State of the Union
January 26th, 2010 | Editorial Cartoons | 10 Comments
Tweet
In a word, the state of the union is ANGRY! The question for the president and for both parties to figure out is, at what? Because we have a two-party system, the only choice people have if they don’t like what’s happening is to vote for the other guy, even if the other guy is largely responsible for what’s happening, and the guy that’s in there now is in there because of the other guy’s mistakes. People are angry at deficits, largely run up by the irresponsibility of the Bush administration, and topped off by Obama. They’re angry that the bankers who got us in this mess are making millions while we lose our shirts, thanks mainly to deregulation promoted primarily by Republicans (but signed off on by Clinton). They’re angry about jobs, but there’d be a lot more of them if the stimulus package had been larger, which would have increased the deficit, which they’re angry about. They’re angry that Washington seems wholly beholden to special interests, so they’re going to vote for the party that loves special interests at least as much as the party in power now. They’re angry at the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which were started by the party they just voted out a year ago. They’re angry that Obama has accomplished so little of his agenda, so they’re going to vote for the party that has unanimously opposed every single aspect of it.
I’m angry, too, and I get to draw cartoons about what I’m angry about, which doesn’t solve any of the problems, but makes me feel good. I’m a Tea Party of one.
Topics: 2010, Congress, Obama, opinion, politics, State of the Union
E-mail
Facebook
RSS
Twitter
You have missed a major point. The people are mad because the Democrates with total control of both houses and the President wasted a year filling thier pockets form insurance groups as they wrote a unread, unknown health care bill. The people expected more. They should not have, but they did and now after a year they are mad and are saying why did they waste time on something we do not understand and you do not understand. To much money & to much power breed contempt for and from the people.
I think you’ve summarized the Catch-22 of it, Ed. Thanks for that.
-Rusty
nah, you hit it, Ed. After the attacks of 9/11/01, the Bush administration blew an amazing opportunity of world-wide good will and aid and assistance with an equally amazing ineptness squandering stupidity and blew up every bridge they could between the US and the rest of the world. Obama and Rodham Clinton have done a wonderful job of rebuilding the bridges the Republicans want down, still. Over the past year, Obama, similarly, has blown an amazing opportunity to rebuild the US, but he has not been alone. Congress was AWOL throughout the Bush administration and has continued to function in a rather inept manner, still.
The Republicans are very good at lockstep unity, while the Democrats, while enjoying great diversity, are unable, or unwilling, to come together and function, progress, act, do something. For this past year, the Democrats have been battling and arguing and negotiating not with Republicans but with themselves and have conceded point after point to the Republicans sitting on the sidelines with glee. What have they not understood about “NO”? about obstructing every item passing by?
Analogously, we were attacked in 2001. We know our politicians knew something bold was about to happen, but why was that surprising? Let us go back over history, 40 years of hijackings, killings, bombings, ranting and raving from the Arab Moslem world against the US. Does no one get it? How clear do they have to be?
Whether Republican, or Arab Moslem, and I am NOT equating the two, NOT equating the two, okay? the message remains clear concise unambiguous definitive.
On the job score, with zero growth over the past 10 years, slow growth before that, outsourcing from the Reagan years, what would happen if all those jobs were returned here? What if we became an importer of raw goods and an exporter of completed desired products? A manufacturer again? And what if the fat cats upstairs could not make a killing in greed? Could they survive on 1 or 2 million dollars a years? They had better learn fast as their ivory towers come tumbling down as they surely will as this present path is hurting the people, badly.
Why was Reagan such a hero? He was not a fiscal conservative; he was the first to bloat government and the deficit over 1 trillion dollars, and the Bushies followed. Clinton was fortunate his years were a boom time, so he could dally and play as he desired. Infrastructure from the ’20s and ’30s should have been serviced back then, but Reagan preferred the money go to the pockets of friends and jobs screwed and sent abroad. Why spend today when he and his friends could have it today? After all, the pipes, lines, tunnels, bridges, road are okay? No, their respective deterioration has cost much more in dollars and lives that proper maintenance could have avoided. Greed, not stupidity. Thank you.
You are correct – America suffers from political bipolar syndrome. Unfortunately, the situation will not get any better because the elected have rigged the constituency boundaries to ensure incumbency for life, and with each constituency now designed to contain only voters of the incumbent’s political stripe, the primary process selects only those who are rabidly polarized. Throw in the Roberts Court decision in favor of syndicracy over democracy and things are beginning to look reminiscent of the final scenes of “The Fall of the Roman Empire”.
Hey Duck, Read your stuff again, you keep blameing Regan, and glossing over Clintion. Clinton came after Regan. Clinton created the problems and did nothing to fix anything other then to cover up his affairs. This man was the worste president we have ever had.
President Clinton was a little short on morals and his first two years of his Presidency were pretty sad, but then he moved to the center and the following six years were very successful. When was the last time we had a balanced budget and a surplus instead of a deficit?
I agree, Don. Bill Clinton had the ability to be a political survivalist, which enabled him to work with the GOP controlled House and Senate after 1994. It was a good example of successful two-party coexistence, which I strongly prefer to single party control, given the way that has been working in recent history.
I shall respond. Dear OldB ol’ buddy ol’ pal. Indeed I do keep blaming Reagan but why continue repeating historical data well known in some quarters and well ignored in others? As for Billy and Willy, I agree with you whole-heartedly, Billy was a slug, still is. He did little to change the course of the previous 12 screwed-up years. He was extremely fortunate this country had begun to turn around in last many months of the first king george, although Billy took credit for it. Billy had been an old time campaigner from way back in Arkansas when he did little else. I understand the term for a governor was 2 years, so he had become a very adept campaigner during those many years. Even Hillary knew her Billy and had various cousins and others trailing the campaign to keep an eye on the philanderer. However, I disagree he was the worst of presidents; I leave that honour to the second king george who, at best, was a simpleton clueless idiot with his silver spoon in his nose and his head in a bottle of booze. His reputation at Harvard and Yale, thank you daddy georgie, were well known far and wide. The downslide of this country from leading 1st world industrial manufacturing giant and leader to leading debtor importer began under the tutelage of Ronald Reagan, ‘well I …’ with deregulation of all that helped us out of the Great Depression and beyond to all the exponential rampant greed that crossed and blurred boundaries and put down the common man and woman by the Robber Barons who ‘privatize profits and bonuses while socializing public risk’. Reagan and Bushes, as Republicans go, fail miserably all the sniff tests for good fiscal conservative republicans. They bloated government and debt hugely and astronomically. The last real Republican in office was Richard Nixon. (Gerald Ford was a temporary stand-in). Nixon and Goldwater were true conservatives true to their values and those of the GOP. No one today. Maybe Pat Buchanan. While this country has been diving, just look around the world at who has not followed our lead and is weathering this hell much better than we are. and that would be almost everyone. Finally, listen to Obama speak; he is giving neither opinion nor editorials but rather historic facts and data that are verifiable by simple fact checking, vs the GOP historical revisionism and ignorance of their complicity over the past decade. Already they place the Arab Moslem attacks of 9/11/2001 in the administration of Billy and Willy. Sorry, just wrong and beyond stupid and/or ignorant. The GOP are petulant impulsive little boys and girls in desperate need of a long time out and no chocolate milk. So, yes, I agree with you, Clinton played and dallied and is a bad guy, too, along with those other baddies, he just was lucky,too. Appropriately enough, Ronnie was a black hatted dude from the early days of Hollywood, so he knew before we knew.
I am not defending Bush. He has a screw that needed to be tighted a long time ago. He got there because of the backlash against Clinton and the other loon (the sky is falling ) guy. Our system is broken, I think we both can agree on this one point. The Teachers Unions Have dumbed down the education system to the point that most people do not read newpapers, they prefer to get the news from a talking head. And a celebrety is now an informed source on the news. IF they are pretty then they must be smart. We have given up teaching history in our classrooms. We are on the same path as the Romans, we want to be amused and not worry about anything. When our wage base gets low enough and the Congress lowers the min. wage we will know for sure that we have slipped to the bottom of the pit of world. Laugh but our grandchildren will face these problems because the do gooders will have had us finially where they want us, all equal , singing CUM BY YA
I just checked; these two following links remain active. An electorate should be an educated electorate, which we do not have. For the most part, education and knowledge are tedious and get in the way of other every day activities. Personally, I have known quite a few who do not read and do not follow the media and do not care. Some never have read a book and barely a magazine. For the $2 billion or so that went into this last presidential bid, I think we had the most informed people involved in a very long time. Nonetheless, the vast majority of Yankee Doodles vote based upon sound bites just prior to the election. All that money is better used for shelters, schools, clinics, housing, parks and recreation. Good reads:
http://www.alternet.org/story/105447
Obama has a lot to offer, but until our education system is fixed or religious fundamentalism withers, anti-intellectuals will flaunt their ignorance.
The Triumph of Ignorance: How Morons Succeed in U.S. Politics
pretty funny and goes with the article about the dumbing down of our society, GOP in particular.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/obamas-use-of-complete-se_b_144642.html