When did it become fashionable for Presidents to speak for over an hour at the annual State of the Union address?
According to those who monitor such things, this was the longest State of the Union speech ever.
But the trend has been noticeable ever since the days of Bill Clinton, who was famous for droning on incessantly during his annual speeches before Congress. George W. Bush gave the nation a break from the verbosity with his tendency to be a man of few words, but now with Obama, we are back to the lengthy laundry-lists, grandstanding, pandering to certain constituencies, and trolling for applause.
It would actually be a breath of fresh air for a President to rise to the podium and give a 20-minute speech on the actual state of the union instead of a politicized white-wash during which negative circumstances are glossed over with a positive spin.
The talking head crew at CBS News proclaimed that Obama's presentation was 'Reaganesque' with its emphasis on personal stories to illustrate the main points. While this was, indeed, a trait of Reagan, the CBS mainstream bias in favor of liberals is on stark display when they dare suggest that this speech was Reagan-like. Nothing in this speech remotely approaches the soaring rhetoric of Reagan at the Berlin Wall, his Inaugural addresses, his commemoration of the anniversary of D-Day, or his memorial speech to the victims of the Challenger disaster.
Apart from the style of the speech, the substance was lacking as well, as Obama engaged in an obvious contradiction on government spending. While claiming that he supports budgetary restraint and a freeze on federal spending, he also called for 'investment' in America--a code term for increased spending of taxpayers' money at a time when the country cannot afford it.
In terms of sheer logic, it only follows that if there is a spending freeze there can be no increased 'investment' of tax dollars in anything. And if there is such an 'investment' then there can be no spending freeze. It can only be one or the other, but not both.
Thus, Obama's words, yet again, prove to be a contradiction, not to mention that inherent in the Obama persona is a blatant incongruence between the President's actions and his words.
Beyond these matters it is useless to give Obama any high marks for the lines that were aimed at the families of the victims of the Tucson shooting or our military men and women who fight overseas. Presidents are almost obligated to offer these types of tips of the hat, which are always appreciated and subject to applause. But such words have little to do with the substance of the speech.
In fact, there was very little substance at all in Obama's speech. There were broad promises but few details. Nothing was said about unemployment, which has spiked upward once again as 20 states reported today an increase in the jobless rate and only 1 reported a decline. Nothing was said about the nation's housing industry, which continues to tank. And nothing was said about the looming economic disaster that will be spurred by the unsustainable mountain of debt and the striking increase in gasoline and food prices.
But what Obama DID offer was very telling--for example, the push for 'green energy,' which of course is intended to help his financier and major source 'green energy' technology--General Electric under CEO Jeffrey Immelt, who just happens to be the President's new chair of the Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.
In other words, there will continue to be oil drilling bans, which do nothing but help along a developing crisis in oil prices that will potentially cripple an already weak economy.
Polls concerning Obama's speech will no doubt portray the fickleness of the dumbed-down American public and their shocking susceptibility to visual images and sound bytes. Thinking people, however, will see right through the President's facade.
Be sure to catch my blog at The Liberty Sphere.
Subscribe by clicking the subscribe box beside my picture at the top of the page, or below, and an email will be sent to your inbox each time a new article is published.
Comments
AMEN...what a pandering droning exhibition of politics. Plus the lies were endless....Good summary.
"When did it become fashionable for Presidents to speak for over an hour at the annual State of the Union address?"
there's a new invention called a channel selector.
Mr. Bailey, I am ROFL!! Thanks for always providing a good laugh with your responses to the mollusk.
Wally-boy!! That's not very nice. Don't you realize we are now in the new era of playing all nice and sweet?
I said "my dear" and "cheers", what more do you want?
Then you admit that the remedy for drone-drone-drone SOTU addresses is to tune them out. But I thought you wanted the people to tune your President in.
Of course, you wouldn't like my SOTU address. I'd lug in a chainsaw to make my point. And fifteen minutes later, I would say, "LET'S GET TO WORK!"
James Russell Bailey ... you've no doubt met walrus before.
A very succinct report on a failing POTUS giving a weak SOTU while taking too long to do it.
Thanks Anthony for summarizing my thoughts. The hypocrisy of the entire speech struck me. This is a man who has spent the better part of the past four years (counting campaign Obama) in dividing this nation. His vapid attempts to be conciliatory were nothing but poorly written prose.
For a man who held so much promise to so many, his legacy seems doomed to be one of broken promises and disappointment. If it simply ended there, we'd be fine. However, his ego-mania will demand a lasting mark on the world. Let's hope it is one we can survive.
Hypocrisy is writing about a speech you didn't bother listening to.
How was your evening with your Wii?
http://bit.ly/fILuMe
And he doesn't even have a birth certificate....wonder why. It's probably hard to find one that say's:
Barry-Steve-Barack-Barrack-Abdullah-Dunham-Soetoro-Soebarkah-Obama
There was absolutely nothing the President could have said last night that you would have found positive. You could have written this article a week ago and got an early start on your page views.
Please check your facts before writing. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/sou_minutes.php
Would you get a please get a clue? Facts are meaningless here.
LOL. Nothing like a collection of conservatives thumping their chests, proudly displaying their ignorance. Remember, there is no facts to Mr Bailey, or the fat headed Mr Martin. They just believe if they pretend something is true, then it is
Barry puts on a pretty good show considering he can hardly say his names without a teleprompter. But, no, he'll never be the equal of Reagun, the Great Actor.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!