| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| State of the Union 2011 – Night of Too Many Promises | ||||
| ||||
The reviews of Pres. Obama’s State of the Union have now been digested and the oddest pairings are in agreement, while the LA Times and U.S. News are questioning whether his speechwriters are guilty of “plagiarism,” stealing from Wilson, Thatcher, Bobby Kennedy and others, cribbing a speech that was a conglomeration of lines looking for a single vision. The problem essentially that Pres. Obama simply doesn’t have his own vision for this country, because his compass is taking what others want and crafting a compromise so he can’t get blamed for something that is his own idea.
Pres. Obama still hasn’t learned that you can’t please everyone and the point of leadership is not to worry about the good opinions of other, but to stake a path on which you are passionately committed and move on it.
Jon Stewart is not impressed with Obama’s Sputnik time line, which puts off goals sorely needed for decades in the future. The high speed rail is just one example. But an Administration who ignores the environmental and energy importance of mass transit, while their energy guru is out in the White House pro corporate biz shake up, likely doesn’t understand the joining of issues and a way to solve them as being compatible.
“Winning the future” requires winning the day, because the future is an unknown so what we do this very day is what begins to build it.
Everything else is just word salad.
Sarah Palin wasn’t the only one who thought “winning the future” was ridiculous, though she is the only one who short-handed it to “WTF.” Twitter exploded on Tuesday night with sarcastic references to “winning the future,” because it was so ridiculously crafted. Palin’s pals have come up with a graphic that’s now bouncing around, using Obama’s signature symbol.
I doubt if the insider media types or the David Gergens of the world would allow it, but as far as I’m concerned the State of the Union needs to be rethought completely. Snap polls revealing the people overall like the speech have become the only measure for how it’s written. It’s how we get goulash instead of the President actually talking about the state of our union, which is not good, despite the Dow hovering around 12,000, which is quite symbolic when you think of the rich and middle class in this country right ow.
Speaker Boehner offered one point of focus when he said “we’re broke.” However, doing a lengthy speech about being broke won’t get the President anywhere.
So, what should Obama have focused on instead of delivering an attention deficit Twitter nation compilation?
Besides being broke, our nation just had a domestic terrorism tragedy in Tucson that broke open a debate about hate speech, rhetorical incitement, as well as the very real issue of guns getting into the hands of the wrong people. Chris Matthews broke the story that Obama is to give a speech about guns or gun control in the near future. That’s the President’s prerogative, of course, because it’s always good when you’re seeking reelection to get a lot of face time before your opponents declare, just in case you can scare off one or two contemplating taking you on. But the courageous thing to do would have been to make the State of the Union about the state of our union after Tucson.
Instead, Pres. Obama gave a “WFT” speech that set future deadlines in a pep talk that celebrated American exceptionalism by regurgitating what past leaders had said, rambling on and on, yet again, and leaving us exactly where we started on Tuesday the next day, except he was going to Wisconsin to begin his ’12 campaign, because the industrial Midwest fell to the Right in the midterms.
The really sad part of all this is that there isn’t another politician on the American landscape that has begun to prove he or she can do better.
“The really sad part of all this is that there isn’t another politician on the American landscape that has begun to prove he or she can do better.” — TM
Sad, and a bit frightening, too. I guess that politics will, as usual, triumph, in that no progressive of “substance” (as perceived by Insiders) will step up to challenge Obama, leaving us at least through 2012 before another politician would potentially “beg(i)n to prove he or she can do better.” Driven by never-ending political cycles — that’s our system.
I agree that the SOTU in many ways has become a speech primarily for the beltway punditry. They were all beside themselves in praising this hodgepodge of contradictions. Chris Matthews suggested that it was “Kennedyesque” in scope, which isn’t really how I heard it at all. Naturally, the public liked it because who doesn’t like a stemwinder about “American Exceptionalism” I know I do (even if I already don’t remember most of what he said) though I could do without the deficit porn.
The most notable thing about the night was the two republican responses, and how, juxtaposed against the SOTU, show how incredibly weak the opposition is.
Would that be the “incredibly weak opposition” that just thumped the daylights out of the Dems in the last election?
Point taken, but Obama wasn’t on the ballot, and if they insist on this particular line i.e. austerity, it’s my belief their momentum will wither.
I htink it’s amusing that it took Sarah Palin to get the “WTF” line out there. I saw it yesterday morning, long before the SP interview, along with the point that “Winning the Future” apparently is the title of a Newt Gingrich book. Found all that quite amusing. O’s speechwriters need to be a little more careful.
You can’t possibly be serious. In the words of Joe Scarborough this morning in reference to Mrs. Palin, “Does she realize it’s over for her?” Even poor Pat Buchanan conceded that she can’t recover from her WTF moment. The woman is a joke.
Pat was speechless! His face was riot.
His face was a riot.
LOL! Poor Pat. Bet he still leaves his Palin wall calendar up. He also has a massive crush on Christine O’Donnell. He is so predictable!
Been gone all day — sorry.
Well, I personally don’t see her as presidential, so I guess I never consider whether something she says makes her more or less presidential. I regard her as a thorn in the side of the political establishment and someone who drives the Dems absolutely NUTS — and has, for whatever reason, an uncanny ability to connect with people. She is a force to be reckoned with, and naysayers dismiss her at their peril.
I think she pointed out here what a lot of people thought, and that was that Obama was full of hot air. And the WTF slogan? Palin (and others, earlier) nailed it — WTF? He was full of empty slogans, hot air and nonsense.
Taylor,
I feel like Obama has been in office for 20 years. Sheesh!
The more I see and hear him, the more, even I, one of Clinton’s harshest critics on this site, miss him.
With Bill Clinton’s eight years, not once did I ever feel like he sold me or the Democratic base up the river, regardless of his policies.
With Obama, I personally feel like he hates all of us more than his obvious love of Republicans.
Mr. Speeches is an empty Wall Street suit. The only solution is to primary his butt to make his handlers aware that his behavior is unacceptable and unrewardable. In Australian Open speak, it is better to have lost the set, not the match. Go Nole! (Novak Djokovich)
Joe Scarborough never liked Palin, Plus we don’t know even no if she wants to run for President or not. She seems happy being a comentator for Fox and making money and having fun. She has done well with her PAC also. We will have to see if she is still on the list of presidental candidates with republican voters. People have said it was supposed to be over for Palin along time ago and they were wrong.
Well, it is indisputable that she is making lots of money . . . off gullible folks like you.
I thought her remarks were great. I really liked Spudnuts rather than Sputnik, and WTF was hilarious.
This whole “shock” seemed more to me to be a beltway versus outsider story.
I had the same reaction to the speech. WTF is right. Another speech on high-speed rail?