The Porn Dude

State of the Union

HankQuinlan

I dont re Member
Sep 7, 2002
1,744
6
0
victoria
The Good:
It is still a pleasure to hear a positive campaign speech. He can still inspire, and almost everything seems like a great idea. It is a nice antidote to the stupifying speeches in the Republican primaries. Bonus point: the only mention of God is at the final "...and God Bless America."

The Entertainment Value:
Excellent. Fun watching Republicans sit on their hands during what any normal person would think are great ideas.

The Bad:
He's made a lot of great speeches, including four years ago. A lot of the things said are exactly the same. The knowledge that most of these things are never going to happen. My cynicism components almost overloaded when he promised a new office to prosecute financial fraud, including that which lead to the financial crisis -- the feds have had the power and the evidence to put lots of these people in prison all along, and have done nothing.

The Unknown:
Who knows the veracity of the numbers quoted in almost any context; the costs or funding of all kinds of things; or any other specifics claimed as successes.

The Verdict: Excellent campaign speech, to an increasingly cynical public.
 

Big Dog Striker

New member
Nov 17, 2007
1,537
1
0
Excellent State of the Union address by Obama and looking forward to more of the same in the next 4 years. :thumb:

The nationally televised GOP response is the best cure for lack of sleep. :pound:
 

InTheBum

Well-known member
Dec 31, 2004
3,186
195
63
I watched 1 minute then switched to the hockey game...To be honest, I have stopped caring after the 2008 Financial Crisis ...it's obvious the middle and lower classes are used as slaves...lied to on a daily basis and will eventually look back on their working lives and realize they worked for X amount of pennies per hour...not dollars. Sorry folks, the game is coming to the end and those holding dollar bills, stocks, bonds, T-bills, GICs, ...will have little to nothing to show for their shitty portfolios!!!


I just hope I see the day before I die, where the average American takes up arms against their government and civil war is the cocktail being served...
 

DavidMR

New member
Mar 27, 2009
872
0
0
Every single incidence of making students stay has resulted in guaranteed pass of grade at age. It always makes a High School Diploma worth little and is one of the reasons that most "good" jobs require a college degree. That wasn't the case for my parents. Grade 8 was enough for a decent job, High School graduation was enough for a good job and College meant a great job.

We already have compulsory attendance, usually up to about age 15 or 16. How is extending it two or three more years going to lower standards?
 

The Lizard King

New member
Jul 8, 2003
1,272
0
0
Most/Much I agree with. However, there are two parts in Education that I disagree with. What he's suggesting in "Nobody can Fail" and it's not education. What it creates is pieces of paper that mean nothing.
Well, I guess that depends. Do you actually think it's about education and the kids themselves?
 

DavidMR

New member
Mar 27, 2009
872
0
0
Right now they get a piece of paper that says they graduated grade 8 or grade 9 - under this policy they get a piece of paper that says they graduated grade 12. Since it's unlikely they learned more, how did it improve standards?

It also affects the student that didn't "get" a subject and would normally repeat the grade. How do you hold back "I don't understand" from passing the grade when "I could give a shit" is guaranteed a pass? The reality is that you don't hold back either of them. Since the subject matter of the next grade is based on the past grade, that means the grade 10 class gets to redo the grade 9 class while "I don't understand" and "I could give a shit" catch up. Maybe "I don't understand" does "get it" half way through the year. "I could give a shit" could give a shit. That means everybody in "I could give a shit"'s class graduates with grade 9 skills in that subject.

Obviously, I don't know all the details, but as I interpret what President Obama said teens would not be allowed to withdraw from school unless they had graduated or reached age 18. If they want to withdraw at 18 without completing that would be allowed.

The interpretation that this means automatic faux passes to get through is one I wouldn't agree with, and I doubt that's what Obama and Arne Duncan have in mind. I am well aware that many US teachers don't like Obama or Duncan who they think have extended and intensified G W Bush's NCLB Act and the widespread testing that goes with it. But if compulsory attendance can get a larger percentage to graduate on the grounds that they are going to be there anyway, that might be a useful measure.

From what I have seen most dropout behaviour is in grades 9 and 10. Once they get to grade 11 and see light at the end of the tunnel, they are inclined to finish.
 

DavidMR

New member
Mar 27, 2009
872
0
0
Actually Grade 8 is the beginning of the drop out tranche. Grade school already had "not allowed to fail" so what happens is that when children entered Grade 8 there is a large number that is totally unable to handle the subject matter. Now, they "aren't allowed to fail" in Grades 8 to 12. It really means that the first two years of college will be devoted to getting students so they can read, write, add, subtract. A lot of students will find themselves $80,000 in debt because the first time they found out that they are dumber than a rock was college they paid for instead of high school that they didn't have to pay for.
Al, I really don't know what the basis is for your comments about not allowed to fail.
 

HankQuinlan

I dont re Member
Sep 7, 2002
1,744
6
0
victoria
When Obama was entering the chambers for the State of the Union Address, he said "Good Job Tonight" to Leon Panetta. There was much comment by the media because they weren't aware of what Obama could be congratulating Panetta on.

Well, today we know. The same SEAL Team that killed bin Laden went and got an American being held hostage in Somalia.
I enjoy the partisan comments on line in regard to this. "Right, taking credit for the work of the military. What presumption." You can be sure if a mission like this blows up badly, he would certainly be getting the blame. The other absurd comments are all along the line of "What is a volunteer doing there anyway? Let her rot." I don't even know how to comment on that kind of attitude, but it is very common in comments sections, appearing on any story about someone getting in trouble in any foreign country.

I also totally agree with your comments about students being forced to remain in school....but it would lower the stats for youth unemployment, wouldn't it?
 

storm rider

Banned
Dec 6, 2008
2,542
7
0
Calgary
differentiation .
Is that even a word?....never heard it or seen it spelled out before.

As for the State of the Union address I did not watch it but I did get the basic gist of it via news radio today.....and it was a lot of rhetoric...blah blah this blame the Republicans and blah blah that blame the Republicans....well what do you expect when a Democratic President wants to pass laws through a Republican controlled Congress/Sentate....Obama's biggest fail was the killing of the Keystone pipeline....and to be honest this project is something the average American was not even aware of....I know of people whose home state would have had the pipeline running through it that were pissed off that it got killed but they did not know about it in the first place...but that comes down to ignorance..the left wing bleeding heart "save the environment" movement did get involved and in the grand scheme of things their voice was perceived to be that od the majority of Americans and that was not the case but Obama caved into special interests...personally I hope that Obama does not get 2 terms.

SR
 

InnocentBoy

Banned
Mar 5, 2006
845
6
18
http://www.nomiprins.com/thoughts/2...as-state-of-the-union-ten-skirted-issues.html
I confess; I expected to be bored out of my mind listening to President Obama’s campaign - I mean, State of the Union - I mean campaign, speech. I kept hoping some truly earth shattering story would sneak in there beforehand, like say some discovery that Mitt Romney had been having an affair with Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife while he was creating jobs at Bain capital, and we could all focus on that instead.

It turned out that my pre-determination proved accurate. I wonder if the members of Congress felt the same sense of same déjà vu that I did, as they were bopping up and down and applauding.

Obama's speech was a compilation of highlights from his past ones. One part optimism, two parts repetition equals one total uninspiring. Maybe it’s so boring, because it matters so little at this point. Taking away popularity polls, our national threshold for belief in hope or change has been trampled, not just because of Obama or Romney, but of the whole political apparatus that thrives on deflection of reality and posturing. We don’t have the same energy to expend listening to politicians, the endless spin that renders fact obsolete, responsibility absent, and true accomplishment, unnecessary.

We saw Optimistic Obama in his first address to Congress in 2009: “While our economy may be weakened and our confidence shaken; though we are living through difficult and uncertain times, tonight I want every American to know this: We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before.”

We got Presumptuous Obama in 2010: “As we stabilized the financial system, we also took steps to get our economy growing again, save as many jobs as possible, and help Americans who had become unemployed.”

We watched Philosophical Obama in 2011: “We are the first nation to be founded for the sake of an idea -– the idea that each of us deserves the chance to shape our own destiny. That’s why centuries of pioneers and immigrants have risked everything to come here… The future is ours to win.”

Now, we had Campaigning on Fairness Obama. He returned to the roots of his pre-Presidential words, having accomplished little to attain the goal that his words implied. Here are ten things that President Obama skirted:

1) The cost of healthcare insurance. Obama tried to play both sides, slapping a populist spin on an insurance industry gift. “That’s why our health care law relies on a reformed private market, not a Government program.” He claimed he won’t “go back” on things like health insurance companies being able to cancel policies. He didn’t say that insurance premiums have already risen 22% in the past two years. Republicans hate Obama’s ‘signature’ healthcare reform bill because it unconstitutionally forces people to purchase insurance. Democrats support the bill because Obama passed it. The reality is – by the time it takes effect in 2014, premium costs may have doubled. Frame it however you want, that means health insurance could cost twice as much when this bill takes effect as it did before it was passed. Meanwhile, there are more people without insurance (because they can’t afford it) even though insurance companies can’t cancel policies or deny insurance for pre-existing conditions. This bill merely offers insurance companies a wider pool of customers, with a few restrictions on how much they can pillage them.

2) Student Loan Defaults. Obama claimed he wants to cap interest rates on student loans - which would be great, but can only work in this particularly low rate environment. He urged colleges to keep costs down – again, something that’s worked out really well when he’s mentioned it before. This year, student loan debt surpassed credit card debt, breaching the $1 trillion mark, at an average of more than $25,000 per student (and up 47% over a decade ago, not all under Obama, but still a problem). Not surprisingly, student loan defaults rates have risen alongside this debt increase. Nearly 9% of loans defaulted in 2010, of those that began repayment in 2009, vs. 7% that began in 2008.) Obama didn’t mention this growing concern.

3) Youth unemployment. Obama took credit for the creation of 3 million jobs (I’m not going to debate that here). Regardless, youth unemployment is at its highest rate since 1948. The unemployment rate for those under age 25 is 18.1%, (31% for blacks) having risen sharply since 2008. Do the math. High student loan debt + diminishing job prospects = bad ending. Work-study programs have to be intense to really alter that.

4) Big banks. The largest firms continue to grow their asset bases and fee extrapolation strategies from their captive customer base (If you’re say, a JPM Chase customer, it costs you $5 to extract your own money from a Bank of America ATM – both banks get a cut). It was Obama that re-confirmed Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke for another fourteen years (and yes, a bi-partisan Congress agreed), and who still keeps Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner around. Both men were gung-ho about the merger mania that dotted Wall Street in the fall of 2008 and making the ‘too-big-to-fail” banks bigger, as they now are.

5) Small banks. President Obama didn’t address the smaller bank closings occurring because the big banks got disproportionate subsides;, 389 smaller banks (with $297 billion in assets) failed from 2009 to 2011. Like during the early years of the Great Depression, this means less choice for individuals, less loans for local businesses, and consolidation of influence and market share for the big banks – which comprise Obama’s largest bundling base.

6) Borrowers. Despite a few tepid programs to help homeowners, the sheer number of foreclosures is higher today than it was in 2008. There were a record number of foreclosure filings: 2.9 million in 2010 and 2.7 million in 2011. These are predicted to rise in 2012 amidst default surges and more lender notices than in 2011.

Why? Because Obama’s program (that was supposed to help 5 million borrowers, and helped half a million) had to be approved by the banks. Banks don’t like citizen aid programs, even if they screwed citizens to begin with by fueling a $14 trillion toxic asset pyramid repackaging risky (for people), high interest-bearing (for them). Obama said, “The banks will repay a deficit of trust”? What?! When?! Where?!

7) Recent regulator incompetence. Regulators looked the other way, Obama said, pre-crisis. But he mentioned nothing about regulators' more recent passes; the SEC bestows banks settlements for fraudulent mortgage asset products, without extracting any admission of wrongdoing. He missed saying anything about the lack of related DOJ criminal indictments. The top five banks agreed to pay $1.149 billion to the SEC to settle subprime-mortgage related fraud charges, with no admission of guilt or criminal indictments. (The SEC settlement of $285 million with Citigroup was rejected by Judge Rakoff in November, 2011 and is being re-negotiated.) And Obama wants to create a Financial Crimes Unit? What’s the SEC supposed to be doing? or the DOJ? or the FBI?

8) MF Global and customer money. On the same topic – the deficit of trust thing: Obama avoided any talk about his buddy, Jon Corzine or MF Global, the nation’s eight largest bankruptcy. He didn’t point out how diabolical it was to use and ‘lose’ customer funds that were supposed to have been kept separate from bad bets. He didn’t suggest having a solid separation between customer money and financial firm money - as in - don't have it at the same firm. He claimed, "we will not bail you out again” and yet, we still are.

9) Banks hoarding. Obama neglected to mention the $1.6 trillion that banks are stashing at the Fed in the form of excess (and interest-bearing) reserves, which do nothing for the Main Street economy. Meanwhile, small business loans are at a 12-year low, having shrunk continuously since 2008.

10) Obama conveyed that we dodged a bullet by getting the banking system under control. He didn’t note the rising risk in the banking system: the largest four US banks (JPM Chase, Citibank, Bank of America and Goldman Sachs) control nearly 95% of the US derivatives market, which has grown by 20% since just last year, to $235 trillion. JPM Chase holds 11% of the world’s derivative exposure, Citibank, Bank of America, and Goldman comprise about 7% each. Goldman has 537 times as many (from 440 times last year) derivatives as assets and it’s still considered a bank holding company (as per Bernanke) that gets federal backing.

In all, the President's speech was reminiscent of George Clooney’s in Ides of March. We’ve heard it all before, maybe with slightly different words: America lost 4 million jobs before I got here, and another 4 million before our policies went into effect, but in the last 12 months, we added 3 million job. We must reduce tax loopholes, and provide tax incentives to businesses that hire in America. We must reform taxes for the wealthy (though he signed an extension of Bush’s tax cuts.) We must train people for an apparent abundance of expert jobs. We need more clean energy initiatives. We created regulations (big sigh of relief he didn’t use the word ‘sweeping’) to stop fraudulent financial practices. We will help homeowners. Wall Street must make up a "trust deficit.” Like Jamie Dimon cares.

In other words, Obama gave Wall Street a pass, while waxing populist. Don’t get me wrong. I expected nothing different. I will continue to expect nothing different, when he gets a second term, given the lame duo the GOP favors his key contenders to be.
 

Devo

Member
Aug 16, 2003
316
0
16
Canada
From now to November is an eternity in a political campaign. The US elections are usually very close right up to election day. Speculating on this election, which is months away, is a waste of time.

In terms of whats best for the US and especially Canada, It is imperative that Obama gets defeated. Thank God we have Harper and not a Marxist like Barack O Class Warfare.
 

DavidMR

New member
Mar 27, 2009
872
0
0
More class warfare rhetoric from the worst US president ever. Can't wait until this tool is gone.

I can't take this seriously. It sounds like BC provincial political rhetoric being transposed onto the US landscape.

How is it "class warfare" to ask that there be some equity in the tax system?
 

DavidMR

New member
Mar 27, 2009
872
0
0
In terms of whats best for the US and especially Canada, It is imperative that Obama gets defeated. Thank God we have Harper and not a Marxist like Barack O Class Warfare.
Wow! This is even more extreme! You can't be serious?
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts