Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Heritage claimed the President didn't talk about any of the highlighted objects--and he most certainly did. I don't understand why you're so upset he didn't mention he was a secret muslim. That is, after all, an open secret.
Talked about (or not) and having a plan are two different things. Heritage points out that the President doesn't have a plan....just lots and lots of platitudes. By chance can we get you folks to think deeper than just arguing surface ideals?
He talked about it (or not)? Whoopie Doo! We want action, not omissions for political purposes!
Talked about (or not) and having a plan are two different things. Heritage points out that the President doesn't have a plan....just lots and lots of platitudes. By chance can we get you folks to think deeper than just arguing surface ideals?
He talked about it (or not)? Whoopie Doo! We want action, not omissions for political purposes!
I guess you weren't listening to the same speech I was listening to. He outlined a plan on jobs and a plan on energy. The fact that his detractors don't get to write his speeches, and put all the negativity that they spew into his speech, does not diminish what he did say.
Is this about ROB? I didn't know he made a State of the Union speech. (He should have, the whole evening would have been more balanced.)
You mean, Obama didn't make any omissions? No, of course not. His State of the Union was selective "facts" a'la Obama.
HA! I watched/listened to the speech. I hung on every word. I love wishful promises and whitewash that makes me feel good.
Apples and oranges. The President's speech is supposed to inform the nation on the sate of the country as it is, not as Obama would like us to see it. If that involves "self-criticism" for failures along the way, so be it.
Only a small man cannot admit failures. Everybody fails from time to time -- and only the small continually place blame elsewhere.
GOP response is NOT intended to be a state of the union report, but highlight what the sitting President hoped no one would notice as he basked in the "afterglow" on the left.
As for Steve Jobs, you forgot to mention that Steve said that there would never have been an Apple in the business climate created by the present administration.
Very good point, and if Steve Jobs saw this, no wonder business's are not starting up and unemployment is high.
We've got one side killing business's and the other giving to many bail-outs. There's a site, "Vote for a President, Not A Party".
Ralph Nader has some good observations about the SOTU address and Obama's performance so far.
Keep in mind that if Obama was doing a good job, Nader would be lauding him. I agree with Nader on many of his observations (except his comment that raising the minimum wage would stimulate the economy. Instead it would hamper it even more).
Ralph Nader has some good observations about the SOTU address and Obama's performance so far.
Keep in mind that if Obama was doing a good job, Nader would be lauding him. I agree with Nader on many of his observations (except his comment that raising the minimum wage would stimulate the economy. Instead it would hamper it even more).
Exactly. What disappoints me is that Liberals on this thread...and presumably millions within the electorate as well......confuse Obama's sky high rhetoric with his actions. They buy it every single time. It's the very same strategy that got him elected....and that has led to disappointment within his base.....but yet they defend him to the end?
Just look at this thread. Pure, unadulterated slobbering over Barack Obama. It's nonsense, and it really undermines Liberal credibility being so slovenly in love with the guy. Is Barack Obama really the person to protect at all costs? That's the mantra from the Liberal Left, and it's sad.
The amount of Liberal Deflection in this thread is downright amazing....even by Liberal standards. Something tells me Liberals are very scared going into this 2012 election season considering they won't even analyze another point of view concerning a President they so obviously worship and intend to protect.
Do Liberals have any dignity left at all?
I haven't read any of this thread since last night but I noticed about a normal amount of liberal deflection at that time. I say normal since their deflection always hits anything i post. They know that they can't really discuss too many points in this one and avoid having to do so by their avoidance of the points the link made.
I agree with you that they just can't stand to see anything like that link taking their Glorious Leader to task. I doubt that many of them have even opened that link since so many came stomping in deflecting in the beginning and the rest failed to even know about the link.
Oh, I read it but I doing so I can only presume that the OP is suggesting that the President should have used the SOTU to criticize himself. There is no president that has used the SOTU as such a platform and to suggest that he should is just silly and whiny.
Similarly, did the Republican response criticize the GOP House? No.
At least the President's speech was factual while the GOP response charged that Mr. Obama said things he never said. An example is Mr. Daniels berated the president for his “constant disparagement of people in business,” which is a complete fabrication. Then he went on with: “The late Steve Jobs — what a fitting name he had — created more of them than all those stimulus dollars the president borrowed and blew.” That's only true if you count jobs in China. Apple only employs only 43,000 people in the United States.
So, the President's speech was factual while the GOP response was a string of crock statements.
Is there a chance that you missed him talking about his killing of bin Laden? Yep he did say that and no matter how you look at it he supposedly said go ahead and the SEALS did the job. Oh yes, he takes credit for many things that he didn't really do.
Why did he omit any words about the things listed here as omissions from his speech the other night? Is there an obvious reason for that? Obama's State of Omission
Remember, this entire thread was started by someone who admits he didn't even listen to the speech, so any link he presents is a link to opinions he imagines he might have if he had heard the speech he didn't listen to.
I had the crock throwing on the whole time although I wasn't watching the face of the man talking. Of course, as so many here do I did read the transcript and found that all those things the blog piece were ignored. Did he say that his Stimulus failed to do much of anything but provide some union jobs and waste so much of the money? Did he say that too many things of the first two years failed to work? I don't remember him saying anything about "cash for clunkers" and how well it worked. How about all the money that went to weatherizing buildings, etc? How much good did his program aimed at helping people buy houses in 2010 by giving them 1/10th of the price they paid? That one really helped the housing situation didn't it?
Did you see him looking down at those notes once, or twice? Nope he was turning his head from side to side just as always when reading from the prompter.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(He should have, the whole evening would have been more balanced.) 
