Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw), Guest Blogger
In light of the all the hoopla about President Obama’s upcoming State of the Union speech on Tuesday night, I have been thinking of all of the ideas and issues that I would like the President to address in his talk with the country. Since I am a Bears fan and used to dreaming, here it goes.
The first issue that I would like to hear President Obama discuss on Tuesday is the Economy. I don’t mean just “jump starting” the economy. I want to hear about the plans to reach full employment. I am not suggesting that the unemployment rate should be zero, but if we are not shooting for that, how will we get the unemployment rate down to an “acceptable” number? I want the President to tell me that he will be starting government jobs programs to assist cities and states with their infrastructure. I am talking about WPA type programs to give every willing worker a job. Whether it is rebuilding and renovating our National Parks and National Monuments, or helping out in State parks and recreation areas; the result is the same. Having jobs that pay people to actually help our country and get paychecks to people who will spur the economy as a whole.
The next issue that I would like the President to talk about is one that will probably be very contentious. I want him to challenge the Congress, on national TV to reintroduce the Assault Weapons Ban to control some of our deadliest weapons. That would include restricting the size of the magazines or clips that could be used on semi-automatic weapons. I would also want to hear that the gun show loop-hole must be “fixed” and made part of the legislation. This will create a firestorm from the Right and from the Left, but if he really wants to help save lives, this is a good first step.
When I read in the papers and on this blog that the Republicans and some Democrats want to repeal and/or defund “Obama care”, my blood just boils. To that end, President Obama needs to outline every single benefit of the health care reform legislation that will die or not be initiated if the legislation is repealed or starved to death financially. When the public hears what the Insurance industry funded Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats want everyday Americans to lose or do without, Americans everywhere will “inform” the Republicans and the Democrats just what is important to them. Since I am dreaming here, I would also want the President to challenge any legislator who votes to repeal or defund the legislation to give up their government-funded health insurance. If you don’t want Americans to have insurance coverage, you shouldn’t take any coverage from the government. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
Finally, the President should reaffirm his vow to end any and all torture by our military and intelligence authorities. The President could reignite his base by going one step further to say that he will be instructing Attorney General Holder to investigate any past instances of torture during the Bush Administration including the actors and the officials who authorized it. It will be a bombshell, but justice deserves this kind of bombshell. If he really has grown a set, he could also mention Pvt. Manning by name and vow to end his solitary confinement and treat him like any other person who has only been charged of a crime.
Now that I have gone out on a limb to give you several of the items on my State of the Union wish list, it is time for you to go out on that limb and tell us what you want the President to discuss on Tuesday evening. It will be interesting to see if the President actually discusses any of our items. This will give us something to talk about after the Bears beat the Packers today!
Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw), Guest Blogger
State of The Union
47 out of 50 States Have Lost Jobs since Democrats’ Stimulus Law
all the while when they told us unemployment would not go above 8 percent.
3.5 MILLION: Jobs Obama Promised Stimulus Would Create By End Of 2010
3.3 MILLION: Jobs Lost Since Obama Made That Promise.
Jill said:
“[President Obama’s] win is bringing down our social system and the rule of law. That’s not a success any more than Bush’s “wins” were.”
If you believe (as I do) that a McCain presidency (or, god forbid, a Palin Presidency) would have brought down our economic system (depression) and possibly our Republic, I call President Obama a big success – when you add in what’s he’s accomplished as president (even if it hasn’t been as much as either of us would like, it’s still been significant) I think that most people would describe his election as far from being an abject failure.
Blouise: It got cut off with my lousy typing.
ouise: We are getting huge medicaid and education cuts here. The republicans won a super majority.
Swarthmore mom
1, January 24, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Unless you use public transportation, you have to buy gas somewhere. Electric cars are not available yet. Social Security has not been gutted. Hopefully, Obama will hold the line. Republicans won many statehouse this fall, and they are making massive cuts in social programs.
============================================================
Wait till people see the cuts that are coming in Ohio!
Voters need to keep their eye on their local and State level races. Obama’s going to win in 2012 with a lot of drama but no real trouble … the real damage could happen at the State and local levels if people get too caught up in the faux Obama drama and ignore the intentions of the at-home candidates.
rafflaw,
I’ve been trying to decide whether or not to watch President Obama deliver the State of the Union Address. Talk is cheap–and actions certainly do speak louder than words. Promises, promises, promises! I’m really tired of listening to politicians who speak “empty” words to us. Gitmo hasn’t been closed; we didn’t get REAL financial reform; our government is still involved in extraordinary renditions; there’s no public health care option. I could go on.
Jill,
It isn’t currently feasible for the majority of people to stop supporting oil companies – that is why it is critical to find measures which can be effective against these powerful interests.
As for the other – I’m all for experiments in ‘small-scale socialism’, so to speak.
Jill:I don’t think Obama created the economic devastation. Things are picking up a bit. Obama is too corporatist for my taste. He caters to the banks too much. We have had this discussion before. Since we have a two party system and the candidates the republicans are offering are much much worse in my opinion,I will stick with him as I have said before. The republicans will probably take the Senate so why do I want them to have all three branches again?
Unless you use public transportation, you have to buy gas somewhere. Electric cars are not available yet. Social Security has not been gutted. Hopefully, Obama will hold the line. Republicans won many statehouse this fall, and they are making massive cuts in social programs.
S.M.
To you, everything is about “winning” an election. If you win an election but your candidate is torturing, murdering, destroying the rule of law, creating economic devastation, etc. what did you win? Bush “won” elections as have Republicans and Tea Party candidates. I don’t believe you would call these wins a success. I know I don’t. So, it’s difficult for me to understand why Obama winning an election means so much to you. His win is bringing down our social system and the rule of law. That’s not a success any more than Bush’s “wins” were.
Slart,
I wouldn’t support any oil company. With regards to energy, all our money needs to be put into conservation and alternative energy. This would provide jobs and stop the degradation of the environment.
I am talking about the public forming cooperative corporations with all the rights corporations now enjoy, putting any money they might have given to corrupt parties/politicians/organizations into it, and providing for the local welfare. As state and local services are cut to the bone, as social security and other social programs are being gutted on behalf of wars of empire and the oligarchy, we must devise new systems to provide for each other’s welfare. This isn’t a stand alone way to go. There’s no reason not to try many different methods to bring about social justice.
Swarthmore mom,
I think information like that needs to be leveraged to create an environment where a ‘citizen corporation’ (a corporation which practiced good citizenship) could thrive. If, say, a significant boycott could be leveled at Exxon Mobil (and BP) because they are marginally worse than their competitors, then it would show what kind of advantage good citizenship practices could produce…
Slartiblast – My son works in that area. He says they are all bad with Exxon Mobil being the worst. Have had a Working Assets card for years.
Slartibartfast,
Well said. I think many of us would be willing to pay a little more for a product or service from a corporation who is willing to stand up for the American middle class.
Jill,
I was thinking more along the lines of educating consumers as to how they are voting with their dollar – the ‘citizen corporations’ that you suggest (I assume you mean companies along the lines of Working Assets – publicly owned with a corporate philosophy to act in the public interest) would provide choices that would be fundamentally different (rather than marginally different) from their competitors. I can boycott BP all I like, but is there an oil company that I SHOULD patronize? I don’t know, but I suspect the differences in corporate philosophy among the major oil companies are minor – I would be more than willing to go a little out of my way or pay a little more to have a real choice in this regard…
Jill
1, January 24, 2011 at 1:23 pm
anon nurse,
It would appear the govt. is using torture on Manning to get a “freely given confession” that torture pretty much guarantees. While I agree that psychological torture is horrendous, I am struck by the fact that orders, “from the top” kept people from physically seeing Manning. To risk the bad PR and possible legal action to keep people from seeing him is both a police state action and bodes ill as to what they didn’t want his visitor to see.
===========
Jill,
…and the isolation tactics continue, as well. One thing that I know, beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that the police state is emerging in this country. And, as I will continue to say: In time, there will be “proof”…
Jill: I admire Chris Hedges, and try to remember to read him. The poll I posted above talked about the center right independents going back to him. Most liberals have not left him. It is the center that decides the elections.
Swarthmore,
I wouldn’t be surprised if the Tea Party is responsible for sending Independents back to the Obama camp. Now if he would only do something big and useful, he could insure the independents stay with him and with the progressive movement. That is a big “if”!
S.M.,
Here is what Chris Hedges has to say in teh above article about running scared back to Obama: “Barack Obama is another stock character in the cyclical political theater embraced by the liberal class. Act I is the burst of enthusiasm for a Democratic candidate who, through clever branding and public relations, appears finally to stand up for the interests of citizens rather than corporations. Act II is the flurry of euphoria and excitement. Act III begins with befuddled confusion and gnawing disappointment, humiliating appeals to the elected official to correct “mistakes,” and pleading with the officeholder to return to his or her true self. Act IV is the thunder and lightning scene. Liberals strut across the stage in faux moral outrage, delivering empty threats of vengeance. And then there is Act V. This act is the most pathetic. It is as much farce as tragedy. Liberals-frightened back into submission by the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party or the call to be practical-begin the drama all over again. ” It is really pitiful thing to see.
Slart,
I agree with you. I believe protest can still be powerful, for example, there was a stop on foreclosures when people protested outside the homes of banking executives). Protests against Manning’s torture are having an effect. But anything which truly impacts the bottom line, the withdraw of funds is going to be an excellent push back. IMO, it might be a good idea for citizens to for a citizen corporation which will enjoy all the many rights which corporations now enjoy. Instead citizen cooperatives could provide for the actual needs of the people by putting the money they would have given to someone like Obama and giving it to the poor and other worthwhile needs.
anon nurse,
It would appear the govt. is using torture on Manning to get a “freely given confession” that torture pretty much guarantees. While I agree that psychological torture is horrendous, I am struck by the fact that orders, “from the top” kept people from physically seeing Manning. To risk the bad PR and possible legal action to keep people from seeing him is both a police state action and bodes ill as to what they didn’t want his visitor to see.
Jill quoted:
“Either we accept that […] the corporate systems of power are instruments of death that can be fought only by physical acts of resistance or we do not.”
The fight against corporations is asymmetric warfare and physical acts of resistance are, in my opinion, likely to be an ineffective
tactic to fight corporations. If you want to fight corporations (and I do) you need to hit them where it will be effective – their bottom line. Corporations will do whatever you want them to if you can threaten their cash flow.