Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Obama's speech evoked various thoughts


I watched President Obama's speech while while doing my elliptical work. He spoke for 50 minutes followed by a lot of hand shaking allowing me to get a much needed ten extra minutes of workout time in.

As I watched the speech I scrawled out phrases that came to mind, I'll share them now:

Best communicator since Reagan

Elegant spokesman

Passionately sincere

Ideologically idealistic

Change from Bush, but not change from Washington politics

Inspirational for a great many

Energy, Health Care, and Education reform

Unfundable agenda

No earmarks? Seriously? Did he really say that? I think he believes it.

Pompous grins from California

What does Sully have to do with this?

The Government will lead you

Taxes won't be raised ,"Not one dime", 3 or 4 times. Ironic and puzzling.

Outnumbered jeers

"if we", "if we", "if we", really means "If the government"

A room of smiley people who can't see that America is in decline.

9 comments:

Rick Calohan said...

First of all a couple of things…

I do not lay all the blame on President Obama, after all when he was Senator of Illinois he was never in the chamber long enough to make a difference. That said I find as I have so often the duplicity and double speak out of these so-called: Address to Joint Session of Congress.

A complete transcript can be located here.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-of-President-Barack-Obama-Address-to-Joint-Session-of-Congress/

If the President and these Members of Congress and Members are truly serious about cutting taxes spending after passing the most massive pork-barrel boondoggle in American History lets start with their pay.

In my yoot, Chrysler Chairman and CEO Lee Iacocca lowered his salary to a $1.00 a year. I think the President and Members of Congress who had to be wealthy to get there in the first place should set the example and lower their salaries to a $1.00 a year. Sure, it is symbolic and will not make a massive dent in our annual deficit or national debt but let us look at the savings.

In 2009, a Member of Congress earns $174,000 per year while the leadership in Congress receives the following

Senate Leadership
Majority Leader - $193,400
Minority Leader - $193,400
House Leadership
Speaker of the House - $223,500
Majority Leader - $193,400
Minority Leader - $193,400
There are 100 Senators and 435 Representatives for those with a Government Secular Public School education out there. That is 535 Members of the Congress.
Now the leadership Post for five positions equals $997,100
The remaining 530 times $174,000 equals = $92,220,000
Totaling $93,217,100 that is spent on Congressional salaries; however, at a $1 a year perhaps, some of the greed and pork will end in that chamber and perhaps some of these attorneys can go back to chasing ambulances. Therefore, instead of 93 million plus dollars a year, just $535 is spent on salaries. I call this my Capital Spending Cap.

For the executive Branch, setting a new tone and showing leadership by example.
Vice President “No one messes with” Joe Biden salary is $221,000
President Obama currently earns $400,000 per year, along with a $50,000 expense account, a $100,000 nontaxable travel account and $19,000 for entertainment.
So add it up that’s $790,000 reduced to $2 by my plan.
Members of the President Cabinent receive $191,000 a year. How many Cabinent post are there?
You have the State, Treasury, Defense, Justice, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, Education, Veterans Affairs, Homeland Security that adds up to 14 post at $191,000 equals $2,674,000 by my plan it would be reduced to $14 a year.
So just by cutting the salaries to a $1 a year we have saved the tax payers millions of dollars in wasteful spending that could go to oh I don’t know back to the tax payer. This is only a first step of a true bi-partisan approach to bring accountability back to

Rick Calohan said...

the last word from my earlier post was "Washington", but I am sure your astute readers knew that. To think the President was wise enough to present his laundry list to Congress and fittingly so on of all days, Fat Tuesday.

Frontier Forest said...

Interesting and encouraging speech for sure. But like you, when he said “No Pork” I heard a bunch of jeers not cheers. I too wondered if he was kidding at first. But on to Rick’s thoughts: I stick to my guns! If Rick doesn’t run for president in 2012, he should take over Geithner’s job.

pjw said...

Woody, I heard those jeers, too! And the Democrats didn't even have the nerve to cheer or applaud on that one. I about choked when he said that! I didn't listen to the whole thing, just checked in and out every so often. I think I watched "House Hunters."

Rick Calohan said...

Woodster, perhaps you can start an exploratory committee get the fundraising underway, should I get the nomination, I would think a person of your knowledge in the lumber business could find a spot in my cabinet (no pun intended) and should sail through confirmation hearings to become my Secretary of Interior. Granted you would still only be paid $1 a year.

Roger Mann said...

"Passionately sincere"

Passionately sincere? Are you kidding? He was no more sincere in what he said last night than…

When he said he wanted to “reduce the number of abortions” at the Saddleback Forum -- and then signed an executive order lifting the ban on using federal funding for abortions overseas (not to mention his support of partial birth abortion, infanticide, and the soon to be passed “Freedom of Choice Act”).

When he said he was “unaware” of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s racially polarizing (i.e., racist) views while he attended his church for the past 20 years -- even though this was common knowledge to anyone familiar with Wright’s sermons, and “Black Liberation Theology” is the official teaching of his church.

When he said he was going to oversee an ethical and “transparent” administration -- while he spends millions of dollars in legal fees in order to keep the official vault copy of his birth certificate sealed (is he actually a “natural born citizen” as the Constitution requires? No one knows, since he refuses to release his birth certificate and his college admission records!). By the way, we now have lawsuits brought forth by a former Presidential Candidate and Ambassador to the U.N., an active duty U.S. Army officer serving in Iraq, and an active duty Military Police Officer serving in Iraq. So this issue isn’t going away anytime soon.

When he said that the stimulus bill had “no earmarks” in it -- when the vast majority of the spending is directed to liberal pet projects that were never approved through the normal appropriations process.

I could go on and on, but I think you see my point. What you have mistaken for “sincerity” would be better described as the flagrant audacity of a brazen and polished liar.

Reepicheep said...

Whoa...chill Roger...

By "Passionately Sincere" I mean that he believes his ideology passionately. I think he really does think he can cure cancer, etc.

I'm not saying he's right, by no means...I'm just saying he passionately thinks he is.

Roger Mann said...

“Whoa...chill Roger…”

Ok, but it feels SO good to rant and rave every once in awhile!!! :-)

Seriously, though, sorry for the misunderstanding. I knew you didn’t think that Obama’s ideology is correct. But I thought you were saying that he’s passionately sincere in what he says in his speeches. I agree with you that he passionately believes his ideology…so much so that the end (the implementation of his ideology) justifies the means (saying whatever a given audience wants to hear, even if it’s an outright lie).

Reepicheep said...

No prob Roger. Your rants are always welcomed.