Spokane7
55°
January 26, 2011 in Nation/World
Obama: ‘Future is ours to win’
Spending freeze proposal would save $400 billion over 10 years; Obama warns he’ll fight health care repeal efforts, vows to protect schools program from cuts
On the day of his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama strides from the Oval Office along the Colonnade at the White House in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 25, 2011.
(Full-size photo)(All photos)
WASHINGTON – Confronting a divided government, President Barack Obama struck notes of conciliation and challenge in his State of the Union speech, suggesting new spending cuts while advocating increased outlays for education, mass transit and infrastructure.
Obama’s hourlong address Tuesday night sought to repel anticipated Republican efforts to roll back his party’s signature legislative achievements, including the health care overhaul, during the next two years.
He emphasized the need for bipartisanship, calling on Democrats and Republicans to work together to create new jobs. “We will move forward together, or not at all – for the challenges we face are bigger than party, and bigger than politics,” Obama said.
In the overarching theme of his speech, the president told the lawmakers: “The future is ours to win.”
Obama called for a five-year freeze on nonmilitary discretionary spending in a bid to help reduce the deficit and said he would veto any bill containing pet projects known as “earmarks.” He also endorsed $78 billion in Pentagon cuts and said he would consider other reductions.
But he defended his record thus far and warned that while he may agree to tweaks to his legislative record, his top priority in the next two years will be to preserve that work. Especially on his landmark health care law, he called for changes where needed, but warned he would oppose repeal.
“Instead of refighting the battles of the last two years, let’s fix what needs fixing and move forward,” he said.
Instead of the fractious reception he received in his previous State of the Union speech, Obama encountered a more somber welcome in which most lawmakers wore black and white ribbons in honor of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and the other victims of the Tucson shooting rampage. Republicans and Democrats sat side by side in a show of unity.
Nonetheless, to Republican critics, his call for government investment sounded like another spending package at a time when deep cuts are needed. “That’s the real secret to job creation, not borrowing and spending more money in Washington,” said Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., who delivered the GOP response.
Rather than promising a near-term solution to chronic unemployment, Obama devoted much of the speech to the threat of competition for jobs from overseas, urging programs to “out-innovate, out-educate and out-build” the rest of the world.
Obama outlined an agenda for the second half of his term in office that tracks closely with his re-election strategy, in which he is staking out a middle ground politically.
With several promises, Obama sought to address perceptions that he spent too freely during his first two years in power and is unconcerned by a budget deficit that now stands at more than $1.4 trillion. His proposals include freezing federal spending not devoted to national security, which aides said would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over 10 years.
Obama signaled that he would protect his signature education program, called “Race to the Top,” which offers grant money to schools that make strides in educating students.
He drew a protective barrier around the basic social safety net, cautioning that he would not slash spending at the expense of “our most vulnerable citizens.”
He added: “Cutting the deficit by gutting our investments in innovation and education is like lightening an overloaded airplane by removing its engine.”
That message is rooted in a hard-eyed calculation by White House aides. Grand new spending programs and initiatives are unrealistic given the political realignment on Capitol Hill. Instead, the White House wants to preserve programs that resurgent Republicans see as targets ripe for elimination.
In some ways, the speech was in keeping with Obama’s move to the center following the Democrats’ midterm election losses. He called for reducing the corporate tax rate, freezing nondefense discretionary spending and approval of free trade agreements that might expand U.S. exports.
Obama showed a willingness to buck members of his party. He said he would veto any bill carrying an “earmark” – a special spending project that lawmakers pass with little scrutiny or discussion. That stand sets up a potential showdown with one of Obama’s closest allies, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who defends earmarks.
Equally revealing was what Obama did not say. He said very little new or different about the war in Afghanistan, the effort to halt the Iranian nuclear programs or other foreign policy hot spots.
He made no mention of climate change legislation, which business interests oppose and which stands little chance of passing in any case. Since his midterm election setback, Obama has tried to repair his relationship with the corporate world.
Obama also sought to reassure members of his liberal base, who’ve bristled over some of his post-midterm moves. He said he was committed to overhauling the nation’s immigration laws and finding a pathway to legal status for the millions of people living in the U.S. illegally. The odds of that happening are low, as Obama essentially conceded.
GOP congressional leaders dismissed Obama’s proposals for spending reductions as inadequate, even though their own party is divided over budget cuts.
“That’s probably not going to inspire a lot of people who want to see meaningful efforts to reduce spending and reduce the debt,” said Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, a potential presidential challenger in 2012.
Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., was more pointed in his critique.
“That word ‘investments’ sure does sound good,” he said. “But it’s really just a fancy way of saying ‘increase government spending.’ ”
Stocks plummet as outlook in Europe dims 
liarsinnews on January 26 at 6:21 a.m.
Bama is the lip service King, notwithstanding the career politicians of both parties. It will be business as usual within 6 months.
DHF on January 26 at 6:44 a.m.
I did not vote for Bama or Mc Cain. I did not watch his speech, but I can imagine it was loaded with histrionic’s. He is about one notch below Jimmy Carter in my opinion. A community organizer at best.
hawken on January 26 at 7:28 a.m.
“Future Is Ours To Win”…. taken from the title of a book by Newt Gingrich? “Winning the Future.” Not technically plagiarism, since he reversed the words.
Obama’s sliver tongue didn’t work last night. He had too many lisps. It was nothing more than a reply of his campaign rhetoric “Yes We Can,” which has been a total bust.
He promised his budget would cut the deficit in half by the end of his term. In fact, he has quadrupled the deficit in less than two years.
Obama is nothing more than an accomplished, used car salesman, the most liberal senator in the U.S. Senate when he served there for a brief time and a hyper-left president.
It has never been more true, in Obama’s case, that we should judge what he has done and not what he says he will do.
Even the Huffington Posts agrees:
“But, if President Obama hopes to “win the future” in 2012, his speech came up short Tuesday night. It was certainly a big and earnest move to the center, but it lacked the kind of specifics and innovative policies that the president needs to make America competitive in the 21st Century.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-penn/state-of-the-union-did-ob_b_814081.html
johnclarke on January 26 at 7:53 a.m.
Hawken the inferior, welcome back from the Principal’s office. Tell me, inferior - exactly how has the President been “hyper - left?” He has extended the tax cuts, lowered Social Security tax and withholding. My paycheck has gone up since the Bush years.
In the accomplishment department, the President is a graduate of Columbia and Harvard, and a constitutional law professor. How about you? Where did your PhD come from buddie ?
Diana on January 26 at 8:02 a.m.
Plagiarism of Newt’s book title? That’s a stretch even for you, hawken.
Embrace the future or cling to the past. The future is coming ready or not. The past isn’t coming back, no matter how hard you try or how much you dislike President Obama.
WillyPeter on January 26 at 8:14 a.m.
johnclarke - Name calling. Personal attacks. Just can’t help yourself I guess.
Ninch on January 26 at 8:30 a.m.
Almost everyone (including Obama supporters) described Obama’s SOTU as “flat.” Included in a focus group last night were fifteen persons who voted for Obama …and only 7 would vote for Obama again while only 5 thought that Obama has done his job. Only two believed Obama’s bipartisanship promise because they had heard it before and he did not perform such. (Note: More than half of those voters are black.)
I listened to Obama’s speech and was appalled how he rewrote history to make his points. One example is how our American pride was responsible for the transcontinental railroads. Really? How about that our federal government granted railroads extensive land grants… which became major sources of timber and minerals that made these railroad corporations rich, rich, rich.
Another example is how Obama gave credit to his and Arne’s Race to the Top education initiative (which is billions of dollars) for 40 states adopting higher education standards. Again…really? I think Obama is getting “standards” mixed up with mandatory legislative “structural” changes to allow more federal control in order to be eligible for Race to the Top. Fact: Washington State and several other western states who belong to a consortium have been working on higher standards for years…way before Obama even campaigned for election. Now Obama is taking credit?
misjustice on January 26 at 8:48 a.m.
I had to go to the text of the SOTU speech, because I didn’t remember the comments about the Transcontinental Railway the same way that others did. This is what the President actually said;
“The third step in winning the future is rebuilding America. To attract new businesses to our shores, we need the fastest, most reliable ways to move people, goods and information — from high-speed rail to high-speed internet. ”
“Our infrastructure used to be the best — but our lead has slipped. South Korean homes now have greater internet access than we do. Countries in Europe and Russia invest more in their roads and railways than we do. China is building faster trains and newer airports. Meanwhile, when our own engineers graded our nation’s infrastructure, they gave us a D.”
“We have to do better. America is the nation that built the transcontinental railroad, brought electricity to rural communities, and constructed the interstate highway system. The jobs created by these projects didn’t just come from laying down tracks or pavement. They came from businesses that opened near a town’s new train station or the new off-ramp.”
“Over the last two years, we have begun rebuilding for the 21st century, a project that has meant thousands of good jobs for the hard-hit construction industry. Tonight, I’m proposing that we redouble these efforts.”
“We will put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges. We will make sure this is fully paid for, attract private investment, and pick projects based on what’s best for the economy, not politicians.”
“Within 25 years, our goal is to give 80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail, which could allow you go places in half the time it takes to travel by car. For some trips, it will be faster than flying — without the pat-down. As we speak, routes in California and the Midwest are already under way.”
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/jan/25/state-union-full-text/
I don’t see jingoistic rah, rah, ‘Merican pride and stuff in these comments; nor do I see a revision of history. But it’s probably just me…and stuff.
; )
MrNatural on January 26 at 8:57 a.m.
I enjoyed this State of the Union Address It was simply inspirational. I believe people are motivated better by optimism than by fear. People are clamoring for specifics and I can understand that. I believe that the State of the Union would be mired by specifics and as I read and reread into the speech I see a fine effort to right the listing ship and steer towards a successful and admirable direction. Specifics…details will come soon enough. I just hope that bipartisan support prevails over the detriment of extremism.
Diana on January 26 at 9:17 a.m.
Really, Ninch? Almost everyone? Including fifteen people in a focus group?
misjustice on January 26 at 9:54 a.m.
Almost everyone? Ya mean the Frank Luntz “focus” group on Faux Noise? ROFLOL! Really?
Lifted almost verbatim from the website…Really?
http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/01/frank-luntz-focus-greoup-gives-obama-failing-grade-on-sotu-video/
THIS Frank Luntz?
” Luntz’s current company, The Word Doctors, specializes in message creation and image management for commercial and political clients.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Luntz
Reminds me of Goebbels the Propaganda Minister
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 26 at 10:08 a.m.
Oh goody…..Hawken is back from his time out the Spokesman Review put him on for hijacking all these threads and yelling and screaming at everyone who disagreed with him. So glad he is back now so nobody will be allowed to give an opinion without him belittling you for how stupid you are for liking Obama and for being a liberal and not being a conservative wing nut like Glenn Beck.
Cheezwhiz on January 26 at 10:14 a.m.
Being a small business owner, he gave me no hope. The Snake of the Union speech was very inspirational. You can help but feel inspired when O talks. One of the best speakers in the presidency ever, in my opinion. However, everything he pretty much said to forget the old ways and the Mom and Pop stores are gone,,,, get over it. Not good. Learn to adapt to clean energy, technology, roads, and transportation. Who has that kind of capital to start one of those businesses?
His “investments” are just another way of saying spending. Investing in clean energy, transportation, roads, technology, and health care is spending money, yet he called for a five year spending freeze. How do you do that?
Did anyone notice that he never mentioned any of his accomplishments, or anything that has happened in the last two years? Isn’t that what the Snake of the Union is for? He mentioned several individual business owners who changed their lives or way of living, and that was inspiring, but I am pretty sure I couldn’t dig up the funding to build a drill to save miners, or even the money to ship that equipment to Chile. Out of my league. He wasn’t giving me hope, but I enjoyed the speech.
I wonder what the black community is thinking now…. There was nothing in that speech for his most valuable and loyal supporters.
It sounded like a campaign speech to me, but it never mentioned the voters that were key for his election. Pretty sure they pictured a different change they could believe in.
greenlibertarian on January 26 at 10:17 a.m.
MisJ, same with saying uuber centrist Mark Penn, a very successful PR hack and Corporate flack is somehow representative of HuffPo, or “the left”. No one occupies that mantle except maybe for Ariana herself, and she’s all over the board anyway.
Ignorance abounds, par usual.
johnclarke on January 26 at 10:19 a.m.
Yeah ok, so I’ll stop calling him Hawken the inferior. This is in response to his offer to bow down to my superiority, so there you go. I guess if you don’t know the fun story behind this, it looks like name calling. Sort of like…
“Obama is nothing more than an accomplished, used car salesman, the most liberal senator in the U.S. Senate when he served there for a brief time and a hyper-left president’
Used car salesman, hmmm. Is that name calling?
Point is, all of my right wing amigos - The President is governing from the center. He is making concessions to the right, yet all they do is complain and call for spending cuts. Well ok Republicans - where is your list of cuts? Typically the right will want cuts to social programs, but not to the military. The right will not want a reformed corporate tax code (one where corporations actually PAY TAXES) either, but on the other hand they want cuts to taxes - in particular the rich. So, what is it? Where is the Republican plan ? Where are the specifics on small business and job creation? I hear nothing but complaining and attacks on health care reform. The offer has been made to work together, again and again. I’ll be waiting and watching.
misjustice on January 26 at 10:31 a.m.
As a small business owner, I was glad for this reminder from his SOTU speech, “Every business can write off the full cost of the new investments they make this year.” That provision was part of the not-so-lame duck Congress tax package.
The President is the leader of all of us, not just or particularly the black demographic. If he specifically addressed that segment of the population, people like Beck and Luntz would have a hay day; see, he hates white people, he panders to black folks, and other stuff…too racially charged to write here.
I agree that investment is another word for spending. But how else will we forge ahead in the second decade of this relatively new century? If we don’t/can’t/won’t invest in our future can we expect to lead the free world? Or will we sit back and allow China to lead? Really?
johnclarke on January 26 at 10:35 a.m.
All true Mis…no one else is spending or hiring. Who is left but Government ? Business are sitting on record profits, yet not hiring. The Dow is over 12,000 again as well.
horse_feathers on January 26 at 11:01 a.m.
Same B HO, BS, different terminology.
By the way what happened to those “shovel ready jobs” to rebuilt the infrastructure that we payed for in the last stimulus?
Cheezwhiz on January 26 at 11:06 a.m.
Mis, I’m not sure what is new about being able to write off your investments. I have always been able to write off everything that I need to keep my business running. All my tools, transportation costs, and advertising are write offs, as well as several other business expenses. That confused me.
I agree that money needs to be spent to keep the country moving ahead and competitive, but saying that there will be a spending freeze is kinda deceptive to the public.
I agree that the black subject is touchy, and I have to admit that when I mentioned it, that I would be punished for it. My point was that if he wants their vote, which was very important for his election, he should probably at least mention that demographic, or give them hope that he didn’t forget them.
His speech pretty much told me that as a small business owner, I better get ready to get a job as a road worker, or find huge capital to start a clean energy or technology company. My assets aren’t that big and I don’t like leaning on a shovel. Small businesses are in very tough times because no one is spending money on anything but necessity. Necessity is usually big business controlled and a small business can’t compete.
misjustice on January 26 at 11:18 a.m.
I’m no tax authority, cheez, so I had to look further…
“…Essentially, Section 179 works like this:
When your business buys certain items of equipment, it typically gets to write them off a little at a time through depreciation. In other words, if your company spends $50,000 on a machine, it gets to write off (say) $10,000 a year for five years (these numbers are only meant to give you an example.)
Now, while it’s true that this is better than no write off at all, most business owners would really prefer to write off the entire equipment purchase price for the year they buy it.
In fact, if a business could write off the entire amount, they might add more equipment this year instead of waiting. That’s the whole purpose behind Section 179… to motivate the American economy (and your business) to move in a positive direction. For most small businesses (adding total equipment, software, and vehicles totaling less than $500,000 in 2011), the entire cost can be written-off on the 2011 tax return.
For large businesses adding even more than $500,000, the write-offs are just as substantial. See the following graphic for an example of the savings that is currently available to you after the ‘Tax Relief Act of 2010’ passed in December 2010.
Limits of Section 179
Section 179 does come with limits - there are caps to the total amount written off ($500,000 in 2011), and limits to the total amount of the equipment purchased ($2,000,000 in 2011.) The deduction begins to phase out dollar-for-dollar after $2 million is spent by a given business, so this makes it a true small and medium-sized business deduction.
After the recent passage of the ‘Tax Relief Act of 2010’, large businesses that exceed the $2 million in capital expenditure threshold can take a bonus depreciation of 100% on the amount that exceeds the limit. Nice.
Who Qualifies for Section 179?
All businesses that purchase, finance, and/or lease less than $2 million in new or used business equipment during tax year 2011 should qualify for the Section 179 Deduction. If a business is unprofitable in 2011, and has no taxable income to use the deduction, that business can elect to use 100% Bonus Depreciation and carry-forward to a year when the business is profitable.
Most tangible goods including “off-the-shelf” software as well as business-use vehicles (restrictions apply) qualify for the Section 179 Deduction. For basic guidelines on what property is covered under the Section 179 tax code, please refer to this list of qualifying equipment. Also, to qualify for the Section 179 Deduction, the equipment and/or software purchased must be placed into service between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2011.
The deduction begins to phase out if more than $2 million of equipment is purchased - in fact, the deduction decreases on a dollar for dollar scale after that, making Section 179 a deduction specifically for small and medium-sized businesses. However, as noted above, large businesses can expense all qualifying capital expenditures with 100% Bonus Depreciation for the 2011 tax year.”
http://www.section179.org/section_179_deduction.html
Hope that helps.
I didn’t mean to come off as criticizing you about race, (don’t believe your comments were off base or wrong) I was merely offering my two cents…
; )
greenlibertarian on January 26 at 11:25 a.m.
Seems as though some supposed small business owners around here are ignorant of the concept of accelerated depreciation, something one learns about in Accounting 101 and has been around for decades.
No wonder their businesses aren’t doing very well if they don’t understand the basics of accounting and business.
johnclarke on January 26 at 11:30 a.m.
horse all those dollars were sucked up by the states (yes, lots of republican states too) to balance their budgets. This is a good resource.
http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/default.aspx
I don’t understand. The money was made available, yet a bunch is unclaimed. I guess Obama is supposed to personally plan projects to get this money accepted or something ? 92% has been made available, including the Republican tax cuts.
Cheezwhiz on January 26 at 11:44 a.m.
Mis, that is interesting information, because in the past, my accountant had me write off my total investments for every tax year. That was up till my 2008 tax year. I didn’t have my stuff organized or planned very well and my accountant retired, so I had to find another accountant for my 2009 tax year. I went to H+R, out of desperation and convenience, which was a giant mistake that cost me a bundle. (a whole other story that I won’t go into right now) They convinced me to quit writing off total investments and depreciate them. Apparently I now have to stick to that forever, but maybe I misunderstood that, or maybe what you quoted gives me the option to discontinue that method. Anyway, I don’t see what changed, unless I now have the option to go back to the way I used to write off my entire investments. Once again, I’m confused. It sure would be nice to simplify the tax code to clear up all of my confusion, which was mentioned in the speech.
Cheezwhiz on January 26 at 11:54 a.m.
greenlibertarian, as far as I can see, to be successful in small business, you shouldn’t have to be an accountant. You should only have to worry that you have more money coming in than going out. The tax web is why you hire an accountant. Taxes are a big expense of doing business, but it shouldn’t be the biggest factor. It certainly shouldn’t be to blame for success or failure. I’ll hire a pro to do that job, just as my clients hire my services to do theirs. I think I’ll just continue to save my receipts and use an accountant who knows what I don’t want to know.
Orange on January 26 at 12:17 p.m.
Sorry, it isn’t ours to win. It’s China’s.
MisJ, that’s not two cents worth. That’s about $25. Huge post. Copy and paste is awesome isn’t it? :)
Thoreau on January 26 at 12:44 p.m.
I did watch the speech, so I feel I can comment on it, unlike others here. I thought it was well articulated, with an optimistic message, and moments of comic relief. Anyone can hastily search for the validy and practicality of his every comment. Guess what? He’s one person among hundreds that set the path of our nation. He’s had resistance from the moment he declared his entry into the presidential race. Are some of our President’s visions ambitious? Yes. But if you dismiss that as unrealistic and absurd, then you have missed the theme of the speech. If we set our sights on insurmountable goals, at the very least, we will find ourselves rising, climbing to the top, even if we don’t reach the summit. I think this is better than wallowing in the pit of dischord, criticism, and stubborness that characterizes Congress. Unconditional adherence to one political party is ignorant…..and lately, dangerous.
misjustice on January 26 at 12:56 p.m.
Yeah, copy and paste is awesome. Especially when trying to understand complicated issues like taxes, depreciation, and a host of other topics. Guess I need to work on my ability to condense information. To my credit, however, I didn’t use a huge copy and paste to call someone names…
; )
Cheezwhiz on January 26 at 2:13 p.m.
Thoreau, I’ll agree that Obama is a great cheerleader.
Misjustice, I appreciated your copy and paste. I gotta know…. Are you male or female? Just curious……..
MrNatural on January 26 at 2:17 p.m.
Well said Thoreau (12:44pm)…very well said
johnclarke on January 26 at 2:18 p.m.
I’m male in case anyone wants to know.
Cheezwhiz on January 26 at 2:27 p.m.
Thanks for clearing that up, John. I was a little nervous to ask you that question.
Ninch on January 26 at 2:32 p.m.
Apparently misjustice chooses to ignore the complete speech and Obama’s words that do indeed imply American pride and exceptionalism.
Diana and misjustice apparently are not familiar with who/what makes up a focus group (e.g. size, diverse points of view)… even if facilitated by Frank Lunz and/or is featured on FOX NEWS. Do you really think that “Obama voters” were screened ahead of time to guarantee their voiced opinions in criticizing Obama’s performance?
james_l on January 26 at 3:29 p.m.
Apparently not everyone agrees with the FAUX NEWS focus group:
“Poll: High Marks for Obama’s State of the Union Speech”
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20029581-503544.html?tag=channelMore;pop
misjustice on January 26 at 3:43 p.m.
More cut and paste: as a back up to James’s last post.
“An overwhelming majority of Americans approved of the overall message in President Obama’s State of the Union speech on Tuesday night, according to a CBS News poll of speech watchers.
According to the poll, which was conducted online by Knowledge Networks immediately after the president’s address, 91 percent of those who watched the speech approved of the proposals Mr. Obama put forth during his remarks. Only nine percent disapproved.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20029581-503544.html
Cheez; I’m 100% full blooded WOMAN! Thanks for asking!
; )
I did not ignore the speech in its entirety, Ninch. I watched it, watched both speeches from the opposition AND have read the text of the speech also. I’m a policy wonkette, have a serious C-Span habit and a degree in Political Science as well as a degree in Communications.
; )
misjustice on January 26 at 4:04 p.m.
Ninch posted: “Apparently misjustice chooses to ignore the complete speech and Obama’s words that do indeed imply American pride and exceptionalism.”
Well, American Exceptionalism is a knife that cuts both ways; we are both the worst and the best. And as I recall, Mitt Money and Mike Pence (as well as Mona Charen and Krauthammer among others) have taken jabs at the President claiming that he doesn’t belive in American Exceptionalism.
“But with Republicans and tea party activists accusing President Obama and the Democrats of turning the country toward socialism, the idea that the United States is inherently superior to the world’s other nations has become the battle cry from a new front in the ongoing culture wars. Lately, it seems to be on the lips of just about every Republican who is giving any thought to running for president in 2012.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/29/politics/washingtonpost/main7100021.shtml
So which is it? Does he or doesn’t he?
; )
Diana on January 26 at 4:05 p.m.
Gee, Ninch, I also watched the entire speech, including the two fact-free rebuttals. And I am familiar with what makes up a focus group, as part of my job includes conducting them.
johnclarke on January 26 at 4:08 p.m.
ha ha Cheese…dull thread anyway