State of the Union

I was hopeful...this was an opportunity to hear something fresh and new from the President about working together and inspiring a new generation of prosperity in America. What I heard was more of the same. Are the liberals out of ideas, or are they just daring the other side to make the first move so they can cut them to ribbons? I think this speech was a calculated and political one, designed to continue to outline the agenda that Obama and his supporters are going to live or die rallying around. They can't outline it in any different terms, even by redefining terms from liberal to progressive and taxation to investment, the core is still the same. Government is the answer.
A philosophical difference of opinion with most of Americans, as evidenced by the recent elections, and very cleverly played. Obama and his staff figure that by doing nothing they risk less, and dare the opposition to try and climb the hill that they protect. They are counting on the Tea Party led Republicans to make the first move into the open, and that is likely what will happen. New budget proposals built around calls for "less spending" will surely be a hallmark of the new legislature, which will surely gut some programs, then be prepared for the defensive onslaught from the liberals..."Look at what they are taking away from hard working Americans!" will be the first line of every major address for the next few years, and it may well be effective.
Obama's opponents and the eventual Presidential candidate will have to be very careful trying to overcome this shift in policy from the Obama administration.
Republicans cannot be seen as the bad guys with no new ideas this time around, on top of market corrections that are bound to improve economic conditions in spite of government's best attempts to delay it. Obama is fighting a delaying action, and he will play it cool. His opponents would do well to not underestimate the impacts of acting hastily, they must maintain a clear understanding of the consequences that may result, or Obama will be able to frame his version of America to over half of the American public that now receives benefits instead of paying for them.
As we learn more about Obama, and actually gain some useful insights into this very private individual by virtue of his words and actions over the past few years, I fear that we may underestimate what he has achieved by placing more voters on the receiving side of the ledger. These next few years are critical, and it is plain to me that Obama is preparing a well thought out policy to remain in power. We are setting up an unfortunate battle between those who are voting for government to take care of them, and those who must pay for it. The numbers are almost split 50/50, due to years of manipulation that has led disadvantaged people to stop looking for ways to get ahead using their own means, and start using the means of government programs instead. Turning the tide will take just as long as it took to create the lie, along with certain fortitude and careful planning to draw the line in the sand for 2012.

Politicians Change Their Tune?

It struck me this week, as the politicians and pundits tried to outmaneuver each other about who could be more "civl" in their discourse after the Giffords shootings, that we should view this as yet another attempt by the chameleons in our government to sway our opinions. Do they really think we are all that stupid?
They are all jockeying to place themselves in either the "look how civil I am" category, or the "look how brash I am because I don't care" category. You can find most politicians in the first column and the pundits in the second column, especially those that are trying to establish themselves among the "giants" of pseudo-news. I for one will stick to candidates like Mike Huckabee, who don't need to "change" anything about their behavior, because they are already civil in their discourse and have genuine plans for the safety and security of our nation.
These candidates face an uphill battle with news sources, entertainment executives and liberal leaning commentators who seemingly control every major news outlet, TV show and movie since I can remember. At least Fox news tries to be even with their commentators, enough to make us feel like we aren't being taken for a ride anyway...as I am pretty skeptical of pretty much any source of "information."
Keep this much in mind, for all of those who cried out for caution and understanding when Major Hassan shot up Ft. Hood, knowing that his Muslim name could stir a backlash across America...where were you in urging caution when the Giffords shooter had the initial impression of being a "right wing nutjob?" It goes both ways people, and now view the facts...the situation in AZ has not proven to be any more than a very disturbed man with intent to kill and emotional issues, while the Ft. Hood shooter has been identified with Muslim Jihad. Still no backlash? Still seem like fair reporting of the facts? I think not.
The lesson for me is this, don't trust reporting for accuracy, always expect an "angle" to be played...so we would do well to explore leaders that are not reported as constantly changing their spots to get our votes. Look to the character first, and how much that person "changes" to meet their expectations, instead of leading people toward their vision.