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every single benefit of the health care reform legislation that will die or not be initiated if the legislation is repealed or starved to death financially.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
Reagan is one of the reasons why the middle class is struggling today. He made the first big cuts in taxes for his wealthy friends and he started the attack on unions. For Obama to heap that kind of praise on him is ignoring the facts.
Slart,
Telling the truth is not “painting” a picture. It’s really the case that Obama has said he has the right to call anyone he likes a terrorist and to take them out. I’m not going to go any further than that. No person who believes in the rule of law should justify or even consider voting for any person who claims to have this “right”.
As to Republicans standing in his way. I seem to remember a very popular president who had both houses of congress on his side. Yet he systematically began hiring left overs from Bush to run the wars, clandestine services, and even his economic policy (with a few left overs from Clinton thrown in). He quickly affirmed Bush’s policies, often exceeding them. He sent emissaries, including Republicans, overseas to prevent prosecution of Bush, Cheney and the torture memo gang. What a strange thing to do, send Republican emissaries to threaten Spain against prosecution.
Here is a list complied by a poster on Common Dreams. It has complete references attached: 1. The escalated wars even compared to overt war criminal Bush?
www.alternet.org/world/144449/obama_far_outdoes_bush_in_e…
2. The continuation of the abrogation of Habeas Corpus just like Bush?
www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/04/11/bagram
Here is a list complied by a poster on Common Dreams. It has complete references attached: 1. The escalated wars
www.alternet.org/world/144449/obama_far_outdoes_bush_in_e…
2. The continuation of the abrogation of Habeas Corpus just like Bush?
www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/04/11/bagram
3. The continuation of military tribunals just like Bush:
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/04/…
4. The continuation of rendition to countries that torture just like Bush:
www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/11/target-of-obama-era-ren…
The last time the retirement age was raised was under Reagan … I don’t think Obama wants to be part of that legacy.
Obama’s op-ed, published on the eve of the state of the union address and also in recognition of Reagan’s upcoming 100th birthday, is written with today’s politics in mind. Without specifically mentioning the new Republican majority in the House and strengthened GOP contingent in the Senate, the president urges today’s politicians to remember Reagan’s ability to compromise and forgo angry words. What Obama doesn’t mention is he once had some angry words for Reagan himself.
In an article published in USA Today, President Obama praises President Ronald Reagan as a man with a “unique ability to inspire others to greatness.” Obama also says of Reagan that “there is no denying his leadership in the world, or his gift for communicating his vision for America.”
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/new-op-ed-obama-praises-reagan-inspiration-95-autobiography-obama?utm_source=feedburnerwashingtonexaminer%2Fnation&utm_medium=feedNation&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+washingtonexaminer%2Fnation+%28N#ixzz1BzaH7TR1
Slarti,
Well said!
Bdaman, don’t you want the President to follow the law and prosecute any government official who authorized torture?
Sure, will it happen? NO
Alito could always send his weeping wife as a stand-in … or sit-in … just give her lots of tissues.
I wonder if any of the newly elected Teabaggers will be packing … Michele Bachmann might need some “armed and dangerous” militia support
The last time the retirement age was raised was under Reagan … I don’t think Obama wants to be part of that legacy.
Bdaman,
thanks, I have seen that report. That is one reason why I stated above that he needs to go after the past torturers as well as any current torturers. It is a shame that he won’t go after George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and the rest of the Bush regime for authorizing torture. Of course, if he did go after them as the law requires, the collective heads of the Right would explode. He should do it because it is what the law requires when someone tortures detainees in our name and because it is the right thing to do. Bdaman, don’t you want the President to follow the law and prosecute any government official who authorized torture?
Memo to Rafflaw:
Obama pressures Spanish Courts to drop investigations on torture.
Details not at eleven but a few months ago.
Slartibartfast,
Well said! You are correct that the Right’s tactics are one of the main reasons why Obama has not gotten even more accomplished. I think of the approx. 200-300 bills that passed the House that did not even get voted on as a prime example.
With that being said, he still needs to go after the torturers and those who authorized the torture. If torture is still being done anywhere, by any US officials or under our approval, that needs to stop and people need to be punished. No matter how high up it goes.
Jill,
You brought up the question of President Obama’s election being a success – to me the only rational way to judge it is in comparison to the available alternatives – McCain and Palin. While I share your disapproval of some of the administration’s policies and positions, I don’t believe that they rise to the same level as those of the Bush administration and I also believe that his policies have done good (especially when compared to what might have happened under a Republican administration). But most important to me is not the past, but the future – since I understand how turnout drives election results (it’s not about changing the minds of independents so much as getting your independents excited to vote. The biggest advantage the Democrats will have in 2012 is Barack Obama’s name on the ballot – people that turn out to vote for the president will tend to vote heavily Democratic – the more enthusiasm there is for President Obama, the stronger position the Democrats will have in Congress and the more and better legislation will be produced. I choose to try to enable this self-fulfilling prophecy rather than vilifying everyone and refusing to compromise with villains. I believe that the more power the Democrats have, the easier it is to fight the corporatists and the more power Republicans have the harder it is to fight them. Given that, it seems to me to be foolishness not to consider President Obama in the context of his predecessor and his alternative as well as crediting him with what he has been able to accomplish (in the context of the environment that it was accomplished in). I’m suggesting that you have a much better chance of getting what you want if you credit the president with what he has accomplished and avoid painting him as so evil that there can be no compromise with him. Do you think this is a good tactic when the right uses it? Personally, I think that the right’s use of this tactic has been a big contributing factor to our current dysfunctional political environment and I think that the tactic deserves scorn whether used by the left or the right to tear down the president.
Swarthmore,
If he was reducing it, I would watch because all heck would break loose.
rafflaw: If Obama was reducing Social Security, I would not watch.
Swarthmore Mom,
I am glad that he is not going to touch Social Security. It has no bearing on the debt anyways. Bdaman, If Justice Alito and Chief Justice Roberts don’t want to show at the SOTU, who cares. They are not needed there and to be honest, they are not worth their weight in Packer cheese on the job as well.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/24/AR2011012403472.html?hpid=topnews Obama won’t back reducing Social Security or raising the retirement age.
CBS News/New York Times Poll. Jan. 15-19, 2011. N=1,036 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.
http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_ad.htm
Just one day before President Obama’s State of the Union address, it’s still not clear whether Chief Justice John Roberts will attend or, like high court colleague Justice Samuel Alito, skip the event.
The recent uptick in collegiality from lawmakers on Capitol Hill in the run-up to Tuesday’s speech contrasts sharply with the lingering controversy from last year’s speech in which President Obama rebuked the justices over a campaign finance decision. If Roberts decides not to attend, it would be his first absence at a State the Union Speech since joining the court in 2005.
Roberts’s decision — or that of any other justice for that matter — wouldn’t normally be an issue but for the instant uproar that resulted from last year’s address and the observations he and some of his colleagues have made over the last 12 months about the celebrated but often hyper-partisan evening.
An official with the University of Hawaii Law School confirms to FOX News that Alito, who was a significant part of the controversy last year, will be with students in Honolulu all week and therefore will not attend Tuesday night’s speech. It will be the first time he will not show.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/24/chief-justice-state-union-alito-begs/#ixzz1BzFa7Som
Blouise: Can’t move for a few years because of spouse’s job.
Swarthmore mom
1, January 24, 2011 at 2:43 pm
ouise: We are getting huge medicaid and education cuts here. The republicans won a super majority.
=======================================================
I have been reading about the super-majority in Texas and some of the plans Republicans have to gut programs. Can you move? I ask that question seriously.
Here, in Ohio, all state offices and both houses of the State Legislature went over to the Republicans but many of the races were very close … within 2-3%. Luckily my little corner of the State stuck with their Democrats. I know people are going to be stunned when the cuts start coming … especially in education. Everybody will feel that one as they try to make up the loss of State funds through their local taxes. After years of the Taft republicans literally stealing the state blind, it’s amazing that the voters put the Republicans back in power but hey, that’s our Representative Democracy … now everybody will have to live with it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/24/texas-deficit_n_812948.html Texas Republican Gov Rick Perry used the stimulus for the budget shortfall.
Slart,
You know, neither McCain nor Palin are president. We must judge what is happening right now, under the president we do have. As I said, Obama is destroying the rule of law and undermining our social system. If you are satisfied with this state of affairs, then there’s nothing more to say. If you do not find this state of affairs acceptable, then I would speak out loudly, clearly, forcefully and I would work for justice.