• Facebook
  • Twitter
AdLib On January - 27 - 2010

Please join us here tonight for live blogging during President Obama’s State of the Union address.

Until then, please feel free to have an open discussion on Pres. Obama, the upcoming speech and what you think will happen in the upcoming year

Here is how AP previews the speech:

The president will devote about two-thirds of the 9 p.m. EST speech to the economy, emphasizing his ideas, some new but mostly old and explained anew, for restoring job growth, taming budget deficits and changing Washington’s ways.

To address economic fears, Obama will prod Congress to enact a second stimulus package and to provide new financial relief for the middle class. To acknowledge frustration at the government’s habit of spending more than it has, he will seek a three-year freeze on some domestic spending (while proposing a 6.2 percent, or $4 billion, increase in the popular arena of education and supporting the debt-financed jobs bill) and announce he’s creating a bipartisan deficit-reduction task force. To tackle the capital’s polarized atmosphere, he will call on Republicans and Democrats to redouble efforts at cooperation.

Written by AdLib

My motto is, "It is better to have blogged and lost hours of your day, than never to have blogged at all."

586 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
  1. kesmarn says:

    I realize I should never, ever pay any attention to what this blowhard says, but this just struck me as so over the top that I couldn’t ignore it:

    “LIMBAUGH: I penned a message to Obama that I would like to deliver now. Because, Mr. Obama, I think it’s time we had a heart-to-heart talk. Let me be the father that you never had or never really knew. Because I think you need some guidance. It’s time to man up. It’s time to grow up.

    That speech last night was an embarrassment. You couldn’t focus. You lashed out in all directions. You refused to accept responsibility for your own actions, and you were angry. And he was, folks. He’s mad. Being president is big job. It’s a big responsibility. You wanted the position, Barack. You campaigned for it. You told the public to trust you with it, and they elected you. And you’re now president of the greatest country mankind has ever known, and yet you act like this was all coming to you, like you deserve it, that you’re better than the people you are supposed to serve.”

    How low does someone have to be, to attack another on the point that his father was not involved in his growing up? I’m sure the children of single parents everywhere are thanking Limbaugh right now. And that’s just the start of his vicious remarks.

    If this guy had no influence, I would just chalk this up to one person’s psychosis. But you’d be amazed at the number of people who take their marching orders from him.

    What a horrible, horrible person he is.

  2. LABC63 says:

    I missed the MSNBC analysis of the speech, so I missed Chris Matthews put his foot in it again. I watched the Daily Show and got Jon Stewart’s ( I will leave hubby for you, Jon, call me!)hilarious review of the “I forgot he was black for an hour” comment. Stewart referred to ole Tweety as being one scotch away from turning into Ron Burgundy (“Anchorman”). Also a funny bit about CNN, that doofus John King’s bouncy maps, twitter, and “the best political team on TV” bullshit.

    Why does it take a comedy show and sometimes Olbermann to point out the dismal state of the media these days?

    • Khirad says:

      For the record, I called both the CNN ridiculous magic wall and 12,000 “analysts” in one room. I knew they’d be there. And I saw Chris Matthews “seduction” comment and “black” comment and knew they’d make it on Jon. So nailed Chris with that Scotch comment (though I would have gone with Jameson’s). Colbert also caught on to the Jefferson Davis infomercial.

      On the topic of media, Mika and Joe made themselves somewhat useful (I know I’m treading into heresy here, I know -- I have my problems with them, but once in a while they serve a purpose) by pressing the Lt. Gov. in South Carolina on his comments about comparing poor (we are left to infer black) children to wild animals and he again said it was a metaphor. Being a SC GOP primary debate, I know it wasn’t accidental he didn’t back off on the comment. Simply said he wouldn’t have worded it that way again (but showed no recognition of what he’d said being heinously wrong).

      • LABC63 says:

        I try to watch Morning Joe, but I find his smirk and faux Mr. Rogers sweater vest look insuffferable. But, compared to what is one elsewhere, it has some moments.

    • BigDogMom says:

      LAB, I love the Daily show and I am on my way to watch last nights show now, can never seem to stay awake to catch it.

      You’d think that the MSM would take note of the two shows that you mention and clean up their act…

    • Chernynkaya says:

      In an weird way, I sometime like watching Tweety. I think he totally represents a huge segment of voters-- not only on policy, but especially on attitude. He’s sometimes liberal, but a real establishment guy--and ridiculously sentimental. I often cringe though; he’s embarrassing and a terrible interviewer. And that ego! But if I could only watch one msnbc show, it would have to be Rachel.

      • LABC63 says:

        I agree with you, especially about the embarassing part. He can be incredibly insightful at times, but he can wipe that away with an equally dense comment.

        As a black woman, I have encountered that sort of person who thinks that they are complimenting you by saying that, but it just comes off like “you are a credit to your race” comment. uhh…thanks…Chris…

      • BigDogMom says:

        I think my husband is secretly in love with Rachel, he watched her show twice last night!

  3. KQuark says:

    Rashomon Lite after the SOTU speech.


    Huffington Post Main: ‘I DON’T QUIT’

    Arianna Huffington: Obama’s State of the Focus Group Speech

    Faux News: Obama Plugs Health Care, But Says Jobs Are Priority

    MSNBC: Obama takes on

    • nellie says:

      There’s a new HP headline up now:

      “The Last Man Hoping for Bipartisanship”

      And here’s the comment I left:

      Only HP could wrangle a snarky headline out of THAT speech.

      WOW — I’m impressed. And disgusted.

      This progressive whining has got to stop.

      • bitohistory says:


        “On this, Drudge reclaims its rightful place for misleading sensationalism.”

        Duh, She is working Matt, she is in London at the international conference on helping Afghanistan. Read a paper, man. Watch the headlines on the BEEB. Check the internets, ya boob! Do some reporter work!

  4. Khirad says:

    I have never made but one prayer to God: ‘O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.’ And God granted it.

    -- Voltaire

    • KQuark says:

      I saw that quote either on a Huffy post or reaction column. I did very much apply to this SOTU speech though. Many times Republicans were exposed for not being in line with the people especially in how to deal with bank regulations and with taxes on bailout money. But now her highness would call that just Obama pandering not what it really is good politics and policy.

      • Khirad says:

        Yeah, I totally stole this and the Confederacy quip (mad on that one for not making the same point) from there. This was WW, of course. I thought about citing it.

        Also stolen: The GOP response was like an infomercial.

        • KQuark says:

          I did not mean to imply thievery. I just thought it was a funny coincidence. Anyway citing quotes are many times the best way to express good points.

          • Khirad says:

            No, I fully implicate myself of my own accord. BSM pointed out the Virginia Assembly was designed by Jefferson -- wonder what he would have felt about the Bible quotes and supply-side Jesus.

  5. Chernynkaya says:

    Allrighty Friends, it’s time to get some shuteye! See you tomorrow, I hope.

  6. Khirad says:

    Anyone notice the significance that they held a separate mini-State of the Union in the former capitol of the Confederacy?

    • whatsthatsound says:

      You can almost see her mind working on this. Hmm….I have to be very critical of this speech, what can I say about it….he made a lot of good points…that’s not much to go on….oh, how ’bout this? He made a LOT of good points, so that means he was trying to please a LOT of people! I’ll write that he was pandering! Perfect!”

      Nice mental jiu jutsu there.

      • KQuark says:

        I love it “mental jiu jutsu”. Got to remember that one. Much better than using cliches like “mental gymnastics” and “pretzel logic”.

        Worse it’s the same way she attacked Clinton so it was not even original.

        • whatsthatsound says:

          the art of using your opponents’ strengths against him or her. The speech didn’t really have many weaknesses to hold against it, so she had to improvise.

          • KQuark says:

            But I do believe Obama practiced the art in his speech much better than the queen bee did in her column. Obama is a master black belt compared to her being a novice white belt methinks.

            Well I think I beat the shit our of that metaphor to death. πŸ˜‰

          • KQuark says:

            The people are in line with Democratic policies even though they begrudgingly accept that themselves sometimes. A big part of any SOTU is to lay out the policies a Democratic president would naturally want. Just because they are in line with what people want does not make it pandering. There is correlation which is far different than cause and effect. Her column was incredibly and intellectually feeble and dishonest.

      • Kalima says:

        I tried to hear this in her voice and yes, it sounds just like her scrambled meanderings. Perfect!

      • Chernynkaya says:

        WTS-- that’s pretty clever, actually!! I think you nailed it.

        • whatsthatsound says:

          Thanks! I’m betting I’m not too far off. One thing we can easily guess is that she was planning to hit whatever came out of his mouth. He could have combined The Gettysburg Address, the “I Have a Dream” speech and the soliloquy from Hamlet; it wouldn’t have made a bit of difference.

          • Chernynkaya says:

            No, I really mean it-- I think that what you described IS EXACTLY how her mind worked. And the worst part is, she will allow no dissenting comments to that screed.

    • Khirad says:

      It’s just sad over there. The usual Faustian left, and weak, weak, weak teabaggers.

    • KQuark says:

      Yeah we need a Rashomon post desperately. πŸ˜‰

    • Chernynkaya says:

      Yep, that’s going into my “Obama/negative HP articles” archive! That was really scathing and uncalled for. I saw Markos Moulitsas on KO’s show and even he was fairly positive in he assessment of the speech. Wow. Arianna so obviously has it in for Obama.

      • KQuark says:

        She is speaking to her base of lemmings and cannot say anything good about Obama or they will be disappointed. The only president she will be happy with is herself.

        Her claims of pandering were almost exactly what she said about Clinton. What she calls pandering is recognizing the people’s concerns. If it was only a poll based speech he would have dropped healthcare and climate change legislation from the agenda since neither is popular now.

        • LABC63 says:

          A very good speech and I enjoyed watching the republicans being caught flat footed at times. I tend to zone out the commentary afterwards because I find the insta polling by CNN and its self serving “best political team” crap tiresome. And I did not go on HuffPost because I could write their faux progressive headlines in my sleep. But I am glad to see Zsa Zsa Huffington is deigning to enlighten the unwashed masses about the speech.


        • Kalima says:

          Expect Maher to mimick her cockeyed views any time soon.

          • Marion says:

            He only whined that Nader was right, that both parties are exactly the same and moaned about no defence cuts. Trust me: NO country cuts a defence budget.

            I really wish something could be done about Huffington. Something like invoking sedition, stripping her of her naturalised citizenship and post her ass back to Greece. They’re in heavy crisis at the moment, and I’m sure they’d welcome her help. Not.

      • Kalima says:

        I just got this in an email, I haven’t taken my name off her “fan of” list yet and I don’t go there any other time.

        Maybe she made him an offer he could refuse and she wasn’t invited for dinner, remember?

        Whatever, people who actually followed the speech from beginning to end will know about her “sour grapes” attack. Really nasty, she seems to evaluate people in her own shallow image.

        • Chernynkaya says:

          I really dislike when people use this term when discussing a woman, but I can’t find a better word-- she sounds shrill. Shrill with a dash of bitter and a hefty pinch of envy-- that’s her recipe for an editorial stew.

          • KQuark says:

            Ouch! But I think there are many shrill sounding men as well but it does not have to do with the tenor of their voice but the offending nature of their sharp retorts to anyone that is trying to help the country.

            She obviously wrote most of the article before the speech was over and they were her same complaints about Clinton. She is totally dishonest and unimaginative. Does she really think people are that stupid and believe she wrote this editorial and appeared on TV at the same time? A more manly term for her would be that she is a true hater.

            • Chernynkaya says:

              I’ll go along with “hater” no problem! But that reminds me: I noticed that all the pundits today had an advanced copy of the speech (which means AH could have written it earlier with some excuse-- which I give grudgingly). Why do Presidents do that-- give advanced copies I mean? What’s the purpose? And people discuss the speech beforehand, which to me takes away the excitement/anticipation.

            • KQuark says:

              I really don’t know. It does not make sense. That’s one reason why I did not know they even did that.

              Plus a speech on paper is really not what a speech is all about. A speech is a dynamic where the delivery and reception are just as important as the words.

              The worse part is Arianna was wrong he did not say things that were just popular. The context Arianna refused to consider is most people like Democratic ideas.

            • Chernynkaya says:

              But KQ-- I was serious-- I don’t understand why they do that! What’s the point of giving out the speech do you think?

            • KQuark says:

              I gotcha. I just thought they gave outlines. Thanks for the lesson. But that even makes her more petty in my eyes.

          • Kalima says:

            I agree Cher, the woman is bitter and very envious and as KQ suggested above, really believes that she can do a better job of being the President. Who on earth would vote for her when even I can’t understand a word she’s talking about. Don’t they have a pill for her nasty condition?

            • Marion says:

              Thank GOODNESS, she can’t run for POTUS. She’s a naturalised citizen. Poor Whoreanna … born Greek and kicked out of the country because Daddy was -- surprise surprise -- a corrupt politician. Kicked out of the UK because the grown-up intelligent media refused to take her seriously. Now she’s a bought and paid for American. She doesn’t give a rat’s ass about this country, and it’s good to see a LOT of people on HP are calling her out on that post. One woman called her out on speaking out for the middle class when she hasn’t a clue. She’s an opportunist. I am disappointed in Maher. He should know better, but he’s got lazy. Maybe he’s ready to come out of both closets now -- the Republican one and the BIG one. He’s seriously running out of beards.

            • KQuark says:

              As you know some people especially extreme narcissists like Aryanna just cannot get our of their own heads. They think they can never be wrong and can do the job better than anyone else in any circumstance.

            • KQuark says:

              I don’t remember that one Kalima. You’ve got to post it sometime.

            • Kalima says:

              She reminds me of the words of an old song.

              “I love myself! I love myself!
              I’m crazy about myself!!”

            • Chernynkaya says:

              KQ-- that’s it, really. How could I have missed the just plain narcissism. That’s all it boils down to.

            • Chernynkaya says:

              Tracey Ullman as the queen:

            • KQuark says:

              πŸ˜† Tracy is one of my favorites.

            • Kalima says:

              She is brilliant, I saw her in a clip Khirad posted yesterday.

            • Chernynkaya says:

              She is really perfect and hilarious! If only she could portray the real AH!

  7. KQuark says:

    Snapshot of the peoples response to the SOTU speech.

    CBS Sample Shows Obama Gains Support

    CBS News and Knowledge Networks assembled a diverse panel of Americans and asked them to participate in a pre-and-post speech survey about Obama’s speech. Before the speech, about 57% of those present said they believed that the President has the same concerns about policies as they did. After the speech, it was up to 74%. After the speech, 83% of those in the sample said they supported the proposals he outlined. Before the speech, only 40% of those in the sample though the administration had a clear jobs plan. After: 59% did.

    Jeebus this reminds me how fickle American are about Obama.

    • Hopeington says:

      That’s because Obama’s language is straight forward, without the spin. He was very clear and direct, like I said, I think he is in control of the message and hope he runs with it.
      I’m glad he laid his plans out before the MSM got hold of it.
      It was refreshing.

    • escribacat says:

      No kidding. Those numbers tell a lot more about the knuckleheads in the audience than they do about Obama.

    • Chernynkaya says:

      Hey Khirad-- or anyone--do you know who the woman seated in the second row to the far right of Alito is? The one wearing a man’s suit?

    • Chernynkaya says:

      I was wondering-- It is protocol for the SCOTUS to never applaud or show any emotion? And that Alito-- the only thought I had as I watched him was how healthy and vigorous he looked. That depressed me.

      • SanityNow says:

        actually, it really has never happened that the SC justices show emotion one way or another at a SOTU, except to applaud a guest or other non-political figure.

        Alito blew it huge with his uncontrollable angry nervous tick. Now he just made himself look like one of the many sour Republican ideologues. I am glad President Obama spanked them in public for what they did. It was a bonus that Alito took the bate and exposed himself like that.

        • Chernynkaya says:

          Thanks Sanity. Since I never watched W’s SOTU ( and I guess I forgot during Clinton) I never noticed the Supremes before now.

          And I was thinking about Alito and I realized that I am glad he was an ass, but because it might mean he feels defensive about one of the worst decisions of all time. And if he feels the need to defend it, that might mean he feels guilty.

      • Khirad says:

        Yes. There’s even been debate that they are there at all, it being a theatrical display of partisanship.

      • Hopeington says:

        I confess…me too, only I thought it days ago!!
        I felt a wee bit bad, but I’m human.

    • PatsyT says:

      HA !! you can read his lips !
      Stay Classy Sam !

    • escribacat says:

      That’s pretty good. Boy, what a stony-faced crew!

    • KQuark says:

      No Alito you lied and broke legal precedent to boot.

      Do any of these right wingers have impulse control?

  8. bitohistory says:

    Text of President Obama’s State of the Union Address

    First one I found .

  9. PatsyT says:

    Hey everyone,
    I just watched the recording of the speech
    Loved It !
    My hands are tired from all the applause!
    I have not listened to any the talkers or repub response
    I don’t feel like I need to.
    He said it all.
    We really have ourselves a Real President !

    • KQuark says:

      Yeah really the Republican response what a waste of time and money. It takes less than a second to say no. Doing the response like a campaign event was so shallow.

      • Khirad says:

        I can’t wait for the Daily Show or a columnist to adequately describe it. I’m still struggling for words. It’s like they lampooned themselves. I mean who all was there? What was that supposed to be?

        Has this staged assembly thing ever been done before?

      • PatsyT says:

        Thanks KQuark you have saved me time
        I’ll take a pass on that response
        Who was it anyway?

        • Hopeington says:

          A governor so milk toast I forgot his name and where he’s from.
          Once again they sounded like that hadn’t heard Obama’s speech at all.
          It was all so yesterday. Silly, contrived and childish are the words that come to mind.
          I do feel like Obama got “control of the message”. I hope he can keep it!
          I’m there,
          and Cher summed it up best
          “I am not even disappointed anymore. He is not the fighter nor the left-of-center guy I wanted. Nevertheless, he

          • PatsyT says:

            Sounds like a tepid response
            And staged yet ? !
            Fake, like they they are.

          • KQuark says:

            Huh not “left of center”?

            So what centrists want HCR or to tax the banks for that matter?

            No he’s not far left but not center left give me a break. It also fails to appreciate that most of this country is center right.

            In the latest poll only 10% of the country says Obama is not liberal enough.

            Over 40% says he’s just right and over 40% says he’s too liberal. I get tired of people that live in progressive la la land.

            • Hopeington says:

              oopsy, I’ve considered myself a moderate dem until this last year. Now I don’t know if I’m a liberal or just left of center…such a dilemma.!
              I never thought Obama was a liberal, I thought he was talking about the things that were important to me and that sounded like a good direction for this country.
              I am probably one of the 40% that thinks he’s doing okay.
              Sure sometimes I start wondering if he’s taking a right turn when it seems so against what liberal thinking folks wanted, but he’s here to work for everyone and while, fortunately, we don’t all want the same thing, unfortunately, I’m not going to get exactly what I want.
              My only complaint of him is I wish he would push a little harder. I thought I heard that tonight, like he remembered we were here, or something.

            • Hopeington says:

              KQ, that’s my dilemma…liberal and left of center are 2 different things, as much as I dislike labels, I can’t figure out which one I am….I think I’ll have to go with left of center and not liberal???
              Made me think of this song Whey Mi Belang Mutabaruka

            • KQuark says:

              Being liberal and left of center are completely different. The country is center right so being left of that center is not as liberal as it would be in most European countries per se. I think right and left labels are overrated anyway. I believe there are forward thinking and backward thinking politicians. And Obama is the most forward thinking president in decades.

              Frankly quoting the Rolling Stones I just want to “get what I need”.

  10. Khirad says:

    Rachel had a slow-mo of Alito. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

  11. kesmarn says:

    Wow, folks, must be post-great-SOTU speech endorphins or something. But suddenly I am mega-tired. Gonna have to call it a day. It ended on a happy note; that’s for sure. Good night, all.

  12. Chernynkaya says:

    Hi all! Glad to be back after a brief recuperation. I feel like a stranger-- so much is going on here, and that’s fantastic.

    I always enjoy listening to President Obama, and tonight was no different. However, I did not hear what I was yearning for-- the repudiation of the GOP. Keith Olberman played a recording of FDR’s speech before the SOTU and perhaps that is the source of my letdown:

    “We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace-- business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering. They had begun to consider the government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs and we know now that government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob. Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are united in their hatred of me — and I welcome their hatred.”

    The fact is as I see it, is that Obama will continue to appeal to our better angels. He believes in his ideals and while I love that about him personally, I do not feel it is the best response to what the Republican Party has degenerated into. He is not dealing with honest brokers or representatives working to better America, but with venal thugs. Yes, it worked for Gandhi, but I do not believe it will work in this environment.

    • Khirad says:

      Gandhi had Nehru. 😈

    • KQuark says:

      Sorry but this is a far different country than what FDR faced. The populous was 100% behind FDR and we are far more divided now. Sure the GOP does not want to unite the country but one side has to try at least.

      Can you please offer an opinion about what Obama said instead of just what you and KO wanted him to say.

      • Chernynkaya says:

        KQuark-- first, let me dispute that FDR had 100% of the country behind him. He was popular and was elected 3 times, but he faced serious and entrenched opposition then, and to this day.

        I have been thinking about what Obama said, and aside from offshore drilling and the spending freeze, I can find nothing I disagree with.

        About his wish for bipartisanship: yeah, a fine idea, but I sure hope it was something he by now realizes is unrealistic, but I suppose he had to at least give it lip service. At least if one reads the polls, people say they want it. But maybe the polls are being misinterpreted to mean that the Dems should exhibit it. Maybe the polls are a repudiation of the Reps and NOT a call to be more conciliatory. All I know is, I have no desire to go for it, especially when it results in right-wing watered down legislation that gets none of their votes anyway. No matter how much the Dems give, the GOP keeps moving the bar. When do elections start mattering?

        Here’s my reaction to the speech-- it was great. I fully believe that Obama believes everything he said. He is principled and honorable. He is not the pragmatist so many say though (I’m fine with that!) because he is an idealist. He believes in the basic decency of people, and I guess that’s where we differ. I do not believe for a moment in the basic decency of most of the Republican Party. And that’s one of my problems with Obama in general.

        I guess it boils down to my gut feelings-- and that is something I realize is objectionable to you because you are a scientist. You prefer to deal in hard facts. I may be wrong about that, but that’s the impression I get from you posts. I bring this up because you asked for specifics, and I don’t have any. As I said, there was little I object to in the speech. But the fact remains that he has not been effective on the centerpiece of his legislative agenda. And it is my centerpiece too!

        Look, I think the world of Obama. I just don’t think he will be a strong leader. This is a big, unwieldy country. And to top that off, he is saddled with a Congress of incredibly weak Dems and incredibly evil Repugs. It takes a strong leader. I think Obama has strength of character, but he doesn’t govern strongly. He believes in reason, but he is dealing with pure unreason--he is dealing with people literally having daily tantrums. I am afraid he is not the right match for these particular times.

        That said, I still support him. I am just not optimistic, because I see that he is a true centrist, and maybe that’s how to win elections. Maybe this country is center right after all. I thought for a while it wasn’t.

        • KQuark says:

          I really appreciate your thoughts on the speech.

          When I say 100% I mean the vast majority of the people were behind him. It’s a vastly different political environment these days for any president especially a Democrat because this country has been fooled to be a center right country. Obama also has a hostile media against him, especially the right wing elements when FDR pretty much had a friendly media. I just don’t think that quote would have played well to most Americans, maybe progressives but not most people. Still FDR compromised greatly to pass his most signature legislation SS but progressives conveniently don’t recognize that aspect of history.

          It’s also not the staunch Republicans Obama was trying to appeal to it’s the majority of Americans that are in the middle. He knows he needs more of the people’s support to get things done. His early poll numbers are the only reason things like HCR got this far.

          The day of Democratic Party strong arm tactics like the 60’s are over after the 60’s. Democratic congresses from Carter on have been the worst enemy for Dem presidents because they are either bought or just worry about their interests.

          Clinton had a much pushier style but he never got as far as Obama has on big issues like HCR. The more you push Dems in Congress now the more defensive they get. It’s really a much more difficult situation to be in than a Republican president with so many DINOs and Republicans who always fall in line.

          If you really think a fiery progressive like Kucinich would be a better leader I disagree because you have to play from the center out to get anything done, especially if you are a Dem. Kucinich would have the same ZERO support from Republicans and ZERO support from about half the Senate Democrats.

          It will take many cycles to move the political center of this country.

          I come to my views not because I’m a scientist but because I look at the country as a whole not just through progressive eyes. Growing up in the NE and then living down South for 18 years and seeing what the opposition is all about taught me much more than my scientific training about the way people look at politics around the country. All I’m trying to do Cher is give context to the way many in this country think and how a divided electorate affects a Dem president. You may call Obama a centrist but more people in this country call him a liberal.

          Finally most of the Republican supporters I know are decent people but they have some serious blind spots when it comes to politics.

          • Chernynkaya says:

            Let me throw this out. Yes, I believe that maybe 10-20% of the country are Liberals. But that same percentage can be said of the far right. The rest are on a spectrum in between. Yet all the noise is coming from the right, and they have the attention of the media and Congress-- big time! That’s because they are not only organized by special interests in the way we on the left are not, but also because they are highly motivated. And they are winning, little by little.

            They are motivated by their strong ideology. They are motivated by their leaders on the Right, and mostly by their opposition to the Democrats. They have moved their Party to the far right!

            Why can’t we? One, we have no infrastructure the way they do. But the left is also DEmotivated by the capitulation by the Dems. Just as successful legislation builds to more successful legislation, so does the opposite. We are seeing a period-- justified by reality or not-- of a demoralized base. Unless we can whip up some enthusiasm, this country will continued to speed to the right.

            I know that you believe that the center is the largest voting block, and you are correct of course. But I ask you, isn’t the same true for Republicans? Isn’t their largest block the center-right? So then why does their base have so much power? I maintain it is because they are the most motivated and the most vocal.

            And that’s why I worry about Obama and the base.

    • Hopeington says:

      When I heard Olbermann ‘s clip, I did find myself wishing Obama had said that! But I also think Obama did set a tone that was different, and he did call out the negativity, in a way that i felt hit the mark.
      I thought he offered some excellent ideas, like the $10,000 tax credits if your in school or forgiving your college loan after 10-20 years, and made a great point with renewable energy being a good idea regardless of what you think about climate change.
      Seems he realized that things weren’t going to go the way he hoped so now it’s on to the next plan and he was able to convey that. It’s like he turned a page.
      He’s not quitting!! And while the speech wasn’t passionate, I feel renewed that this year we will “get er done”.
      Quick edit to say…I was down for 4 days Cher, it was a rough one to rise above. Glad you’re back on your feet again!!

      • Chernynkaya says:

        Hopeington, there were some good proposals. And he certainly did call out both the GOP and the Dems. He’s just not bold.

        Anyway, thanks for your good wishes-- I am feeling A LOT better.

    • bitohistory says:

      I feel that the speech tonight will play great with a large majority of the citizens. Throw in the actions and faces and actions of the R’s, this speech will play in Peoria! We must remember that there was always around 30% of people that never liked FDR. NEVER!

      • Chernynkaya says:

        Yes, Bito, I do too. I think the the sane center of the country will like it. I was just writing about my personal reaction. I was moved as I always am by his heart. But I am not even disappointed anymore. He is not the fighter nor the left-of-center guy I wanted. Nevertheless, he’s a good guy. If we only had a Congress that wasn’t composed of 90% asshats, he’d get something done.

        • bitohistory says:

          Cher, first of all I am glad you are back and feeling better.
          Perhaps if he could get something done to get some stability back into the country, he could get more done of what you and I want done. Like you said though the 90% asshats!
          take care.

    • Kalima says:

      Welcome back Cher, that must have been a whopper. Glad you are feeling better.

    • Khirad says:

      You were missed. I wondered where you were.

      • Chernynkaya says:

        Hi, Khirad. I deliberately didn’t read the other comments before I posted, because I didn’t want to be influenced or let myself lose my nerve to post something negative. I want to read what you guys all thought now.

    • escribacat says:

      Glad you’re feeling better, Cher. Seems like you’ve been missing for ages! I saw that on KO tonight too. If Obama were ever going to say something like that, tonight would have been the time. As you say, I don’t think he’ll ever make polarizing statements like that. Maybe he realizes that his mere existence so freaks them out that it’s polarizing enough.

      • Chernynkaya says:

        Hi, e’cat! No, Obama will never take off the gloves.

        • Kalima says:

          Personally I think that he’s just too much of a gentleman to ever really let it rip and get nasty. Then again why should he, he can fight them by signing/passing new bills and legislations, that should be enough to knock the naysayers on their collective behinds.

          I prefer a man of integrity and principles to an outright bully any day. I can’t fault him for who he is, he was brought up, not dragged up, that’s the difference.

          • Chernynkaya says:

            Kalima-- I re-read my reply, and it reads harsher than I meant. I wrote it with a smile~!

          • Chernynkaya says:

            Well, who wouldn’t prefer a gentleman? And that is the perfect description of Obama-- he is a true gentleman! However, I do believe that there is something along the spectrum between bully and gentleman. One can be a gentleman while being effective. I am not feeling that Obama has been effective on health care, for example, but I am not sure it has to do with gentleman-ness. Wasn’t Churchill a gentleman? Wasn’t FDR?

            • Kalima says:

              I’ll be watching closely to see what happens after this speech but I believe he meant every word and that his attitude toward the opposition has and will change.

              I’m not really sure about Winston, he did speak in a rather posh voice though. :)

    • kesmarn says:

      Cher! So good to see you back. That bug must have really laid you low. So sorry you felt so bad for so long.

      I love that FDR quotation. It was both strong and prescient.

      Obama does have a much less confrontational approach--one that has been shaped by a very different set of life experiences than the ones Roosevelt had, no doubt.

      It’ll be interesting to see the fallout over the next few days--especially of the visuals of dour Repubs, scowling motionless in their seats.

      • Chernynkaya says:

        Hi Kes! Good to be back. And about those dour Repugs-- they haven’t done anything tonight that I haven’t seen for a year. It hasn’t hurt them yet, unfortunately.

        And you are completely correct-- Obama didn’t grow up with a silver spoon in his mouth as did FDR. Maybe it’s like Nixon going to China: Only the most rabid anti-communist could have done that. And only an elite, millionaire like FDR could have helped the average American--but not without impunity. He is still vilified on the Right.

        • kesmarn says:

          Yes, exactly. And only a Southern “good ole boy” like LBJ could have gotten Civil Rights legislation passed. It is odd, how that works, no?

          And you and b’ito are right; some folks on the right could never even say the name “Roosevelt” without putting “That Damned…” in front of it. Even years after he was gone!

        • Khirad says:

          It still stings them he got reelected so many times. That’s all it comes down to.

      • Khirad says:

        Thanks for the link.

        “I welcome their hate”

        -- Would love that feistiness. It’s not Obama’s style, though.

Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets
Ongoing Stories