President Obama Delivers State of Disarray Address

Last night, President Obama delivered his third State of the Union address before Congress. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers were present for the speech. Entitled “An America Built to Last,” Obama’s speech was touted to be monumental.  Much to the dismay of Obama, he lived up to expectations and delivered the usual far-leftist talking points.

Upon making his grand entrance, President Obama received the celebrity treatment and, per usual, was adorned by fans and supporters. No stranger to campaigning, Obama gladly signed autographs and embraced his Democratic colleagues. Not surprisingly, he used the State of the Union address as an opportunity to fundraise for his campaign:

Tonight, we set the tone for the year ahead. I’m going to lay out in concrete terms the path we need to take as a country if we want an economy that works for everyone and rewards hard work and responsibility.

Barack Obama, with his leftist rhetoric in tow, beamed with confidence throughout his speech. Although Team Obama is emboldened by incumbency this election year, polls and dismal economic conditions spell trouble for the president.

A Fox News poll from January 11-13 reports 45 percent of Americans approve Obama’s performance, while 47 percent disapprove and eight percent are undecided. Similarly, a RealClearPolitics poll averaging Obama’s job performance from January 5-23 shows 46 percent approve of his performance, while 48 disapprove.

Much to the dismay of this administration, this State of the Union address perpetuated the status quo and further revealed this president’s failure to lead.

During the speech, President Obama touted himself as a job creator.

In his speech he said, “In the last 22 months, businesses have created more than three million jobs. Last year, they created the most jobs since 2005. American manufacturers are hiring again, creating jobs for the first time since the late 1990s.”

Since Obama took office, more people have become poor. In September 2011, the U.S. Census reported that 1-in-6 people—an estimated 46.2 million people—now live in poverty.  When Obama assumed office, unemployment rested at 7.6 percent. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that it sits at 8.5 percent, as of January 6, 2012.

Moreover, Obama discussed plans to boost the economy through alternative energy.

“We can also spur energy innovation with new incentives. The differences in this chamber may be too deep right now to pass a comprehensive plan to fight climate change,” said Obama.

He added, “But there’s no reason why Congress shouldn’t at least set a clean energy standard that creates a market for innovation.”

Recently, the Obama administration rejected a permit for TransCanada Corp’s Keystone XL pipeline—a project slated to create 20,000 new jobs. Unfortunately, Obama’s close ties to environmentalist groups propelled this move. Interestingly enough labor unions fumed over this, as well; they joined unlikely private sector allies in anger over this decision.

Scaremongering by ‘global warming’ alarmists and similar environmental apologists has inhibited job creation. They decry off-shore drilling; citing that its impact would be “harmful” to the environment. Instead, Americans should stand up to these alarmists and counter their efforts. Projects like the Keystone XL pipeline readily ensure job growth.

Unsurprisingly, President Obama attacked capitalism with class warfare rhetoric. He called on the wealthy to “pay their fair share.”

He said, “Tax reform should follow the Buffett rule: If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes.

“Now, you can call this class warfare all you want. But asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as his secretary in taxes? Most Americans would call that common sense,” Obama added.

It is widely held that top income earners already pay high taxes.  More importantly, nearly 47 percent of households do not pay federal income taxes.

With respect to education, President Obama had this to say, “States also need to do their part, by making higher education a higher priority in their budgets. And colleges and universities have to do their part by working to keep costs down.”

In order to remedy education in the United States, greater choice and less bureaucracy will propel reform to take place. School choice will encourage parents to send their children to better K-12 schools, and allow children’s interests—rather than a teachers union’s interests—to take precedence. Moreover, many states are facing budget problems because university administrators make a killing from pensions, tenure, and high salaries. It is undeniable that a bloated bureaucracy breeds contempt for quality (and student-minded) higher education.

President Obama’s remarks signal the failure of  “leading from behind”: bitter divisiveness, economic turmoil, attacks on capitalism, and mediocre leadership. Too many American people, industries, and companies have suffered at the hands of his disastrous policies.

Marxist-Leninist ideas, anti-American ideals, and endless bouts of corruption have left voters dismayed by their government and the political process. As a result, the United States cannot afford another four years of disarray.

Want change you can believe in? Vote Republican in 2012.

Gabriella Hoffman :: University of California at San Diego :: San Diego, California :: @Gabby_Hoffman

Related News

10 Responses

Leave a Reply
  1. Michelle
    Jan 26, 2012 - 01:16 PM

    I’m sorry but she really is the worst writer on this site and thats saying a lot. The moment she uses Obama’s campaign to support her point she loses creditablity. You mean Obama is using evidence of his actions and experience to run his reelection campaign? That’s what everyone does when they’re applying for a job. It’s called a “resume.” McCain would of posted the same thing if he was president now.

    Reply
  2. Hmmm,,,,Really?
    Jan 26, 2012 - 11:23 AM

    @Thereal99percent–Facts (or more accurately, bits of information) and conclusions are two different things. The trouble with most extreme writers, this one included, is that they see the information they have as only suitable for one conclusion, their own.

    For example she refers to Obama as divisive. I don’t reach that conclusion at all, given the same information. I do on the other hand see the vitriolic, angry, and hateful actions of the extreme right and their political allies as very divisive. I actually see from the information I’ve seen that those far right nay-sayers have just about reached the point where, no matter what they do now, they can no longer hold back this economy from recovering. Much to their woe and fear Obama looks as if he is headed toward a second term just based on the recovery of the economy as it picks up steam.

    She also charges that he has Marxist-Leninist and anti-American ideas. You assert that he leans toward socialism. Well my friend, the day the United States government built its first highway, created its first law enforcement or military organization, passed laws that encouraged economic advantage to one product or crop over another, became involved in education, healthcare, and retirement, invested in airports, air traffic control, and air travel, it ventured into socialism. Socialism is not an inherent evil, it just acknowledges that we as humans are somehow greater as social animals than as hermits. So the question is not, “Are you a socialist?”, it is, “What are your personal limits, or what is your comfort zone, around social programs?” We Americans are all socialists.

    Same facts, different conclusions. The main difference between me and the author on our conclusions is that I know that different “valid” conclusions can be arrived at from the same information. I’m just pointing out the naivete of the self righteousness and name calling of the far right.

    And my reference to her being informed by Fox News Net is a reference to the far right wing discourse of cliche’s and memes injected into the culture that guides her thought process and language.

    Reply
  3. Thereal99percent
    Jan 25, 2012 - 02:18 PM

    @Hmmm,,,,Really?… LOL you are absolutely correct, neither extreme is good. The authors references include many sources, Fox only being one of them. I did not read the authors article as extreme. The unemployment examples and supporting stats are spot on. She accurately calls him out on his comment about Warren Buffets taxes. His comments are misleading at best and deceptive/manipulative/rabble rousing at worse. Obama refuses to acknowledge the difference between capital gains and income tax and misrepresents them as one in the same. His comment that Warren Buffet should pay the same taxes as his secretary makes no sense whatsoever. In dollars he does pay much more than his secretary, he also pays capitol gains, not income tax. Also, Warren Buffet is an extreme example. Most people paying capital gains are retirees on fixed income. :)

    Perhaps he is a marxist, perhaps he is not. I do not know what he thinks he is however philosophically you cannot argue that he leans heavily toward the socialist side. I tend to be at odds with him as I do not.

    Outsourcing-
    This is unfortunately a necessary evil and is not as simple as it is made out to be.

    Economic argument: If American company A can produce something for $X and a UK company can produce the same thing for 10% less who will get the sale?

    Salary argument: Do you honestly believe that the shareholders or the executives will absorb the 10% loss from the above example or will they pass it on to the employees? What would most people do in the shareholder/executives positions? Anyone who says they would give it up can put their money where their mouth is. Take 10% of your salary each pay period and tape it to your garbage can for the Janitor or hand it out to people who report to you :)

    IT Argument: Outsourcing allows a company to focus on what it does best and not worry about the day to day information security, the massive amount of staff it takes to keep data centers running, the cost of electricity, keeping up with the latest legislation from every country they have data in or for, etc. To over simplify those massive costs are shared across all companies in an outsourced situation.

    I do not know if what he is talking about is good or bad. There are more questions than there are answers to his usual fluffy statements. He talks about offering a credit for closing a factory overseas and opening one in the US. Is this enough to offset the loss? Will this be offered to companies that both open a factory and outsource part of their business? How about companies that outsource parts of their organization, (IT, payroll, HR, etc) to other American companies that employ overseas workers? How about a company that opens one in the US and overseas? What if they are selling overseas and building a factory to reduce the costs of shipping to that region?

    Perhaps he is really just talking in circles and the penalties and credits offset into a zero sum game? Perhaps he is just telling the simple masses what they think they want to hear knowing it will never ever happen?

    Taxes- I would put some credence to Obama’s statements IF he indicates that (1) he understands that there is a difference between capital gains and salary (2) that changes to salary taxes will have a different impact on different populations than changes to capital gains (3) that he has at least a small understanding as to the massive impact changes to capital gains will have on retirees, business, the economy, and our dollar.

    Reply
  4. Hmmm,,,,Really?
    Jan 25, 2012 - 01:26 PM

    @Thereal99percent–Wow, I think I see some originality there,,,,,”Derp derp,,,,,, herpa derp.”

    So you are suggesting that this conservative blond came up with “Marxist-Leninist ideas, anti-American ideals, and endless bouts of corruption” without coaching from pundits on the Fox News Net. Oh, I got it, you all independently came up with that trash.

    You and the author have never made one real connection with Marxist-Leninist ideas nor anti-American ideals,” with the Obama administration. And your right wing republicans are at least as corrupt as those on the left.

    You people on the far right are no better than those on the far left, you both think excluding the majority in the center is democracy in action. You are both idiots.

    Reply
  5. Thereal99percent
    Jan 25, 2012 - 12:57 PM

    @Hmmm,,,,Really? : It is amazing to me that all those on the left are capable of doing is parroting “Derp derp can’t you think for yourself? herpa derp” :)

    The author of this article put forth support and evidence for her statements and opinions. What exactly are you offering? If you are actually thinking and have your own opinions and evidence or stats to support those opinions then please share them. Otherwise you are exactly what you claim the author to be.

    Ask yourself a question, (no need to answer it here)… Do you ever disagree with Obama? If the answer is “no” then you really are not thinking for yourself :)

    Reply
  6. Hmmm,,,,Really?
    Jan 25, 2012 - 10:19 AM

    And I’m sure you are dismayed that your writing skills only include the minimal capacity for repeating mindless cliche’s, name calling and talking points from the far right. Wouldn’t it be refreshing to think on your own rather than parroting what you hear on Fox News?

    Reply
  7. THOMAS CARSLEY
    Jan 25, 2012 - 07:37 AM

    Nailed it.

    Reply
  8. Ron
    Jan 25, 2012 - 07:16 AM

    Good article…Write more….Your writing counts….Ron – http;//theoxfordteaparty.blogspot.com

    Reply

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Obama’s Lust for Power in State of the Union Education Remarks » Caffeinated Thoughts
  2. Re: The State of the Union « All Tied Up and Nowhere to Go

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyrıght 2014 THE COLLEGE CONSERVATIVE.

Facebook

Twitter