President Obama delivered a powerful speech that focused on bipartisanship and counted on the hope that the poor performance of the private sector over the past two years has forced people to have more faith in government and want more government action.
Undeniably well received, the speech was also undeniably expected.
President Obama believes that government is the answer to all our problems and although he made a point of stating that he does not believe in bigger government, he never backed away from more government control .
In fact three extraordinary government based goals were punctuated in President Obama’s speech. One was for a government run universal health care project that is akin to LBJ’s expansion of social economic welfare in the 60’s.
Another lofty target laid out was the President’s cap and trade regulations on carbon. That well intended environmental goal will revolutionize our economy and produce some economic winners and many losers and, at best negligible, environmental results.
The final foray into change offered by President Obama was his initiatives which would put education in the domain of government and under its control from the elementary level through the college level.
However, in the Republican response to the President, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal reminded us that the strength in America’s future lays not in government but our people. Acknowledging the fact that Washington must lead, Jindal made it clear that more money and power in the hands of Washington is not leadership.
Despite the trappings of Washington power and the deserved traditional pomp and circumstances of the Presidency, Governor Jindal presented his case under less impressive circumstances than the President, but his message was as resounding as the Presidents.
Governor Jindal addressed the need to stabilize housing markets, increase energy efficiency and the use of alternative energy sources, and the need to grow our economy. But his approach to those efforts did not rely on the government bureaucracy which has proven itself unable to effectively deliver services, monitor itself or act with speed and efficiency.
Having to follow President Obama in a response, Bobby Jindal faced a daunting task.
He needed to deliver a response that could appropriately counter the President and although the grandiosity of his oration may not have met the emotional height of President Obama’s, the content did.
One speech relied on the collective will, determination and stamina of the people. The other relied on government replacing individual will, determination and stamina with a bureaucracy.
Jindal’s response was not made an easier by the fact that President Obama is undeniably one of our greatest contemporary political orators. Any message that the President delivers is likely to strike a chord in the hearts and minds of citizens. Much the same way that Ronald Reagan did when he ruled the bully pulpit. Both Obama and Reagan used the bully pulpit quite effectively. The difference between the two though, existed in content.
President Obama uses the bully pulpit to promote government as the key to the success of our people.
President Reagan used the bully pulpit to promote our people as the key to the success of our government.
President Obama sees government as the tool which people are empowered by while President Reagan saw people are the source to any power that the government is given.
It is a point noted when we look at the content of President Obama’s speech. In it , government is the source of our success.
Through incremental moves to socializing medicine, education and industry, under the leadership of President Obama, things will improve. In his speech, the source to a sustainable success is the bureaucracy which has proven itself to be slow, cumbersome, unruly, ineffective and inefficient. We are to believe that a government which can’t control itself or monitor itself is suppose to be the source of our wealth.
This is the same government that operates a postal service that is in the red, and has to increase rates while cutting services.
Yet, according to President Obama, government is the answer.
Bobby Jindal’s response to President Obama stated the opposite and although he lacked the suspense and emotion of the President, the content of his speech spoke to the fact that government bureaucracy holds no candle to the power of a free people.
He spoke to the principles that our nation was founded on. The principles that we will have to someday struggle to recapture as we slowly move away from a people driven government to a government driven people.
In his address, governor Jindal stated that where Republicans agree with the President, we “must be his most ardent supporters.” With that I agree. However; I fear that that the President’s incremental adoption of the socialist policies that America has long fought against will provide little opportunity to demonstrate any ardent support.
Governor Bobby Jindal's Republican response to President Obama
What did Soviet Socialists use before they had candles?
Answer: electricity.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 44
So, I suppose you are against unemployment compensation, social security and medicare?
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." - Benjamin Franklin, letter to Benjamin Vaughn, March 14, 1783
With respect To Obama's speech which asks us to give up more and more liberty for his promise of "economic security." I again must agree with our founding father Benjamin Franklin when he said:
"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, 1759
To be quite honest I agree with Ben Franklin on a great many things...
For example: I might as well have said this myself today, very much like he said it 243 years ago:
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." - Benjamin Franklin, On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor, 1766
I heard an intelligent human being willing to give everything for his country, to bring his country together, to dispel party politics, and to help the American people through a crises. I heard someone whose spending initiatives are meant to provide a safety net during that time period of restoration, and someone with the foresight to understand that we need to start planning for the future now - a future with new industries, new technology, better education, more efficient energy consumption.
I heard a leader. With ideas. Without empty promises. Someone who is willing to deliver the tough messages, someone who is willing to make the cuts in the deficit that his former seat holder ran up in astronomical proportions. I heard someone who reinforced the strengths of this country to work hard and pull through this time together.
More useless garbage from the source, Tony.
From that other one I heard pompous, grandiose words of fluff. Pretty words with nothing but "trust me I'm from the government" to hold them up.
Marilyn, until you listen to Obama's report to the nation, please don't comment.
Carla, last I checked, this was Anthony's post and unless he has a problem with anything Marilyn has said, you can keep your mouth shut unless it is your post.
The only reason the man was there was because he's the GOP's response to an African-American in the WH. Sad. They better come up with something more substantial than a brown puppet if they hope to do anything in 2012.
Well, some Americans know enough to learn from experience. When you get burned, you learn to stay away from the hot stove. If the GOP hope to regain their reputation and strength, they better start coming up with some new ideas using some critical thinking, instead of the droning on and on of the same, tired stuff that got us into this mess.
And it's shameful that people who are supposed to be so smart keep proclaiming themselves idiots:
- can't read legislation put in front of them over the course of weeks;
- continue to profess that government cannot lead or solve problems, even though they want us to elect them into government.
If I marketed my business that way, I would have been out of business a long time ago.
Honestly.
Carla, this is definitely the pot calling the kettle black. I count you as one of the "many people" who are NOT open minded. If someone writes anything that doesn't shower praise on your anoited one (Obama) you suddenly attack them. Obama IS for government expansion and at the rate he is going we ARE headed toward socialism. Unfortunately, Obama's glowing halo has blinded you to the truth.
Sheryl, you base this on what? One speech that came in after the praise fest?
Here comes Bush, we have a repeat, deregulation, lack of oversight and million of working people loose their savings and investment pension they worked all of their lives.
And the people are left holding the bag again.
Finally we get a democrat that wants to give back all the money the republican stole back to the people. If that is socialism I ' ll take it.
Its our money that getting paid with and they have done a terrible job of running the country all those years in charge, the last 50.
Time to wake up, they are not fiscal conservative neither for small government, they just very good liars at throwing garbage on the other party to make themselves look good.
I think they call it attack when you have nothing also you can do to save your asses.
This is going to break us financially. The libs are trying to force green energy that is not cost effective -- the only way they can make it competitive is to raise the prices on our main sources of energy. This is not going to work in the short term and will do more damage than good. IMO.
What's wrong with harmony, respect, honor, love, unity. Rather hard to have when you're so rapt up in decimating each other.
And people before the election said we couldn't call Obama a socialist!
""When you tax something you get less of it. So, we as a nation will work less."
Spoken like a truly delusional wingnut loser. Hey loser, how is it that some of the largest companies in the world rose to power at a time when the top marginal tax rate was over 90%? Idiot.
OBAMA urged socialism. AS OPPOSED TO THE FREE MARKET CAPITALISM THAT CREATED THIS MESS.
I think a lot of people would line up for those CEO jobs even if it meant a higher tax bracket. What a crock to think otherwise.
You know, here is a real crock. This is how this crap gets started when people who have no idea decide they have to make some sort of statement. Unintentionally, they do indeed make a statement but not the one that says they know what they are talking about. Julia, you are clueless on Bobby Jindal. Absolutely so clueless its pathetic.
The wealthiest 2% should be grateful that tax cuts are rolling back to the 2003 level and not the 1955 level. Any talk of Reagan and smaller government is laughable. During the Reagan years the federal government consumed the biggest chunk of our national income since 1947.
Year Income Bracket Tax Rate
1955 $44,000-$52,000 59%
1965 $52,000-$64,000 53%
1975 $88,000-$100,000 60%
1985 $169,020 and over 50%
1993 (Clinton) $250,000 and over 39.6%
2003 (Bush) $250,000 and over 35%
One thing is for certain -- there is not enough money in all the millionaire bank accounts to pay for all these good intentions. The middle class is the only other place he can go to get the money.
Jindal has done a good job with what he was left there a mess...and I think most of your loosers fear him, he is up and coming and yes, he is a brown man.... I think in an election he would give Obama a good run for the White House...