January 27, 2010
— Gabriel Malor According to Ambinder, these are the policies we can expect to hear about in the speech.
(1) Non-defense, non-discretionary budget freeze.
(2) Salary freeze for WH and political appointees.
(3) Tax cuts and credits aimed at the middle and working classes.
(4) Education funding.
(5) Call for Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal.
(6) Call for amnesty.
(7) Call for legislative attack on the financial industry.
All of it, with the exception of the DADT repeal will be couched in his new-found faux-populism. I also expect some sort of nod to Haiti, probably the announcement of a new relief program or something.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
06:58 AM
| Comments (101)
Post contains 107 words, total size 1 kb.
HEY! According to "the corner" ...Senator Coburn's amendment to cut $120 billion of double payments and wasteful spending was defeated.
Does Congress really think we can afford one more spending binge with a $1.35 trilion deficit this year?
And the democrats want to raise the dept limit - again. It's all smoke and mirrors. It's all talk.
All Obama has is talk.
Posted by: Pre Paid Sex Monster at January 27, 2010 07:04 AM (0fzsA)
Posted by: GuyfromNH at January 27, 2010 07:06 AM (GWXuo)
Posted by: taylork at January 27, 2010 07:06 AM (4jZ56)
Damn those Republicans, refusing to let me get anything done!
Posted by: Barry O at January 27, 2010 07:06 AM (mR7mk)
I project more of the..."targeted tax cuts" meme.
Which is Bullshit. The democrats will never cut taxes. They might offer a "tax credit" - but they will never truly cut taxes. They live and breathe to raise them.
Posted by: Pre Paid Sex Monster at January 27, 2010 07:07 AM (0fzsA)
About what I expected. Talk about misplaced priorities. How about smaller government, significantly lower taxes (start with the corporate rates to spur hiring), stronger national security (especially in the air), enforce our borders, teach people math and English, firm debt reduction goals with a self-imposed duty of accounting along the way, quit lying about the impact of spendulus, unhitch the union whores from our gravy train (I think they've taken a full drink from the trough by now), and populist rhetoric that extols the virtues of America. instead?
Posted by: Bust of Churchill at January 27, 2010 07:07 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: Agnostica at January 27, 2010 07:08 AM (gbCNS)
Posted by: taylork at January 27, 2010 07:08 AM (4jZ56)
Posted by: jjshaka at January 27, 2010 07:08 AM (3rSzP)
Kauthammer nailed it when he explained that a freeze of recently bloated dept budgets is no freeze at all. If he were serious, he roll back to 2008 levels, but he won't.
Posted by: Phil at January 27, 2010 07:09 AM (L8jeB)
Posted by: Fresh Air at January 27, 2010 07:09 AM (tE2Go)
Posted by: Crusty at January 27, 2010 07:09 AM (GvSpB)
Posted by: Average Jen at January 27, 2010 07:10 AM (fRnux)
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at January 27, 2010 07:11 AM (554T5)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 27, 2010 07:11 AM (DIYmd)
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that means more checks to people who file but don't actually pay in. Any of you got a "qualifying child" you're not using I could borrow? I want in on that.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 27, 2010 07:11 AM (mR7mk)
Get primed for another heapin' helpin' of FAIL Zero!
I'll go out on a limb here and predict that the anger and other problems are all due to BOOSHE.
Posted by: maddogg at January 27, 2010 07:11 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: conscious, but in pre-drunk mode at January 27, 2010 07:12 AM (Vu6sl)
Posted by: MaureenTheTemp at January 27, 2010 07:12 AM (8cihe)
Posted by: Curmudgeon at January 27, 2010 07:12 AM (ujg0T)
(6) Call for amnesty.
(7) Call for legislative attack on the financial industry.
Sweet Fancy Moses. Talk about out of touch.
Posted by: Rocks at January 27, 2010 07:12 AM (Q1lie)
Posted by: teej at January 27, 2010 07:13 AM (c459z)
Oregon just voted to increase taxes on themselves. Prediction: Oregon's local economy will hit the skids. Oh glorious progressive tax increases!
Posted by: Pre Paid Sex Monster at January 27, 2010 07:13 AM (0fzsA)
Posted by: Prez Barry at January 27, 2010 07:13 AM (bWB5j)
Even libs, as they lose their jobs, are starting to talk about closing the border and enforcing the laws so that little bit about Amnesty should really go over well with his base, again.
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 07:14 AM (p302b)
Posted by: alexthechick at January 27, 2010 07:14 AM (8WZWv)
Nothing about fighting two wars (three if you now count Yemen)?
Nothing about foreign anything? (Iran, world economy, impoving relations, China, Israel/Palistinians, terrorists, etc.)
Nothing about going green? Climate fairy tales? Cap and trade?
NOTHING ABOUT HEALTHCARE????
What happened to his agenda? Under the bus?
Posted by: markytom at January 27, 2010 07:14 AM (NHad9)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 27, 2010 07:14 AM (DIYmd)
Posted by: nevergiveup at January 27, 2010 07:15 AM (0GFWk)
Posted by: The Chicken Of No Return at January 27, 2010 07:16 AM (OlN4e)
(6) Call for amnesty.
(7) Call for legislative attack on the financial industry.
Sweet Fancy Moses. Talk about out of touch.
Don't you know? Socialists lesbian Mexicans are the new soccer moms, and we have the registrations to prove it.
Posted by: ACORN at January 27, 2010 07:16 AM (4jZ56)
Okay, I know there's probably a perfectly rational an accounting/political explanation for this term, but "Non-discretionary budget freeze?" If it's non-discretionary, wouldn't it by definition have to be paid, regardless of budgetary concerns? A budget freeze would have to focus on limiting discretionary expenses, since they are... um... freakin' discretionary!!eleventy1! and can be frozen.
Like I said, I'm sure there's an accounting/political definition of discretionary/non-discretionary expenses that I'm not aware of that gives the phrase "non-discretionary budget freeze" some semblence of meaning.
Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at January 27, 2010 07:16 AM (pZEar)
So....I'm not sure it hurts Obama as much, unless independents have a collective WTF moment when they view it alongside 10% unemployment.
Posted by: grognard at January 27, 2010 07:16 AM (v0kvW)
Posted by: nevergiveup at January 27, 2010 11:15 AM (0GFWk)
Not for the soldier who calls one of his platoon mates "faggot" after they repeal DADT you can bet on that.
Posted by: Rocks at January 27, 2010 07:17 AM (Q1lie)
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 07:17 AM (p302b)
Foreign policy is nothing but an irritating distraction to these statists. So is the military.
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at January 27, 2010 07:17 AM (554T5)
(2) Salary freeze for WH and political appointees.
(3) Tax cuts and credits aimed at the middle and working classes.
(4) Education funding.
(5) Call for Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal.
(6) Call for amnesty.
(7) Call for legislative attack on the financial industry.
1. Great.
2. Great.
3. Why not across the board?
4. Not the feds job.
5. I'm too ignorant to comment.
6. Unjust.
7. Scapegoating.
Posted by: David at January 27, 2010 07:19 AM (T8c0z)
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 07:19 AM (p302b)
The only reason people don't support it now is that they just don't understand it. It's up to us to make those people understand how great it'll be -- force them to free their minds, if you will.
Sure, we'll get an earful back home all right, but it will be an earful of wonderment and happiness about what a great job we did.
Posted by: Bust of Harry Reid at January 27, 2010 07:20 AM (8/DeP)
Oregon just voted to increase taxes on themselves. Prediction: Oregon's local economy will hit the skids. Oh glorious progressive tax increases!
I knew people in the north end of the state (above Redding) who used to drive to Medford for big ticket item purchases, as OR had no sales tax. This initiative amounts to a hidden sales tax, as businesses pass on the costs to consumers.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at January 27, 2010 07:20 AM (ujg0T)
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 07:22 AM (p302b)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 27, 2010 11:14 AM (DIYmd)
And playing class warfare too.
Posted by: David at January 27, 2010 07:22 AM (T8c0z)
I think this should be titled "SoTU the Musical" (from Fiddler on the Roof)
Spend more, spend less
Spend more, spend less
All of the money flows away
Prosperity turns to poverty and misery
Greatness to ruin as we gaze
I'm here all week.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at January 27, 2010 07:23 AM (r1h5M)
Posted by: Agnostica at January 27, 2010 07:23 AM (gbCNS)
Posted by: Penny at January 27, 2010 07:23 AM (5sGLG)
Posted by: barbelle at January 27, 2010 07:24 AM (qF8q3)
They can be Catholic and stay in Mexico and church affiliation numbers stay unchanged. I think you're right. It's a money game, but "poor undocumented" Mexican Catholics have no money, or they send it back to Mexico anyway!
The Catholic Church has a serious problem with this embracing of liberal policies that it seems to be doing. Instead of appealing to the good consciences of people and preaching good deeds by individuals, they seem to have taken the point of view that the government should be voted in and tasked with applying "social justice."
Posted by: grognard at January 27, 2010 07:25 AM (v0kvW)
Teh chicken is going to be very sore tonight.
Posted by: Peaches at January 27, 2010 07:26 AM (9Wv2j)
Here's what Barry will say, "I was going to call for a 10% across-the-board tax increase. Instead, I am calling for a 5% increase. You're welcome for the 5% tax cut."
Posted by: Steve L. at January 27, 2010 07:26 AM (Gkhxf)
Mary Katharine Ham notes that President Obama tells ABC:
“Let's just clarify. I didn't make a bunch of deals [on health care]. ... There is a legislative process that is taking place in Congress and I am happy to own up to the fact that I have not changed Congress and how it operates the way I would have liked.”
But the Washington Post reported on December 20 that Obama's top aides were involved in the negotiations with Nelson:
Schumer,
who spent more than 13 hours in Reid's office Friday, said the Medicaid
issue was settled around lunchtime, and the final eight hours of the
talks focused on the abortion language. Boxer estimated she spent seven
hours in Reid's offices -- without ever once sitting in the same room,
even though they were all of 25 steps apart.
-------
Unfrigginbelievable!
Read the rest here: http://tinyurl.com/ycgzzfh
Posted by: Tami at January 27, 2010 07:26 AM (VuLos)
I hope Not to see any of the well known RINO's giving a milquetoast "rebuttal". I wanna see this crap sandwich taken apart layer by layer in no uncertain terms. And I don't want to see McCain or Newt.
Posted by: maddogg at January 27, 2010 07:27 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: David at January 27, 2010 07:27 AM (T8c0z)
(7) Call for legislative attack on the financial industry.
What? Does he 1) still not realize this ISN'T good for the economy, 2) not care, or 3) have this as his goal all along?
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at January 27, 2010 07:28 AM (eNxMU)
Either I'm completely out of touch with the political zeitgeist or Obama is. What can he be thinking? Amnesty? I have to assume that's gonna be a Haiti-only deal (at least to start) and it still won't be very popular.
Is "Don't ask, don't tell" of importance to anyone but the gay lobby? Doubt it. Going after the successful businesses that actually still employ people at good wages? That's supposed to be smart?
I'm beyond puzzled by Wee-Wee and his handlers.
Posted by: lincolntf at January 27, 2010 07:29 AM (V2pCF)
Posted by: Agnostica at January 27, 2010 07:29 AM (gbCNS)
Instead of the traditional rebuttal, I'd like to see DeMint and Coburn and a few other stalwarts just sitting around a table laughing hysterically for 15 minutes.
Posted by: Peaches at January 27, 2010 07:30 AM (9Wv2j)
Posted by: Zimriel at January 27, 2010 07:30 AM (9Sbz+)
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 07:31 AM (p302b)
The Catholic Church has a serious problem with this embracing of liberal policies that it seems to be doing. Instead of appealing to the good consciences of people and preaching good deeds by individuals, they seem to have taken the point of view that the government should be voted in and tasked with applying "social justice."
There has been a "liberation theology" 5th column of Commies in Collars, often Jesuits, in the Church for some time.
In fairness, the good guys in the Church, like Opus Dei, rock.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at January 27, 2010 07:31 AM (ujg0T)
65 maddogg 57, the response is going to be from McDonnell in Virginia, who strikes me as a sharp guy with unapologetic conservative principles.
Sounds good. I don't know anything about him. That will be the only part of the speech I will watch.
Posted by: maddogg at January 27, 2010 07:32 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: gus at January 27, 2010 07:33 AM (Vqruj)
Word has it that The Wall Street Journal editorial board still thinks we're all racists for not supporting amnesty. After all, there are so many jobs that Americans still won't do.
Agnostica: for some time now, I have been posting back on the WSJ comment section / editorial pages, rebutting the open border greedheads, and concluding with the words "You. Just. Don't. Get. It." Join the fray.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at January 27, 2010 07:33 AM (ujg0T)
In some dioceses the Bishops are trying to centralize everything. They claim this is to shore up the church going forward but parishes have always had their autonomy and they used their own discretiion. The parishes, the people, aren't taking this obvious "land grab, money grab and centralization" by the bishiops lightly. There is a lot of talk about violations of cannon law and how the heirarchy (the Bishops) relate to the people, not. It seems some Bishops are attempting to replicate what is going on in the administration. There is a battle brewing in the church.
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 07:35 AM (p302b)
Not too long ago this guy looked like the anti-christ character in a low-budget apocalyptic christian movie produced by Jack Van Impe.
Now that he's in trouble and needs to focus on jobs...he also wants to focus on amnesty? Really?
Jeez, how many more jobs will he have to create or save to accommodate all the people from other countries that seek to do the work that Americans formerly refused to do?
Epic fail. Tin ear. Complete implosion.
Posted by: oh, Hi Mark at January 27, 2010 07:37 AM (1812w)
David 42 1. Great. 2. Great.
You misspelled "gimmick".
Posted by: Zimriel at January 27, 2010 11:28 AM (9Sbz+)
Ha! Thanks.
Posted by: David at January 27, 2010 07:37 AM (T8c0z)
Posted by: maddogg at January 27, 2010 07:37 AM (OlN4e)
Interesting question. They basically have to remove Article 125 from the UCMJ which deals with sodomy, which is further defined as “unnatural copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex.” and includes oral sex even between consenting and married adults
Of course I don't think many, if any, straight military members ever get charged under this article so they would have a problem if they only went after gays.
Posted by: TRO at January 27, 2010 07:40 AM (XKrqS)
Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 27, 2010 07:42 AM (ucq49)
Posted by: Go BIG Guy at January 27, 2010 07:43 AM (G0BIG)
Posted by: barbelle at January 27, 2010 07:44 AM (qF8q3)
Posted by: tachyonshuggy at January 27, 2010 07:49 AM (yUybe)
Posted by: jjshaka at January 27, 2010 07:51 AM (3rSzP)
Posted by: George Orwell at January 27, 2010 07:52 AM (AZGON)
Jesus H. Christ. The financial industry is already on life support, despite a few dumbasses on Wall Street who decided to pay themselves too much. Lending is slowing to a crawl because of a shitload of new regulations that went into effect on January 1. And this asshole wants to declare war on the banks?
Do these people have ANY idea how business actually works in this country???
Posted by: rockmom at January 27, 2010 07:54 AM (w/gVZ)
Posted by: maddogg at January 27, 2010 11:37 AM (OlN4e)"
Pulling a switch would be a lib/dem move, not a republican/conservative one. That's so sad though cause a Sarah Palin response, coming now, would have them blow all their circuits and end up in a fetal position crying.
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 07:55 AM (p302b)
Posted by: sydney jane at January 27, 2010 07:55 AM (T8h7U)
Jesus H. Christ. The financial industry is already on life support, despite a few dumbasses on Wall Street who decided to pay themselves too much. Lending is slowing to a crawl because of a shitload of new regulations that went into effect on January 1. And this asshole wants to declare war on the banks?
Do these people have ANY idea how business actually works in this country???
Posted by: rockmom at January 27, 2010 11:54 AM (w/gVZ)"
Yep before it was that liquidity froze and it was a shocker, now liquidity is starting to freeze because few want to borrow and that's fine for the banks casue they really don't want to lend. And small business is caught in the cross fire.
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 07:57 AM (p302b)
Posted by: George Orwell at January 27, 2010 07:58 AM (AZGON)
70% say it is in epic fail mode.
They want polls, there are the polls.....
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 07:58 AM (p302b)
We've seen his act over and over and over and over and over.
He's not fooling anyone anymore.
Amnesty = more LIBTARD voters. It won't fly.
Posted by: gus at January 27, 2010 07:58 AM (Vqruj)
Problem is they are so insulated they can't see it or they won't see it or they know and they just don't give a damn about what "the people who are too stupid to know what is good for them" think.
Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 08:00 AM (p302b)
82
Yes, Obama ran a SHAVED ICE stand and Biden ran a 7/11. Kevin Jennings ran a PORN shop and Napolitano owned a tavern. Steven Chu sold paint at an ACE HARDWARE and Al Gore sold sun tan lotion in South Beach.
These people are real Americans.
Posted by: gus at January 27, 2010 08:03 AM (Vqruj)
I bet she would raise her eyebrows at that one, if only she still could.
Posted by: Darren at January 27, 2010 08:27 AM (PntkJ)
Posted by: Teleprompter of North Mexico at January 27, 2010 08:38 AM (+Z5RN)
Barry must really love pain.
Posted by: GarandFan at January 27, 2010 08:41 AM (ZQBnQ)
Now, get a guy recently elected *despite* Obama to articulate the same message - that will have resonance. Good move on McDonnell, in my opinion.
Posted by: grognard at January 27, 2010 08:41 AM (v0kvW)
I'd wait until the commercial paper defaults become impossible to cover up anymore first. There's still a lot of downside risk there. I'm thinking some JPM June 35 puts might be a worthwhile gamble.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 27, 2010 08:42 AM (Yav4x)
Posted by: nyc redneck at January 27, 2010 08:43 AM (EtrGh)
Posted by: Teleprompter of North Mexico at January 27, 2010 08:51 AM (+Z5RN)
Posted by: Luca Brasi at January 27, 2010 09:50 AM (YmPwQ)
Posted by: joeindc44 at January 27, 2010 12:14 PM (QxSug)
26
Oregon just voted to increase taxes on themselves. Prediction: Oregon's local economy will hit the skids. Oh glorious progressive tax increases!
I heard Michael Medved, Seattle resident, talking about this today. He says that this is not just a tax increase, but a tax on gross receipts of a business (i.e., not a tax on profits but a tax on anything sold, regardless if the business is actually making money at the end of the day). Also, if you make more than $125,000 per year you are "rich" and get hit with an extra couple percent additional tax.
Washington State is gearing up for an influx of tax refugees.
Posted by: Boots at January 27, 2010 02:57 PM (06JTY)
Too true.
I went to Jesuit college and by the time I was done I had lost track of all the priests who should have been excommunicated for continually badmouthing the Vatican and Pope.
They were all brainwashed with "Liberation Theology" which was nothing more than a trojan horse for communism. Same here, the Social Justice meme is repeated over and over. Social Justice is Liberation Theology is Socialism.
Posted by: Boots at January 27, 2010 02:59 PM (06JTY)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2643 seconds, 229 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: docj at January 27, 2010 07:02 AM (dt6br)