State of the Union: My Take
Last night, President Barack Hussein Obama II delivered the first State of the Union Address of his second term. Overall, honestly, I was “meh” with the speech. He highlighted some things that are moving the country forward (thanks in no part to the Republican party), and I liked some of his proposals. I just wish he’d stop pandering to those who want to hurt the environment in order to make a few bucks. Show me clean coal production and I’ll show you a Leprechaun. Show me responsible fracking procedures and I’ll show you a brand new minority college graduate with good credit.
I realize that you have to appeal to both sides of an argument to get things done, but that other side isn’t exactly helping you out to meet you in the middle…and hasn’t for the last four years…but I guess you still have hope for that change, eh, Barry?
I had the fortune of watching the speech at a local restaurant where they were hosting a #BarackTalk. I got in on the tail end of one of the parts around 8:40p, for a speech at 9p. Watching the speech in a Liberal town with Liberal onlookers is funny. You can see those who are moderate with those who are anything but that. I went there to meet Goldie Taylor (@goldietaylor) from The Grio and MSNBC while she was in town. After locating each other through Twitter we sat together, talked some, and live tweeted the speech. We both have questions about an unrelated story, though, for which we will unfortunately never know any answers until we all stand at the Great White Throne. I speak of Christopher Dorner’s take-down (?) yesterday in California. We also ended on a joke from comedienne Wanda Sykes on Twitter about the 102 year-old Desaline Victor (how awesome is her name?!) who waited three hours to vote (presumably for Obama) in 2012. Wanda said that Desaline was 82 years old when she got in that line to vote. Someone else tweeted that Desaline has probably long forgotten all the life lessons that particular tweeter (in her 20s) has yet to learn. I love/hate Twitter (and cried laughing over those tweets).
The address ended on an emotional note with Desaline (referencing the fixes needed to make sure voting is smooth and easy – but when you put in Romney’s lawyer as one of the people to fix it, and he worked on a campaign with the political party that worked HARD to make voting hard as all get out, I don’t think we’ll get very far) and shooting victims and their families dotted throughout the chamber. Gabby Giffords was there. Hadiya Pendleton’s parents were there. Another victim (I forget his name, but he is a police officer, I believe) was there. Obama asked Congress to at least vote on gun measures, even if they disagree with them, still bring them to the floor for a vote. Maybe someone can be convinced at the last minute? I don’t know. As long as the NRA stays powerful on the Hill, I doubt that any significant gun changes will take place. These detestable people are against universal background checks now. (I laugh internally wondering if they still feel the same way after the Christopher Dorner incident. Black people with a full arsenal and training to take out people with one shot? You know they’re not in favor of that.) I don’t know what that ending moment was all about, but maybe it will inspire some people to write their representatives and demand stricter controls for guns and better background checks. No, it probably won’t stop someone determined to take out a stadium, but it can make it a lot harder for them to get what they need to do it.
Finally, we have Marco Rubio’s response speech. I listened to it on the radio on the way home. Rubio sounded like a high school student in debate class compared to Obama. Rubio mentioned things that Obama never mentioned in his speech. For him to be the savior of the Republican party, Rubio has a lot more miracles to perform and sacrifices to make because that response was so anemic. I liked how Rubio proposed alternatives to Obama’s way (some of which can be looked at), but he never backed it up with a strategy for implementation or established why their way was better in comparison. It was like he debated a point or called out something, but didn’t back it up. I felt like he left me hanging to know more information. He also took an awkward water break that I heard clearly on radio. It looked worse on television.
And THAT is what we remember about his speech. Great going, Marco Rubio! You’ve done Bobby Jindal proud! (Jindal even tweeted his congratulations to Rubio and I about died laughing. Oh, the shaaaaaaaaaade of it all!) Rubio also left me feeling very depressed about the future of America. He offered no hope for a better day. Is this reality or just poor speech writing?