State of the Union Live Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Obama Administration
Posted on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:09:27 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

BTD will be here in about 10 minutes. Here's an open thread for your reactions to Obama's State of the Union Address.

Be with you in a sec. Fla-Georgia is in OT. 2OT.

Winning the future! Live blog on the flip.

A little flat on the delivery? Or is it me?

Best place on Earth to do business!

I really hate that "winning the future" line.

I don't know who is winning the future, but I am losing the love blog. Gators up 7 in 2OT. 3 minutes to go.

"Winner of the science fair." Cue Charles Barkley.

I dunno. A pedestrian speech to me.

"Become a teacher. Your country needs you." Don't ask for better pay though. Arne Duncan hates you.

Gators win!!! Now on to the future!

I heard a lot of gobblygook about "undocumented workers." Sounds like a call for amnesty, but it was couched in "let's work on it" language.

Call for infrastructure. This is actually better. Best part for me so far.

Was he better last year? This is not a well delivered speech imo.

Free trade!!!!!

Recently, we signed agreements with India and China that will support more than 250,000 jobs in the United States. And last month, we finalized a trade agreement with South Korea that will support at least 70,000 American jobs. This agreement has unprecedented support from business and labor; Democrats and Republicans, and I ask this Congress to pass it as soon as possible. Before I took office, I made it clear that we would enforce our trade agreements, and that I would only sign deals that keep faith with American workers, and promote American jobs. That’s what we did with Korea, and that’s what I intend to do as we pursue agreements with Panama and Colombia, and continue our Asia Pacific and global trade talks.

Ha!

Coming up on taxes -

And if we truly care about our deficit, we simply cannot afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans. Before we take money away from our schools, or scholarships away from our students, we should ask millionaires to give up their tax break.

Explain The Deal to me again?

Ok. You are on your own. You have to "Win The Future!" without me.

As always, SOTU provides a boring hour.

< Obama on Immigration Reform | SOTU Highlight >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

State of the Union Live Thread | 102 comments (102 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

As Anne pointed out earlier (5.00 / 0) (#15)
by jbindc on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:31:06 PM EST

"Winning the Future"

Shortened version: "WTF"

What happens if we don't win the future? Do we lose the future - does it go somewhere else? Can we tie the future? Will there be a shoot-out in that case? If we win the future, what is our prize?

I hope to win the lottery. I like to win when I play board games. I hope to win the heart of a nice man someday. How do I "win" the future?

I'm very confused.

Great comment (5.00 / 2) (#21)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:33:28 PM EST

As some of us have been saying for three years +, "hope is not a strategy."

This speech is irrelevant, anyway. (Though I think it's possible that Pelosi got her heightened attention from now-lethargic Boehner).


: Yep (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:37:39 PM EST

the speech really is irrelevant and it's why I'm not watching. It really doesn't matter what Obama says because it gives you not clue as to what he actually WILL DO.

Mars, B*!tches! (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by observed on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:34:38 PM EST

Please clarify! (none / 0) (#45)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:54:12 PM EST

: You forgot that Bush (none / 0) (#53)
by observed on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:57:42 PM EST

promised Mars in a SOTU?

How to win the future... (none / 0) (#88)
by kdog on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 08:28:41 AM EST

Join the dark side by getting a job grifting for Goldman Sachs:)

I think I'd rather lose the future myself...something to be said for losing the right way as opposed to winning the wrong way.

Why the future has to be a wrestling match at all, I don't know...just because thats how we've played it in the past? Why can't we share the future like the planet earth in Star Trek?


We must COMPETE to win that future (5.00 / 2) (#18)
by Dadler on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:32:31 PM EST

Or so saith the masters. You know what though.

WE DON'T!

America does not NEED to compete against anyone but herself. To suggest we must do the opposite is brainwashed nonsense.

The kind of competition they speak of at the presidential level is the kind that gets villagers murdered on behalf of multinationals. And allows food bubbles to starve millions on the bets of a few players a world away.

Spare me that competition. I'll take the honest kind. A ballfield, a poker table, an illusionist's stage. And what is that saying about our nation today?

: And let us remember (none / 0) (#26)
by brodie on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:36:07 PM EST

that Kennedy all along wanted to go to the Moon in a joint effort with the Soviets.

: Ya can take the human being.... (none / 0) (#86)
by kdog on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 08:11:32 AM EST

out of the cave, but ya can't take the cave out of the human being...or something like that.
There is plenty of food, yet we still "compete" for it and hoard it like there ain't enough to go around.
I'm with you Dadler, lets leave the competition for sport...technology has rendered the need to compete to live obsolete...if only our minds could catch up.

What good is a college degree (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by Maryb2004 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:36:04 PM EST

if there are no jobs?

Maybe we will find out how (5.00 / 2) (#65)
by MO Blue on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:32:58 PM EST

supporting jobs here in the U.S. differs from actually creating jobs here in at home. Do the increased jobs in India and China provide support functions for existing jobs here in the U.S.? Obama has a habit of using words that imply one thing when it actually means something else.

Recently, we signed agreements with India and China that will support more than 250,000 jobs in the United States.

: I'm wondering (none / 0) (#69)
by cal1942 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:59:39 PM EST

if the reality of support jobs here at home means the jobs of stevedores unloading boats full of products stamped Made In India.
"Supporting" jobs here at home.
I smell a rat.

Think: solar shingles. (none / 0) (#32)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:40:00 PM EST

Unemployment (none / 0) (#78)
by Politalkix on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:44:33 PM EST

for people with college degrees is just over 5% at this time. This is much less than people without college degrees. link


Strangely, though (none / 0) (#87)
by jbindc on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 08:18:35 AM EST

What's missing from your link is the number of pepople who have college degrees (or higher) who are underemployed. That's a neat trick law schools use to pump up their rankings - if they call an alumni who can't find a legal job with their very expensive education (which isn't too hard to imagine, these days), but that same person is working in a bookstore or waiting tables, Voila! that person is counted as "employed", so the law school's statistics will say "80% of our graduates are employed within 6 months of graduation."

It's a shell game. The same kind you are relying on.


honestly (none / 0) (#89)
by CST on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 09:16:52 AM EST

with 10% unemployment, underemployed is still employed.

And these days I'm not sure I'd consider waiting tables underemployment as some rediculously high percentage have college degrees. Besides, you can make pretty decent money waiting tables.

A job is a job.

I actually have a good friend who is literally working at a bookstore AND waiting tables with a college degree. But he's empolyed, and pays his bills. And just got promoted to book store manager. So that's something. Underemployment can also lead to real employment. But we shouldn't denigrate those jobs. There's nothing wrong with working in the service industry.


I'm not denigrating anything (none / 0) (#93)
by jbindc on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 09:26:28 AM EST

I'm way underemployed myself. Yes, it's a job, but it's certainly not worth it when it comes time to pay those student loans (also not factored in the comment or the article cited)

The premise was a false one - "Unemployment for people with college degrees is just over 5% at this time," - hinting that college educated people really aren't as impacted as everyone else. (And considering that, as of 2009, only about 38.5% of the entire population has an Associates and/or Bachelor's degree, that isn't a reason to celebrate)


If a college degree (none / 0) (#94)
by CST on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 09:32:33 AM EST

is the difference between facing a market with 5% unemployment, or 10% unemployment, it might be worth it even with student loans and under-employment.

I don't think it's a reason to celebrate. It might be a reason to go to college.


Unfortunately (none / 0) (#95)
by jbindc on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 09:45:33 AM EST

It doesn't seem to be that way in reality for most people.

Then there's this.

I think we need to move away from a model where everyone is encouraged to go to college - not everyone is college material - and focus more on things like trade schools.

But getting back to the original point - that 5% unemployment number for college grads is misleading.


I agree 100% (none / 0) (#96)
by CST on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 09:52:19 AM EST

on trade schools. But I have no idea how we even begin to make something like that happen.

Also... there's something to be said for the fact that not all college degrees are equal, and I'm not talking about different schools here. We are falling behind in math/science/engineering. Honestly, I feel like my generation was taught they could study whatever they want and it's all good. So no one chose those fields because they're "haaard" and wouldn't you rather be doing something else? But that's where the jobs are.

5% may be misleading, but 10% is misleading too. I wonder how many of them are underemployed. At least comparing 5% to 10% you're comparing apples to apples to some degree.


I agree with this (none / 0) (#97)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 09:58:14 AM EST

I think telling a kid to spend thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars on a liberal arts degree with no particular direction is insanity.

I am all for trade schools. I think about 60 or 70% of people would be far better off getting training to actually do a job.


Sure (none / 0) (#98)
by jbindc on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 10:17:55 AM EST

Underemployment is never counted. But I could argue that while I have a job, and am therefore "employed" (and at an empirically decent rate by most people's standards, but I have taken huge paycuts the last two years in a row because my rates have been cut through no fault or influence of my own), I really consider myself among those "looking for a job and unable to find work at this time."

And no, I don't think 10% is nearly as misleading. People with no college degrees will take jobs that do not require college degrees and will be paid accordingly. They are not taking jobs that only require junior high completion and being compensated less (not including the macro depression in wages or part-time work). They either have jobs making "high school graduate wages" or they don't.

On the other hand, those with college degrees are not necessarily taking jobs that require college degrees and that pay "college degree wages". Unlike their high school graduate-only counterparts, they are taking jobs that are, if you will excuse the crude term, "beneath them," at least educationally and skill wise.


Time to re-read the (none / 0) (#100)
by jeffinalabama on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 11:07:58 AM EST

notes I made on "Capital" and "Grundrisse" from my sociological theory courses... or maybe wage slavery was in "Manifesto..."

Sounds a lot like your situation, jb...


Yeah (none / 0) (#101)
by jbindc on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 11:35:44 AM EST

I got 4 W-2s this year. Depressing doesn't begin to cover it.


but (none / 0) (#102)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 11:53:48 AM EST

are they all from different states? the year before I took this full time job I had 4 different w2 from 4 different states.


: Nope (none / 0) (#103)
by jbindc on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 12:36:23 PM EST

I'm an attorney and do project work - I worked for 4 different agencies this past year in DC.
I was really depressed when I added them all up - about $15,000 less than last year (which was much lower than the year before).
I figure if things keep going this way, I'll have to send my employers the forms!

High-speed rail -- (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by brodie on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:43:44 PM EST

something we should have started about 40 yrs ago.

Still not too late I suppose, just a lot more expensive today ...

How about "reorganizing" (5.00 / 1) (#49)
by brodie on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:56:00 PM EST

some US troops into coming home from overseas.

I've spent the last 3 hours in the library, (5.00 / 1) (#63)
by shoephone on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:28:01 PM EST

redoing my resume. Anything interesting happen while I was gone?

Oh, that.

Waiting (5.00 / 1) (#80)
by chrisvee on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 11:06:21 PM EST

for my pony with a jetpack.

That's a funny last line. (none / 0) (#1)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:14:11 PM EST

Just remember (none / 0) (#2)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:20:21 PM EST

"we do big things."

The president says it three times, so it must be important.

bleh (none / 0) (#3)
by Maryb2004 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:23:53 PM EST

Innovation doesn't just change our lives it's how we make our living.

Sounds like a commercial


I'm not watching (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by jbindc on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:26:22 PM EST

But your comment instantly reminded me of a GE commercials.


: I assume it tests well (none / 0) (#7)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:27:44 PM EST

TV commercial (none / 0) (#8)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:28:12 PM EST

Maube mu watching it in bits is why it gave me that impression.


wanna try that sentence again? (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by Maryb2004 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:29:13 PM EST

: Sorry (none / 0) (#20)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:32:56 PM EST

Watching the hoops there for a minute.
Speech like a TV commercial.

I'm sure history (none / 0) (#4)
by lilburro on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:24:07 PM EST

will try to tell me of Biden's great contributions, but I can only see his seat back there as a missed opportunity.

John Thune (none / 0) (#6)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:27:08 PM EST

doesn't look very happy to be sitting next to a glowing Kirsten Gillibrand.

It's prom night (according to CNN) (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by jbindc on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:28:56 PM EST

Bet he knows it won't end like most prom nights. ;)


Ugh (none / 0) (#14)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:30:36 PM EST

Anthony Weiner is sitting next to Peter King. King needs to lay off the pizza.


: Peter King's wife's idea (none / 0) (#16)
by jbindc on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:32:09 PM EST

King said his wife suggested the two loudest mouths in the House should sit together.

This speech sounds (none / 0) (#9)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:28:40 PM EST

like every other speech he's ever given. Obama almost always falls flat for me.

Well, "80% of our energy (none / 0) (#17)
by brodie on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:32:19 PM EST

by 2035" as a major national goal isn't exactly JFKesque. More like Ike.


It's not like he's wrong (none / 0) (#19)
by lilburro on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:32:55 PM EST

with what he's saying, but sometimes it seems like a miracle that he ever got elected, considering that he doesn't like to "play politics." Of course, most of our members of Congress look bored at the thought of thinking beyond the next election, so who knows who's at fault..


Excellent comment on the speech, (5.00 / 1) (#66)
by jeffinalabama on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:38:50 PM EST

I thought. He wasn't wrong, but the speech did seem like a 'small-viewpoint' speech in many areas.

I did not like one certain line, where he blamed 'frivolous lawsuits' for the health care cost increases. That straw dog don't hunt.


Quickly reading the text of the (none / 0) (#67)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:46:16 PM EST

SOTU, lots of "I"s and "I'm"s.


: More points, then, on B.S. Bingo! (5.00 / 1) (#68)
by Towanda on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:58:07 PM EST

So mark those "I's" and "I'm's" on your scorecard here.

Weird speech so far (none / 0) (#12)
by lilburro on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:29:27 PM EST

trying to ignore both elephants in the room.

See what I did there...

Is Obama going to (none / 0) (#13)
by brodie on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:30:12 PM EST

invite the winner of the Science Fair to the WH, like he does the SB winner?

Notice how he got applause (none / 0) (#23)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:34:43 PM EST

for the other part of the reconciliation bill about higher ed?

Is it just my TV (none / 0) (#24)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:35:52 PM EST

or does the color of Obama's suit make his face look a bit yellow?

Something is wrong with the TV (none / 0) (#30)
by lilburro on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:38:58 PM EST

Boehner is not glowing orange.


TV is (none / 0) (#31)
by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:39:00 PM EST

not Obama's friend. Or he needs to fire whoever is doing his clothes and make up.


HDTV is no one's friend (5.00 / 1) (#72)
by Anne on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:07:02 PM EST

They all look decrepit in high def...some like they ventured out of the crypt...


He often looks ashen (none / 0) (#34)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:42:25 PM EST

Tough crowd here at TL (none / 0) (#46)
by brodie on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:54:31 PM EST

-- getting nailed every which way, substance, style, even makeup.

Try MSNBC folks -- he comes in fine.

Now about that unusually dark white fellow sitting to his left rear ...


: I've said my piece (5.00 / 2) (#51)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:56:43 PM EST

about the orange jerk.

John McCain starts (none / 0) (#27)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:37:36 PM EST

clapping on immigration reform before Tom Udall.

: Yea, cuz he was for it before (none / 0) (#57)
by BackFromOhio on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:10:02 PM EST

he was against it

Grassley (none / 0) (#33)
by lilburro on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:41:03 PM EST

not letting go of the holiday season...

Is my recollection faulty? I seem to (none / 0) (#36)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:43:56 PM EST

remember many SOTU speeches included extremely specific portions re legislation the Pres. would send to Congress.

That was before the (5.00 / 3) (#37)
by observed on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:46:36 PM EST

powerless President consortium moved in.


Yes. This is a missed chance (none / 0) (#70)
by Towanda on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:59:41 PM EST

taken often by other presidents. But then, they had agendas other than community-organizing Congress.


: He hasn't (none / 0) (#71)
by cal1942 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:06:11 PM EST

even done that.

President Clinton was the incomparable (none / 0) (#81)
by christinep on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 11:14:09 PM EST

champion of the specific lists, etc....tho also tied to overall policy. It used to drive the "pundits" batty because they didn't like the approach, and the public did.

Now, we have moved again to a thematic approach. Pundits again sorta unclear. Yet, all the "instant polling" (CNN, CBS, MSNBC) shows extremely positive reception by the public tonight.

Lesson 1: "Pundits" get confused, and public always gets it right. Lesson 2: Different times probably call for different speech styles, tones & rhythms.


: I agree it should be tied to the times (none / 0) (#85)
by ruffian on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 08:04:50 AM EST

I didn't mind more of a thematic approach this time because I know it is pie in the sky to talk about big initiatives with a divided Congress. On one hand a laundry list of 'like to haves' at least puts the POTUS on record, on the other hand it makes him look like he's out of touch with reality. There is a balance that has to be struck.

OHH!!! 1099 (none / 0) (#38)
by lilburro on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:47:14 PM EST

called it!!

RE trade (none / 0) (#39)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:48:19 PM EST

Free trade is now more popular with Dems than Reps.

So which is it. Steel mills need less (none / 0) (#42)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:51:14 PM EST

workers due to free trade or due to computerization?


: Both (none / 0) (#79)
by Politalkix on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:58:23 PM EST

Also because America does not have a long term vision regarding strategic industries in the way China, Germany, Japan and S.Korea does.

It appears (none / 0) (#73)
by cal1942 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:20:59 PM EST

that the demographics of rank and file Democrats have changed more than I'd feared.

Of course I wonder if respondents really knew what's meant by free trade. When the terms NAFTA and WTO are used the results are different.


Regarding the Colombian (none / 0) (#75)
by jeffinalabama on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:27:12 PM EST

free trade agreement, there are no tariffs on goods coming from Colombia, but up to 18 percent on goods going to Colombia from the US. Construction equipment has the 18 percent tariffs, bur I can't say precisely what else. It's a product-based scale, not exactly a country-based scale.

In this specific agreement, there would be benefit to US companies. Can't speak to other agreements.


: Thanks (none / 0) (#84)
by cal1942 on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 03:26:16 AM EST

Good.
I wish there were adequate information about the other agreements.

More applause (none / 0) (#40)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:49:36 PM EST

for "not on the backs of our most vulnerable" than FREEZE.

Surely a good thing we aren't working (none / 0) (#41)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:50:22 PM EST

for the federal government.


: Better than state and local (5.00 / 1) (#43)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:52:53 PM EST

: Actually, depending on how the "freeze" (none / 0) (#82)
by christinep on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 11:18:20 PM EST

is laid out, it may not be that bad for the Agencies. As CST noted in another thread, it depends on what the "freeze" covers. As a fed retiree myself, it could be better but it is not bad <the freeze consequences, i.e.)

Well, speaking up for ending the (none / 0) (#44)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:54:02 PM EST

tax cut for the top 2%. Almighty then, let's do it.

As a good friend likes to say, (5.00 / 5) (#47)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:54:56 PM EST

that ship has sailed and you aren't on it.


Yeah, he was pretty short on details of (none / 0) (#56)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:08:18 PM EST

how he plans on achieving that post-Deal with a Republican House.


: State of the Union speeches (none / 0) (#83)
by christinep on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 11:21:14 PM EST

don't usually detail the specific steps involved. Over the many years, with few exceptions, it is styled as an outline, an approach, or a set of themes with a few examples. But then, you were probably just going with the flow of the conversation.

What became of the live blogging program? (none / 0) (#48)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:55:22 PM EST

Neither J or I (5.00 / 1) (#52)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:57:05 PM EST

really wanted to live blog this and I just half a**ed as it is.

Winning the live bogging future was not in the cards.


You are the hope you've been (none / 0) (#55)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:03:39 PM EST

waiting for.


: He is the soap (none / 0) (#59)
by DFLer on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:17:09 PM EST

he has been wading for.
(huh?)

Does Gary Locke have pinkeye (none / 0) (#50)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:56:05 PM EST

And was Obama alluding to a famous administrative law case when he referred to smoked salmon?

: Ha. Found it: (5.00 / 1) (#54)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:01:48 PM EST

Adequate review of a determination requires an adequate record, if the review is to be meaningful. Davis, Administrative Law in the Seventies, supra, at 669-71.
Kenneth Culp Davis was my admin. law professor.

Cspan 2 showing Congressional twitters (none / 0) (#58)
by DFLer on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:14:53 PM EST

Cong Paul Braun (?) MD:

Mr. President, you don't believe in the Constitution. You believe in socialism.

: Ha! (5.00 / 1) (#60)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:17:25 PM EST

: Is the question mark (none / 0) (#74)
by cal1942 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:24:46 PM EST

really a mystery.
Sounds like an R to me.

: R-GA, FWIW (none / 0) (#77)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:39:26 PM EST

(Anyone surprised by that?)

Well, that was an hour I'll never get back (none / 0) (#61)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:21:18 PM EST

Do I dare watch the Republican response? Maybe he'll kill his career like Bobby Jindal did. That was amusing.

: Opening with a psalm for Giffords (none / 0) (#64)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:30:27 PM EST

and because you can't be a Republican and not quote the bible in every speech.
Wierd facial expressions, but probably won't hurt himself.

Very Good Speech (none / 0) (#62)
by Politalkix on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:22:47 PM EST

Emphasis on science, engineering, research, education....

Have to agree with (none / 0) (#76)
by brodie on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:28:56 PM EST

Lawr O'D: Obama's very awkward example using the plane lacking an engine joke really was awful.

Surprising that disaster-humor stuff like that, so easy to spot as off-key and sophomoric, wasn't tossed in the 1st draft stage.

Sometimes I wonder about O's basic political smarts ...

WWJD? (none / 0) (#90)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 09:17:13 AM EST

I apologize in advance for this but I simply cant be the only one whos day is ruined by this story:

Dog Hung and Set on Fire for Chewing Bible
SPARTANBURG COUNTY, S.C. -- A 65-year-old woman is accused of killing her nephew's dog because it had chewed on her Bible, and she said it was a "devil dog."
Deputies said that Andy Fowler called them last Tuesday to report that his aunt had hung his dog. Fowler said his aunt, Miriam Smith, admitted hanging his 1-year-old pit bull, Diamond.
Officers found the partially burned body of the dog under a pile of grass with an orange electrical cord around its neck at the home on John Worthy Road in Pacolet.

what would jesus do?
I say he would kick her stupid a$$.

: good quote from the piece (5.00 / 2) (#91)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 09:23:16 AM EST

Steven Weinberg said it best,
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

: a better pet story (none / 0) (#92)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 09:24:48 AM EST

Your sweetheart or your pet. Who would you choose to dump if one had to go?
Most current pet owners said they would hold on to their spouse or significant other (84 percent), but a sizable 14 percent picked their pet, according to an AP-Petside.com poll.

I wasnt going to mention this but (none / 0) (#99)
by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 10:30:44 AM EST

then it showed up on SlashFilm

you really need to see the greatest movie EVAH!

part 1 and
part 2

The movie features Rajinikanth in dual roles, as a scientist who is struggling to control his android android robot creation (also played by Rajinikanth). The movie was shot over two years beginning in 2008, after eight long years of development. The film was critically acclaimed in the country and became the second highest grossing Indian film of all time.