ok what did you think

[Roseslipper]

what did u think of the state of the union address????

[rameumptom]

Pres Obama sought to be Reaganesque and more conservative than in the past. He partially succeeded in both. We'll see what actions follow, however, as he also campaigned as a moderate, but his actions as president have been rather liberal domestically.

He's called on bipartisan efforts in the past, but then allowed Nancy Pelosi to steam roll over the Republicans. We'll see if he really works with the Republicans.

[FunkyTown]

Pres Obama sought to be Reaganesque and more conservative than in the past. He partially succeeded in both. We'll see what actions follow, however, as he also campaigned as a moderate, but his actions as president have been rather liberal domestically.

He's called on bipartisan efforts in the past, but then allowed Nancy Pelosi to steam roll over the Republicans. We'll see if he really works with the Republicans.

I think he may have learned his lesson. He has to work with the Republicans now that there's a power imbalance in the senate.

As for his previous actions as President, I sincerely believe him to be a moderate trapped in immoderate times. You have to remember that the bailouts(Which I think we can agree was the single series of events that would paint him as immoderate) were pushed by Republicans as well when they were in office, but they reversed their stance when they lost power.

I like Obama. He's sincere, direct and truly believes in what he's doing. I disagree with what he's doing sometimes, but I believe him when he talks about what he's doing. He has had a remarkable amount of transparency in his time in office compared to historical presidents. That transparency has paid off for him with people who pay attention.

[hordak]

I think he may have learned his lesson. He has to work with the Republicans now that there's a power imbalance in the senate.

As for his previous actions as President, I sincerely believe him to be a moderate trapped in immoderate times. You have to remember that the bailouts(Which I think we can agree was the single series of events that would paint him as immoderate) were pushed by Republicans as well when they were in office, but they reversed their stance when they lost power.

I like Obama. He's sincere, direct and truly believes in what he's doing. I disagree with what he's doing sometimes, but I believe him when he talks about what he's doing. He has had a remarkable amount of transparency in his time in office compared to historical presidents. That transparency has paid off for him with people who pay attention.

Why is a Canadian so interested in USA politics and affairs? Nothing wrong with it, just wondering.

[bytor2112]

Obama is a world class liar for sure....not unlike many other politicians and FT, he is SO not transparent. AND...I didn't listen to the address, but in fairness I didn't listen to Bush's either.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Why is a Canadian so interested in USA politics and affairs? Nothing wrong with it, just wondering.

An interesting dynamic with Canadians. Many like Obama because they view him as a global thinker. But many are concerned about Obamacare because the better medical care in the United States that shores up the weaknesses in Canadian socialized care is now in jeopardy. If they can't go to the United States for care they can't receive in Canada, where will they go? Where will anyone go?

I didn't bother watching, mostly because I'm a truck driver and I can't, but I won't even bother to watch the youtubes. I would be interested to know how many Supreme Court justices decided to sit this one out after Obama's atrocious behavior last year. There was rumor that at least 2 of them would not attend. Whether Obama realizes it or not, he's now a lame duck president and the squawking of a dying animal just breaks my heart.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

As for his previous actions as President, I sincerely believe him to be a moderate trapped in immoderate times. You have to remember that the bailouts(Which I think we can agree was the single series of events that would paint him as immoderate) were pushed by Republicans as well when they were in office, but they reversed their stance when they lost power.

Just a small correction. Republicans lost Congress in 2006. What happened was that Republicans voted for TARP even though their constituents were screaming for them not to. Several of those RINOs have since been thrown out of office and the 2nd vote for a further bailout received continental opposition from Republicans.

[rubondfan2]

Well, for me, I think the State of the Union address is nothing more than entertainment for the masses. Nothing of real substance is ever said, rarely are any of the "promises" fulfilled and no real decisions are made.

For a real look at the state of our Union, we would be better served to look at our debt to income ratios, our true Gross Domestic Product indicators and our true inflation numbers. I think we should then crack open and observe the contents of the textbooks which are spoon fed to our children in the Public School system. Finally, we should go out on the streets of any american city and randomly ask people if they know the names of the following individuals:

US President

Vice President

England's Prime Minister

Canada's Prime Minister

President of Mexico

Owner of Fox network

Owner of CNN network

President of the Council on Foreign Relations

Head of the United Nations

"Your" state Governor

Chairman of the Federal Reserve

Both your US Senators (heck, it'd be interesting to see how many even knew there were two)

And just for fun comparison purposes... ask:

Who won the most recent "American Idol" competition?

Who is the current "Bachelor"?

What was the last episode of "The Simpsons" about?

I think that would start to give us a better sense of the state of our Union.

[HoosierGuy]

I didn't listen to the whole thing but what I did told me the U.S. is scared of China. We are owned by China. We are slaves to China. The master of our ship is Wall Street.

[Saldrin]

He was really fake he did not believe anything he said.

[selek]

Nearly every single one of the platitudes President Obama mouthed last night has been offered before.

It's the same snake oil he's been selling all along....and no one is buying who isn't already addicted.

How many times now has he promised to "focus like a laser beam" on jobs?

How many times has he promised "bipartisanship" only to tell those who disagree with him to "sit in the back of the bus"?

How many times has he promised to "moderate" his course, only to continue to spend money we don't have and centralize political power in his unelected and unaccountable czars?

No- this was yet another dose of empty rhetoric.

Obama is very good at talking the talk- but he's never yet walked the walk.

And time will show that he has no intention of doing so.

[Guest]

Yeah, I agree with Selek somewhat. I didn't really see anything "new" here. I heard about the earmarks and I'm like, really? He said that last year and as late as last month, he was signing earmarks. High-speed rail? Yeah, we heard that too - from past Presidents even...

So, yeah, I don't know what to think about this one. I laughed about Sputnik... I wouldn't expect anybody younger than me to remember what that was... but, I get what he was trying to say.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Now there's some claims out there that this speech was one tantamount to plagiarism. Many of the phrases have been pasted from other great speeches such as from Reagan or JFK. There was also a lame attempt to imitate Reaganesque speeches on American exceptionalism. Obama's "glimpse into the future" is nothing more than sad rhetoric that masks itself as being drawn from America's greatness. But coming from a man who believes America is racist, homophobic, prolific in injustices all over the world, and a promoter of an ever widening gap between the evil rich and the oppressed poor...his words ring hallow.

As Saldrin said, he doesn't really believe what he's saying.

[dahlia]

The man is a socialist, with socialist activist friends, who wants nothing less than to substantially change the US as we know it. When I was in college in the 70's, I was a member of one of the socialist parties. I know what these people believe politically. Now they think they have a friend in Obama and that the time has finally come to make the Utopian (and ultimately doomed to failure) changes they think will make the country more like the socialist and communist governments they idolize. And of course, they all assume that the people are dumb and that they, as the intelligentsia and the elite, must lead. Not on my watch, kids.

The man has no business sense, generally hates business and sees businesses as thieves, making profit on the backs of the poor. There is no gray area for these people, no 'good' businesses, no good business people (unless they are big contributors, of course). In a time of nearly economic collapse, he has fewer people with a business background in his cabinet than any president for many, many years. What business he and his ilk do 'allow,' will be so regulated that any entrepreneur with any sense is going to take outsource the business to a country with fewer restrictions. I'm not talking about going someplace where they can hire people at $2 a day or empty toxins into rivers, I'm talking about 1st world countries that have looked around the economic landscape and revised their tax system so that responsible businesses aren't penalized for - gee, doing business in their country.

He isn't fit to say the name 'Reagan,' much less try to be Reaganesque.

[Tyler90AZ]

Bottom line President Obama gets done what he says in the State of the Union. Maybe this is better for some "get-r-done."

Obama State of the Union 2011 - CNNMoney.com

[FunkyTown]

Why is a Canadian so interested in USA politics and affairs? Nothing wrong with it, just wondering.

It only seems that I'm interested in USA politics because there are a lot of Americans on this board and it comes up.

I also care about President Sarkozy's overtures of conciliation with the rest of the world(Which, I would hope, is something most Americans are familiar with as the American/French rivalry got to be pretty petty and vindictive from both sides for a while. Freedom Fries, guys? Really?)

I also care about Greece's national debt and the tendency to bail out countries that refuse to moderate themselves.

I also care about Ukraine's Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and wonder if she has the courage to stand up to corruption and Eastern Bloc bullying.

The question shouldn't be, 'Why is a Canadian interested in American politics?' but rather 'Why are most Americans not interested in international politics?'

This tendency to ignore the rest of the world when making decisions is the biggest cause of strife between the US and the rest of the world, and lack of education on international issues has become somewhat of a joke in the international community. If you're interested, go to YouTube and watch 'Talking to Americans'. This style of show is repeated in the UK, Australia and Canada. If you want a real treat, go to the 'Talking to Americans - Harvard edition' where the best educated minds in the US were asked questions on international politics.

Most politics have international consequences, and it behooves everyone to be educated on the international scene.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Funkytown, I couldn't agree more. Americans are obsessed about their own problems and we can't blame the media because the media shows us precisely what we ask it to...24 hours of commentary on the Tiger Woods scandal, Michael Jackson's death, and Sarah Palin's wardrobe.

I would say that our relationship with France has experienced some healing since the election of President Sarkozy. He reminded the French about the thousands of graves where Americans were buried in French soil, having given their all to free France from the nazi rule. There was one senator or congressman who suggested "freedom fries" in the capitol hill cafeteria and the media ran with it. Americans' anger was expressed more by the boycotts, but that seemed to die down quickly after Sarkosy's overture of peace.

I'm guessing that Canadians have always been interested in US politics simply because their future is tied with ours. Even during the cold war, I'm sure they didn't appreciate the fact that our ICBM trajectories, as well as the Soviets' went right over Canadian airspace. What if one of them ran out of gas right over Toronto?

[Blackmarch]

Why is a Canadian so interested in USA politics and affairs? Nothing wrong with it, just wondering.

About everything has global consequences now.. it pays to be attentive of a neighbors politicking.

... that and it pays to learn from others' mistakes and succsesses.

[Guest]

It only seems that I'm interested in USA politics because there are a lot of Americans on this board and it comes up.

I also care about President Sarkozy's overtures of conciliation with the rest of the world(Which, I would hope, is something most Americans are familiar with as the American/French rivalry got to be pretty petty and vindictive from both sides for a while. Freedom Fries, guys? Really?)

I also care about Greece's national debt and the tendency to bail out countries that refuse to moderate themselves.

I also care about Ukraine's Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and wonder if she has the courage to stand up to corruption and Eastern Bloc bullying.

The question shouldn't be, 'Why is a Canadian interested in American politics?' but rather 'Why are most Americans not interested in international politics?'

This tendency to ignore the rest of the world when making decisions is the biggest cause of strife between the US and the rest of the world, and lack of education on international issues has become somewhat of a joke in the international community. If you're interested, go to YouTube and watch 'Talking to Americans'. This style of show is repeated in the UK, Australia and Canada. If you want a real treat, go to the 'Talking to Americans - Harvard edition' where the best educated minds in the US were asked questions on international politics.

Most politics have international consequences, and it behooves everyone to be educated on the international scene.

AMEN, BROTHA!

I may not agree with your perception of Pres. Obama but you are very spot on in this post, my friend!

I mean - it's not even that Americans are not well versed in International politics/history - a lot of the new generation is not well versed in their own American politics and history!

By the way, have you read Testimony by Sarkozy? I love that book!

[rameumptom]

I think he may have learned his lesson. He has to work with the Republicans now that there's a power imbalance in the senate.

As for his previous actions as President, I sincerely believe him to be a moderate trapped in immoderate times. You have to remember that the bailouts(Which I think we can agree was the single series of events that would paint him as immoderate) were pushed by Republicans as well when they were in office, but they reversed their stance when they lost power.

No, he doesn't have to do anything. As for his previous actions, he has not shown himself to be a moderate. He has shown himself to be one of two things: either a liberal on the level of Nancy Pelosi, or a weak person who caved into Nancy Pelosi. Neither one is a good sign.

He campaigned as a moderate, but instantly pushed for methods that heavily involved government. The bailouts could have been done in a way to keep the fed out of everything - for instance, paid off mortgages rather than directly give money to the big banks and make them beholden to the fed. Obamacare could have focused on the 30 million without health care, rather than making the huge monstrosity it now is (which is so bad that many big companies have been given waivers!). Or he could have given all adults a health care voucher to use at any insurance company. Instead, he turned it over to Pelosi, who had to bribe the moderate Democrats into voting for it. He snuggled up to unions. Chrysler's bailout was actually a bail out for the union, and not the stockholders. This is not moderate at all.

Of course, November and December 2010 was telling, as he and the lame duck Democratic-led Congress passed forth many liberal issues, as well, trying to get as much passed as they could before the Republicans came into office.

He spent 2 years saying we were one of many nations. Only now is he saying we are number one. His actions have not been consistent with a moderate's actions and behaviors.

While I like him, I do not trust him as president.

[bytor2112]

I have resisted until now...But, I would be curious to see statistical evidence (MOE?) showing that citizens of other nations know more regarding international politics or that they are better versed than their American counter parts.

As far as OP...I didn't watch the address. Obama's speaking cadence is annoying and frankly the man is full of himself and of that deliciously cheap cut of meat known as baloney.

[Guest]

I have resisted until now...But, I would be curious to see statistical evidence (MOE?) showing that citizens of other nations know more regarding international politics or that they are better versed than their American counter parts.

As far as OP...I didn't watch the address. Obama's speaking cadence is annoying and frankly the man is full of himself and of that deliciously cheap cut of meat known as baloney.

Doesn't really answer your question directly, but an interesting finding nonetheless...

http://pcl.stanford.edu/research/2009/iyengar-darkareas.pdf

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I have resisted until now...But, I would be curious to see statistical evidence (MOE?) showing that citizens of other nations know more regarding international politics or that they are better versed than their American counter parts.

As far as OP...I didn't watch the address. Obama's speaking cadence is annoying and frankly the man is full of himself and of that deliciously cheap cut of meat known as baloney.

Statistics not required. Nothing ever happens in Canada so naturally, they're fascinated with news from everywhere else. It's just a logical deduction.

The most shameful aspect of the Obama speech is that is is the most plagiarized speech given by any president in US history. They didn't even try to conceal the fact that they were pasting right from Eisenhower, Wilson, Reagan, JFK, and others who gave memorable speeches.

BTW, we're bashing Obama something fierce and he's now an official candidate for re-election. I won't be too surprised when the gingerbread cookie locks down this thread.

[Palerider]

I was not impressed with anything he said.

[FunkyTown]

I have resisted until now...But, I would be curious to see statistical evidence (MOE?) showing that citizens of other nations know more regarding international politics or that they are better versed than their American counter parts.

As far as OP...I didn't watch the address. Obama's speaking cadence is annoying and frankly the man is full of himself and of that deliciously cheap cut of meat known as baloney.

Hi Bytor,

While I won't be providing links, you should be able to do a search on Stanford's website. They did a study on that very thing.

The reason I won't provide links is for two reasons:

1) This is the one thing that angers the rest of the world towards the US, so links will often be coloured by that anger. I did a search on that very thing and was given a plethora of websites. Unfortunately, they could be seen as Anti-American. As someone who has nothing but respect for the American people, I didn't want to post something that linked to Anti-American sentiment.

2) There's a tendency, when speaking about any country, that people will assume that any criticism means that you hate the country in question. While silly, people's defenses naturally come up due to heavy nationalist feelings.