GOP SOTU response

[teetoppz28]

When people invoke Hitler, I have no interest in hearing the remainder of what they have to say.

Speaking of invoking Hitler... remind me who said that a certain set of people were "poisoning the blood of our country" in a recent rant??

[Rate This]

When people invoke Hitler, I have no interest in hearing the remainder of what they have to say.

Speaking of invoking Hitler... remind me who said that a certain set of people were "poisoning the blood of our country" in a recent rant??

Trump of course does that regularly and uses other language directly lifted from Hitler and company. If you don’t want a comparison to them then it’s recommended you don’t say things they said and NOBODY is making him say those things.

Beemer is upset because the impression is that he energized Democrats and put their minds at ease and proved he’s up to it and the momentum is showing early signs of shifting. Trump made a tactical error by lowering the bar as far as he did and resorting to talking about Biden’s hair during the speech… that’s a sign he’s got absolutely nothing. We are gonna get an actual race out of this now.

[Matt]

WSJ editorial:

State of the Union speeches are eminently forgettable, but President Biden’s address on Thursday was memorable for all the wrong reasons. His address was one long, divisive pep rally for Democrats, goading Republicans throughout the speech, and targeting multiple and various villains for partisan attacks. It really was extraordinary.

Most such speeches make at least an attempt at reaching across the aisle, if only as a gesture. This one had none, not even on the issue of aid to Ukraine where he most needs Republican support. He made a good if incomplete argument for supporting Ukraine, and we agree with its substance.

But he made the dreadful political mistake of comparing Russia’s threat to democracy with the threat to democracy at home. There is no comparison between Vladimir Putin’s invasion and partisan, even raucous debates in the U.S., and many supporters of Ukraine will resent the linkage. We regret to say it, but this speech may have made it harder for GOP Members of Congress to resist Donald Trump and vote to send weapons to Ukraine. Was the short-term partisan adrenaline rush worth that risk?

Given the foreign threats to democracy, Mr. Biden could have made a bipartisan pitch to increase defense spending. Even Jimmy Carter made that pivot in the final year of his Presidency when the Soviets were on the march. But Mr. Biden wants to spend and spend on everything else instead. This could turn out to be a historic miscalculation as the threats from Iran, Russia and China mount.

The speech was downhill from there, with a list of partisan campaign themes that hewed hard to the left, while framing opposition as ill-intended and out to hurt the country.

He demeaned the Supreme Court on abortion, suggesting its decision overturning Roe v. Wade was partisan and political. The truth is that the Dobbs decision, as correct as it was under the Constitution, has been a political boon to Democrats. But he still trashed the Court, and the Justices in attendance a few rows in front of him had to sit stoically and take it.

His political enemies list was long, and far more than Mr. Trump. There were the 1,000 billionaires who don’t pay enough taxes, the drug companies that care nothing for patients, the credit-card companies that want to gouge consumers, the “big landlords who break antitrust laws by price-fixing” and drive up rents, and more. He even hauled out the carcass of the National Rifle Association for a drubbing.

He sneered at Republicans who voted against his spending bills but whose states now are receiving some of the federal largesse: “If any you don’t want that money in your district, just let me know.” On the border-security bill and fentanyl, it was a schoolyard taunt: “You don’t want to do that, huh?”

He said Republicans want to cut Social Security in order to cut taxes for the rich. But Republicans have expressly refused to get anywhere close to reforming entitlements in this Congress, despite the urgent need to fix programs that will soon be bankrupt.

Israel also came in for a lecture about morality and civilians, a more forceful reproof than he gave Hamas. This was an attempt to pacify his party’s anti-Israel left in Dearborn, Mich., and elsewhere. But it may have consequences on the ground in the Middle East, where adversaries will wonder about the U.S. commitment to our best ally in the region.

There is much in the speech to critique on policy, and to correct on the potted history of his Presidency, but policy wasn’t his point on Thursday. This was a campaign rally disguised as a State of the Union, as Democrats chanted “four more years.”

No doubt it was an attempt to rally Democrats who fret that he’s been too passive, or to show voters who worry about his age that he can sound tough. Thus the near-shouting delivery. But we wonder how effective it will be as a campaign message.

There was nothing here for Nikki Haley voters, or Republicans who don’t want a second Trump term and might consider voting for Mr. Biden. In its divisiveness, it could have the effect of encouraging the No Labels movement to go ahead with a third-party candidacy. Every bit as much as Donald Trump, the Joe Biden in the well of the House on Thursday promised four more years of dispiriting rancor.

I didn't watch, but based on what I've read seems to imply that the bar for a Biden speech being labeled a success is so low that basically if he doesn't mumble or shit his pants on stage, the left is going to applaud.

[Rate This]

WSJ editorial:

State of the Union speeches are eminently forgettable, but President Biden’s address on Thursday was memorable for all the wrong reasons. His address was one long, divisive pep rally for Democrats, goading Republicans throughout the speech, and targeting multiple and various villains for partisan attacks. It really was extraordinary.

Most such speeches make at least an attempt at reaching across the aisle, if only as a gesture. This one had none, not even on the issue of aid to Ukraine where he most needs Republican support. He made a good if incomplete argument for supporting Ukraine, and we agree with its substance.

But he made the dreadful political mistake of comparing Russia’s threat to democracy with the threat to democracy at home. There is no comparison between Vladimir Putin’s invasion and partisan, even raucous debates in the U.S., and many supporters of Ukraine will resent the linkage. We regret to say it, but this speech may have made it harder for GOP Members of Congress to resist Donald Trump and vote to send weapons to Ukraine. Was the short-term partisan adrenaline rush worth that risk?

Given the foreign threats to democracy, Mr. Biden could have made a bipartisan pitch to increase defense spending. Even Jimmy Carter made that pivot in the final year of his Presidency when the Soviets were on the march. But Mr. Biden wants to spend and spend on everything else instead. This could turn out to be a historic miscalculation as the threats from Iran, Russia and China mount.

The speech was downhill from there, with a list of partisan campaign themes that hewed hard to the left, while framing opposition as ill-intended and out to hurt the country.

He demeaned the Supreme Court on abortion, suggesting its decision overturning Roe v. Wade was partisan and political. The truth is that the Dobbs decision, as correct as it was under the Constitution, has been a political boon to Democrats. But he still trashed the Court, and the Justices in attendance a few rows in front of him had to sit stoically and take it.

His political enemies list was long, and far more than Mr. Trump. There were the 1,000 billionaires who don’t pay enough taxes, the drug companies that care nothing for patients, the credit-card companies that want to gouge consumers, the “big landlords who break antitrust laws by price-fixing” and drive up rents, and more. He even hauled out the carcass of the National Rifle Association for a drubbing.

He sneered at Republicans who voted against his spending bills but whose states now are receiving some of the federal largesse: “If any you don’t want that money in your district, just let me know.” On the border-security bill and fentanyl, it was a schoolyard taunt: “You don’t want to do that, huh?”

He said Republicans want to cut Social Security in order to cut taxes for the rich. But Republicans have expressly refused to get anywhere close to reforming entitlements in this Congress, despite the urgent need to fix programs that will soon be bankrupt.

Israel also came in for a lecture about morality and civilians, a more forceful reproof than he gave Hamas. This was an attempt to pacify his party’s anti-Israel left in Dearborn, Mich., and elsewhere. But it may have consequences on the ground in the Middle East, where adversaries will wonder about the U.S. commitment to our best ally in the region.

There is much in the speech to critique on policy, and to correct on the potted history of his Presidency, but policy wasn’t his point on Thursday. This was a campaign rally disguised as a State of the Union, as Democrats chanted “four more years.”

No doubt it was an attempt to rally Democrats who fret that he’s been too passive, or to show voters who worry about his age that he can sound tough. Thus the near-shouting delivery. But we wonder how effective it will be as a campaign message.

There was nothing here for Nikki Haley voters, or Republicans who don’t want a second Trump term and might consider voting for Mr. Biden. In its divisiveness, it could have the effect of encouraging the No Labels movement to go ahead with a third-party candidacy. Every bit as much as Donald Trump, the Joe Biden in the well of the House on Thursday promised four more years of dispiriting rancor.

I didn't watch, but based on what I've read seems to imply that the bar for a Biden speech being labeled a success is so low that basically if he doesn't mumble or shit his pants on stage, the left is going to applaud.

The WSJ editorial board would pan it even if he announced immediate plans to suspend all taxes on everything period and announce a liquidation sale of the federal government. The big problem is that Republicans have stupidly focused on his age and supposed infirmity while running Trump who is certainly appearing to be not all there… and then when Biden doesn’t commit any real gaffes in 68 minutes people go “WOW WHAT A SPEECH CAN YOU BELIEVE IT??!! I GUESS HES NOT SO DEMENTED AS THEY SAY”… the Republicans are running a campaign with little to no policy positions and “when I’m president we’ll take care of it very quickly, we’ll solve the Middle East in a day” or whatever is not policy.

[Matt]

The WSJ editorial board would pan it even if he announced immediate plans to suspend all taxes on everything period and announce a liquidation sale of the federal government. The big problem is that Republicans have stupidly focused on his age and supposed infirmity while running Trump who is certainly appearing to be not all there… and then when Biden doesn’t commit any real gaffes in 68 minutes people go “WOW WHAT A SPEECH CAN YOU BELIEVE IT??!! I GUESS HES NOT SO DEMENTED AS THEY SAY”… the Republicans are running a campaign with little to no policy positions and “when I’m president we’ll take care of it very quickly, we’ll solve the Middle East in a day” or whatever is not policy.

So we've decided to attack the source, eh?

[Rate This]

The WSJ editorial board would pan it even if he announced immediate plans to suspend all taxes on everything period and announce a liquidation sale of the federal government. The big problem is that Republicans have stupidly focused on his age and supposed infirmity while running Trump who is certainly appearing to be not all there… and then when Biden doesn’t commit any real gaffes in 68 minutes people go “WOW WHAT A SPEECH CAN YOU BELIEVE IT??!! I GUESS HES NOT SO DEMENTED AS THEY SAY”… the Republicans are running a campaign with little to no policy positions and “when I’m president we’ll take care of it very quickly, we’ll solve the Middle East in a day” or whatever is not policy.

So we've decided to attack the source, eh?

No different than that buffoon Nolan Finley writing something. I view them as about the same location on the political spectrum. But I’m saying the WSJ is a Murdoch paper… it would take a lot for them to not pan a Democratic speech and applaud a Republican one.

[bmw]

When people invoke Hitler, I have no interest in hearing the remainder of what they have to say.

How did he do that?

From the beginning of his speech:

In January 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt came to this chamber to speak to the nation. He said, “I address you at a moment unprecedented in the history of the Union.”

Hitler was on the march. War was raging in Europe. President Roosevelt’s purpose was to wake up the Congress and alert the American people that this was no ordinary moment.

Freedom and democracy were under assault in the world. Tonight I come to the same chamber to address the nation. Not since President Lincoln and the Civil War have freedom and democracy been under assault here at home as they are today.

[Honeyman]

The WSJ editorial board would pan it even if he announced immediate plans to suspend all taxes on everything period and announce a liquidation sale of the federal government. The big problem is that Republicans have stupidly focused on his age and supposed infirmity while running Trump who is certainly appearing to be not all there… and then when Biden doesn’t commit any real gaffes in 68 minutes people go “WOW WHAT A SPEECH CAN YOU BELIEVE IT??!! I GUESS HES NOT SO DEMENTED AS THEY SAY”… the Republicans are running a campaign with little to no policy positions and “when I’m president we’ll take care of it very quickly, we’ll solve the Middle East in a day” or whatever is not policy.

So we've decided to attack the source, eh?

No different than that buffoon Nolan Finley writing something. I view them as about the same location on the political spectrum. But I’m saying the WSJ is a Murdoch paper… it would take a lot for them to not pan a Democratic speech and applaud a Republican one.

WSJ has been much more centered, at least in some of their editorials, in the past year. They have criticized Trump frequently.

[Honeyman]

When people invoke Hitler, I have no interest in hearing the remainder of what they have to say.

How did he do that?

From the beginning of his speech:

In January 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt came to this chamber to speak to the nation. He said, “I address you at a moment unprecedented in the history of the Union.”

Hitler was on the march. War was raging in Europe. President Roosevelt’s purpose was to wake up the Congress and alert the American people that this was no ordinary moment.

Freedom and democracy were under assault in the world. Tonight I come to the same chamber to address the nation. Not since President Lincoln and the Civil War have freedom and democracy been under assault here at home as they are today.

100% accurate. This is worse than the McCarthy era.

[Rate This]

When people invoke Hitler, I have no interest in hearing the remainder of what they have to say.

How did he do that?

From the beginning of his speech:

In January 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt came to this chamber to speak to the nation. He said, “I address you at a moment unprecedented in the history of the Union.”

Hitler was on the march. War was raging in Europe. President Roosevelt’s purpose was to wake up the Congress and alert the American people that this was no ordinary moment.

Freedom and democracy were under assault in the world. Tonight I come to the same chamber to address the nation. Not since President Lincoln and the Civil War have freedom and democracy been under assault here at home as they are today.

Guess what? He’s right. That’s a pretty tasteful way to put that in there. When Trump literally says “I’ll be a dictator… but only for one day” do you actually believe he would try to just do it for a day? Really? Trump uses verbiage that Hitler did… the Republican Party has become bound and determined to win no matter what they have to do… legal or illegal… so yeah we have a problem.

CNN did a flash poll and the speech was pretty well received even if the audience for the speech because it was a Democrat giving it skewed Democratic. People became a little less nervous about his age. This weird Trump will win in a walk call it now thing you have going on just isn’t aging well. I warned you.

Not only that but several times he was able to bait the Republicans into responding and hit them in the face with it. No dementia addled person could do that performance off the cuff to such effect.

[Rate This]

The WSJ editorial board would pan it even if he announced immediate plans to suspend all taxes on everything period and announce a liquidation sale of the federal government. The big problem is that Republicans have stupidly focused on his age and supposed infirmity while running Trump who is certainly appearing to be not all there… and then when Biden doesn’t commit any real gaffes in 68 minutes people go “WOW WHAT A SPEECH CAN YOU BELIEVE IT??!! I GUESS HES NOT SO DEMENTED AS THEY SAY”… the Republicans are running a campaign with little to no policy positions and “when I’m president we’ll take care of it very quickly, we’ll solve the Middle East in a day” or whatever is not policy.

So we've decided to attack the source, eh?

No different than that buffoon Nolan Finley writing something. I view them as about the same location on the political spectrum. But I’m saying the WSJ is a Murdoch paper… it would take a lot for them to not pan a Democratic speech and applaud a Republican one.

WSJ has been much more centered, at least in some of their editorials, in the past year. They have criticized Trump frequently.

They are not Trump fans. That said there was extremely little chance they were gonna like Biden’s speech.

[zzand]

As a Jew I see nothing wrong with what he said. I actually agree with him.

[Honeyman]

As a Jew I see nothing wrong with what he said. I actually agree with him.

Ditto....and also a member of the tribe.

[teetoppz28]

When people invoke Hitler, I have no interest in hearing the remainder of what they have to say.

Speaking of invoking Hitler... remind me who said that a certain set of people were "poisoning the blood of our country" in a recent rant??

Of course bmw won't answer my question to him... it would completely make his statement null and void, since he gobbles up anything the obese orange-faced guy says.

[Honeyman]

When people invoke Hitler, I have no interest in hearing the remainder of what they have to say.

Speaking of invoking Hitler... remind me who said that a certain set of people were "poisoning the blood of our country" in a recent rant??

Of course bmw won't answer my question to him... it would completely make his statement null and void, since he gobbles up anything the obese orange-faced guy says.

.....except when he's a meanie to DeSanctimonius