I Have a Gripe

January 28, 2010

My State of the Union Review

Filed under: government,Healthcare,Laws,Politics,Security,United States government — alvb1227 @ 11:11 pm

Last night was the first State of the Union by President Obama. Now that close to 24 hours have past the the twitch in my eye has settled down, I can put some thoughts together about my opinion of the speech.

First off, I will say he is an excellent (teleprompter reader) orator. He delivers a speech very well. Like many State of the Union addresses, the President spoke of lofty goals that on the surface make lots of sense. Who wouldn’t want to see lower tuition, better paying jobs, development of green technology and all our troops home? I would love to see all those things…and more. But the harsh reality is that we don’t live the int he dreamworld of Washington D.C.; we live in the cities and suburbs of the United States of America.

We are living in a world today where extremist lunatics want to kill us simply because we believe in a free society. While I am not a Constitutional expert, I believe these people should be considered enemy combatants and enemies of the state. I don’t believe that they should be tried in civilian court, but in military tribunals. This is a different warfare we are waging today. Not one of countries, but of ideologies. We have a pretty solid idea where these terrorists (and they are terrorists) come from, however, because they are not “officially” associated with a country’s military, we need to redefine how to handle these people. They are not common thugs and as a result, shouldn’t be treated as such. I don’t believe we should have the 9-11 trials in the shadow of where those great buildings once stood, but in Gitmo where they won’t have a soapbox to spew their hatred. They are already pleading guilty. So, just make it official and hang them and be done with it.

The Administration needs to understand that we Americans are not happy with what is going on in Washington D.C. today. Yes, he is right; there is partisan bickering and we can be far apart on issues. However, our elected Representatives (including the President) all need to understand they represent “we the people” and we are now watching them like a hawk. If they make backroom deals like with the recent health care debacle, we will hold them to task. At the same time, I do not believe it is the place of the President to lecture the Senate, the House or (especially) the Supreme Court like a mother lecturing a four-year-old. In my opinion, he is as bad as many of them currently in office. My opinion is that he delegates off a lot of what he should be doing so when it falls apart, it can’t stick to him.

He said he wants to meet regularly with both sides of the aisle. I hope that’s true. I respectfully disagree that the GOP is the “party of no.” They just haven’t been taken seriously when it comes to how they feel issues should be handled (like health care). This goes beyond a party being obstinate, to a party not being considered. Why? Because the liberal wing of the Democratic party felt they didn’t have to listen to them because they had a super-majority. As a result, they tried to push an agenda a majority of the country didn’t believe was the right way to proceed. Just like over 200 years ago, a shot was heard around the world. As shot in the form of the election of a little-known Republican by the name of Scott Brown in one of the most liberal states in the Union. It looks like it got their attention and hopefully they will keep this in mind moving forward.

One thing I have been saying for as long as I can remember is the role of government as it relates to job creation. It is not the job of the government to create jobs, even though they seem to be the only ones hiring these days. It is the job of the government to create conditions that are conducive for businesses to create jobs. This takes place by offering sensible tax cuts and hot holding business owners feet to the fire every time the government needs to institute some ridiculous policy.

What do I really want? As I have said for ages…stay out of the way and let the market correct itself. It is not the place of the government to levy fees on banks (that will ultimately trickle down to the consumer), bailout private industry, regulate health care or decide how much college should cost. The framers of this ever-evolving society understood the ramifications of a government too involved in one’s private life. That’s why they developed specific limitations as to what the government can and should control. And the President? That was designed as the least powerful office. Washington also warned against the two-party system. People should’ve listened.

Ultimately, I would like to see all politicians, federal or local, to read the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, their state’s governing documents and really understand what it means to serve the people. The ones who voted them in and the ones who can vote them out. Because at the end of the day, the living document of the Constitution defines a government that is, as I quote from Lincoln, “of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.”

Advertisements

1 Comment »

  1. Great post! You said all that needed to be said.

    Obama was not only unprofessional in criticizing the courts, but he’s wrong. Despite Obama’s fear-mongering, it’s unconstitutional to accept campaign donations from foreign companies. The last liberal in office knew that all too well.

    I’ve had it with this “party of no” BS. Ok, so the Democrats push the most radical agenda in our nation’s history and are surprised when Republicans oppose it?? I’d like to point out that far more Democrats supported the Iraq War (before they opposed it of course) than Republicans support Cap and Trade, the Stimulus Package, or Healthcare “Reform.” This isn’t because Dems are more conciliatory than Repubs. It’s because Iraq made sense (despite subsequent liberal hand-wringing), and Obama’s agenda is harmful to our country. Obama’s initiatives hit a nerve with right-wingers, striking at the very heart of what makes them conservative. It would be similar to Republicans advocating racial segregation.

    Comment by Jason — January 28, 2010 @ 11:43 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: