ceremony better, but this is as good as it gets here and well worth watching.
 
Also learned just today, the Kochs are not Republicans as some claim. They really are considered to be Libertarians. What ever that may mean. Something I guess I will have to learn as I have heard of and met others that say they are Libertarians.
 
That means that they believe that they should be totally unfettered in their business dealings.
And possibly in their private lives as well.

Never mind what others say about them. How do they identify themselves?
 
Dame Warrigal said:
That means that they believe that they should be totally unfettered in their business dealings.
And possibly in their private lives as well.

Never mind what others say about them. How do they identify themselves?
Click to expand...

True. And these guys in particular don't want you to be able to pin a label on them period as they don't want a money trail politically, but, fortunately there is a trail and most of it coincides with the conservatives and republican party ideas. From what I've gathered, they don't really call themselves Libertarians any more than Republicans they've kept close company with and fund what is called think tanks of those parties.

http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-...-gop-koch-brothers-change-tactics-not-beliefs
 
Thanks for those inputs on the Libertarians. I guess I would agree in general. We have far too much government now and for some we need more. For me we need to go back at least 50 years and maybe further and have far less federal government and allow the states to handle their own problems. Big government will just squander more money for their very own wages, benefits, facilities, and less of the tax money is left for the benefits of the citizens and taxed folks.

Right now, rather than just keeping squeezing more taxes from the wealthy, we should cut down lots of the not needed benefits and also start taxing among those over 50% of the people that are not taxed. I would think a small tax on even the lowest income folks would help make it clear that when taking a so called benefit, all would know where some fo that money came from. Sure different from the current government that wants to tax the very rich so all the rest of us can sit back and live off the benefits plans. Soon the US will be just as poor as those European countries where over 20% or 30% do not work and live off the hand outs. The US is far better than that and we should resist all this government meddling with our lives. We are stuck right now with on going inflation that is rapidly eating away our ability too live frugally. Our economy should be stopped where it is and allow cost of living and wages to settle into a more stable position. Demanding much larger wages so the low income can afford to buy $4 hamburgers in the budget price Mac's and other low budget eating places. Maybe lowering the taxes would be a good start.
 
We have a libertarian senator, David Leyonhjelm, elected in 2013.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Leyonhjelm

Here is a summary of his political views

Leyonhjelm has been described as a "libertarian purist" who wants government "wound back to a minimal role in society".[SUP][32][/SUP]

In interviews, he has stated that he was initially drawn towards socialism, but turned away from it after travelling to socialist countries in Africa and Eastern Europe, and was later influenced by the writings of economist Milton Friedman.[SUP][12][/SUP][SUP][33][/SUP]

Along with Bob Day of the Family First Party, who was also elected to the Senate at the 2013 election, Leyonhjelm has been compared to Ron Paul, a former U.S. Representative and noted libertarian.

Their election has been associated with a rise in the popularity of libertarian and classical liberal ideas in Australia, with one commentator suggesting his election might "spark a libertarian renaissance [in Australia]".[SUP][33][/SUP][SUP][34][/SUP][SUP][35][/SUP]

Leyonhjelm and Day have announced their intention to vote as a bloc in the Senate on economic issues, but will vote separately on social issues.[SUP][36][/SUP]
Click to expand...

Leyonhjelm tends to vote with our conservative government on economic issues if they are clear cut. He will vote against then if any part of a bill offends his economic libertarianism views. He is against regulation of people's personal lives in that he votes for legalised abortion, euthanasia, same sex marriage etc. This is where he differs from the above mentioned Family First Party's Bob Day who is essentially of the Christian right wing. Day would probably vote for family income support, Leyonhjelm would probably reject it. Day wouldn't have a bar of abortion, same sex marriage etc.
 
Just a quick check on the Koch brothers leads me to believe that they are indeed libertarians rather than either Republicans or Democrats

The Koch brothers each made $10 million grants to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to fight the Bush administration over the PATRIOT Act.[SUP][55][/SUP][SUP][56][/SUP] According to Reason magazine that $20 million is "substantially more than the Kochs have contributed to all political candidates combined for at least the last 15 years."[SUP][56][/SUP]
Click to expand...

Their donations to educational institutions also a commitment to promotion of unfettered free enterprise.

Educational grants[edit]

The Charles Koch Foundation (and in the case of Kansas schools, the Fred and Mary Koch Foundation) provides grants to nearly 270 U.S. colleges and universities for "projects that explore how the principles of free enterprise and classical liberalism promote a more peaceful and prosperous society".[SUP][57]
[/SUP]
In 2011, the Charles G. Koch foundation made a grant of $1.5 million to Florida State University (FSU) in exchange for allowing the foundation, via an advisory committee,[SUP][58][/SUP] to approve hiring decisions in the university's economics department for a program that promotes "political economy and free enterprise". The foundation also sought to have the university create a class called Market Ethics: The Vices, Virtues, and Values of Capitalism. Required[SUP][dubious– discuss][/SUP] reading for the class would include books by Ayn Rand.[SUP][59][/SUP][SUP][60][/SUP] The FSU student senate introduced a resolution protesting the Koch's "undue influence on academics as established by the current agreement between the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation and the FSU Economics department."[SUP][61][/SUP]

In 2014, the brothers made a $25 million grant to the United ***** College Fund, amid unusual publicity.[SUP][62][/SUP] After the fund's president also appeared at a summit held by the brothers, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, a major labor union, ended its support for the fund in protest.[SUP][63][/SUP]
Click to expand...

Libertarian is an appropriate label which I think they would be proud to wear.
 
It's on ABC News 24 too.
Our PM's ear must be very red as he talks about efforts to combat climate change.

What's wrong with the fellow behind him on his left?
Toothache or piles?
 
Dame Warrigal said:
It's on ABC News 24 too.
Our PM's ear must be very red as he talks about efforts to combat climate change.

What's wrong with the fellow behind him on his left?
Toothache or piles?
Click to expand...

lol!! That's John Boehner..Speaker of the House.. and a Republican leader.. Yeah.. he looks like he's been sucking lemons... Usually he's just drunk.
 
Dame Warrigal said:
Just a quick check on the Koch brothers leads me to believe that they are indeed libertarians rather than either Republicans or Democrats



Their donations to educational institutions also a commitment to promotion of unfettered free enterprise.



Libertarian is an appropriate label which I think they would be proud to wear.
Click to expand...

Ah... Libertarian.... Nice rhetoric... BUT it doesn't work.. Check it out... There has NEVER been a Libertarian government... ANYWHERE.. It would result in pure anarchy. I suppose the closest to it would be Somalia. Need I say more?

tb-somali-paradise-3.jpg
 
Two years and Obama is gone. Much of what he calls success has been done in his self defined special groups outside of the Congress reaches. Technically legal but not the way our government is supposed to work. Looks like we may have Hillary on the liberal side and still no real idea on the conservative side. Looking forward to some changes, no matter which way it goes.
 
I thought SOTU 2015 was one of his best speeches. Mr. Obama knows his prospects of getting Congress to agree are less than zero; Republicans dismissed his ideas before he even voiced them. That does not make them irrelevant. Mr. Obama was speaking not just to the present but to the future, to the 2016 presidential elections and even beyond. By simply raising the plight of the middle class (and, looming behind it, the larger issue of economic inequality), he has firmly inserted issues of economic fairness into the political debate. Hillary Rodham Clinton or whomever the Democrats nominate cannot ignore them now.
 
Josiah09 said:
I thought SOTU 2015 was one of his best speeches. Mr. Obama knows his prospects of getting Congress to agree are less than zero; Republicans dismissed his ideas before he even voiced them. That does not make them irrelevant. Mr. Obama was speaking not just to the present but to the future, to the 2016 presidential elections and even beyond. By simply raising the plight of the middle class (and, looming behind it, the larger issue of economic inequality), he has firmly inserted issues of economic fairness into the political debate. Hillary Rodham Clinton or whomever the Democrats nominate cannot ignore them now.
Click to expand...

Very true.. NO ONE... not even the POTUS, I'm afraid, believes this Congress will go along with any of this... but they dismiss this at their own peril. All that was outlined is VERY popular with the general electorate.. not just Democrats, but many middle class republicans and Independents. I believe I have stated in the past.. now that the GOP has the power in the House AND the Senate.. they need to show the American people how they will make the average persons life better.. They can continue to propose destructive policy.. but America is watching. You are correct.. all the issues will be debated in the 2016 campaign. I'm interested to see how the GOP handles this.. they have to placate their Big Money donors who are against just about all of the proposals made... AND they have to convince the average American to vote for them... good luck with that..

IN addition to the Presidential race, there are 24 Republican Senate seats up for grabs in 2016... many of them in states that Obama won in 2012. I believe the General Election in 2016 is going to look MUCH different that the 2014 midterm.
 
My SIL called us last night asking if we were going to watch the SOTU and we said "yes". Then, she went on to tell me, what she thinks, is the bad things Obama wants to do and how he is going to start WWIII. I said "what the heck are you talking about??". Then, she went on to say, "I'm scared for my grandchildren's future." Then, I said, "Gee, what was going on in the world when you were your grandkids age......Korea War was going on and then came Viet Nam when you were in your early 20's!" She didn't have a "come back" answer to that!

I told her, "whatever Obama plans on doing, neither you or I are going to stop it, so why worry so much about it?" Then, I went on to tell her, "Just remember, there is more that Obama at the Conference Table. There are General's and Admiral's there as well, giving their military thoughts to him."

Actually, I think she is worried about her granddaughter's boyfriend, who just got a Promise Ring from him, that he will have to go to war.......if/when that happens. He is in the Army and graduated from Basic Training a few months ago. Thing is, whenever a person enlists in the military, he is NOT guaranteed that he won't end up going into battle for any kind of conflict that might happen.

Basically, I told my SIL.........CHILL OUT!!
 
Is she forgetting that OBAMA didn't start the war in the Middle East? AND that he voted AGAINST going into Iraq when he was a US Senator.. and that he has had to clean up Bushes and Cheney's mess for the last 6 years? He is hardly a Hawk... If Romney had been elected we would now be at war with Iran.. See what a good job the Right Wing Echo Chamber has done in brainwashing folks..?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top