POTUS State Of the Union Address 2018

[RAyMO]

1 hour ago, Merc14 said:

They didn’t just sit, actually. They grimaced. They groaned. They booed and hissed. And it wasn’t just that they disapproved of Trump on policy. It’s that they refused to stand for things they supposedly believe in because they hate Trump so much. Paid family leave? They sat. Infrastructure spending? They sat. Amnesty for 1.8 million illegal immigrants? They sat.

I don't know what it is like in the US but over here it is quite common for the opposition to government to fail to acknowledge any good in the government - why should they? 

Why clap if you don't believe the policies of the speaker were responsible for the outcomes claimed, or if you don't even believe the outcomes claimed, Why clap for aspirations that match yours if experience shows - its word play not likely to backed up by action or that actions to achieve those aspirations are contrary to your principles. Why applaud an individual if you believe his policies and methods are likely in the long run to weaken you country or sections of it you support.

It is not the job of opposition parties and peoples to give succor to an government party or leader - unless they have earnt it - and very few really do earn it.

[Dark_Grey]

2 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

It is not the job of opposition parties and peoples to give succor to an government party or leader - unless they have earnt it - and very few really do earn it.

I get that, but some of things Trump brought up should be universally applauded. But like Merc said, some sour Democrats refused to applause simply out of spite. That just shows bad character on their part. 

[RavenHawk]

45 minutes ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

When he does so, it will truly be the triumph of the will.

So you found a way to invoke the Godwin Law.  It also shows you how ignorant you are.  This is the famous Riefenstahl film.  Do you realize that Kristallnacht was still a few months away and Wanasee was 3 years away?  But up to this point, Hitler had used Nationalism to rebuild German.  There is nothing evil about that.  Nationalism is very good.  The nation was on course, but it was a turning point.  In this one case, just as the FBI and DOJ was weaponized, you have someone overly ambitious that corrupted the intent.  And you fear that (perhaps rightfully so), so you are willing to let entropy come into the world and ensure more of the same. 

There were two things that allowed the evil that Hitler spread, one was Mein Kampf and the other was that the people had fallen asleep.  Where is Trump’s Mein Kampf?  That would probably be “the Art of the Deal”.  That is hardly the blueprints for a new Nazism.  In fact, it’s the opposite.  It’s closer to what the Founding Father intended for this country.  It is true that the people have fallen asleep but that is what “Dreams of My Father” Obama had hoped.  Their social engineering wanted enslaved cogs to command.  Trump is getting people active again in the body politic, which the Founding Fathers knew would defeat what would later happened in Germany.

[RavenHawk]

31 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

 Exactly my point. You're a believer in Trump so you don't see the division he sews as being something he's doing. 

 

Then it is your point that is wrong.  It’s not Trump.  It was the division that Obama and the Progs seeded in order to create the anarchy we see today.  Obama was the most divisive President this nation has ever had.  He planted the seeds of discontent and insurrection between the races and between minorities and police.  Trump is trying to erase all of that negativity and he will succeed.  He will return prosperity and unity to this nation.  His will is greater than the Progs.  And more and more will see that and start to believe.

[Farmer77]

1 minute ago, RavenHawk said:

Then it is your point that is wrong.  It’s not Trump.  It was the division that Obama and the Progs seeded in order to create the anarchy we see today.  Obama was the most divisive President this nation has ever had.  He planted the seeds of discontent and insurrection between the races and between minorities and police.   

I just cant take you seriously with this. Do you even know why Trump's speech was divisive?  

2 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Trump is trying to erase all of that negativity and he will succeed.  He will return prosperity and unity to this nation.  His will is greater than the Progs.  And more and more will see that and start to believe

LOL are you sure it isn't Trump you believe in ? 

[Space Commander Travis]

15 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

So you found a way to invoke the Godwin Law.  It also shows you how ignorant you are.  This is the famous Riefenstahl film.  Do you realize that Kristallnacht was still a few months away and Wanasee was 3 years away?  But up to this point, Hitler had used Nationalism to rebuild German.  There is nothing evil about that.  Nationalism is very good.  The nation was on course, but it was a turning point.  In this one case, just as the FBI and DOJ was weaponized, you have someone overly ambitious that corrupted the intent.  And you fear that (perhaps rightfully so), so you are willing to let entropy come into the world and ensure more of the same. 

 

There were two things that allowed the evil that Hitler spread, one was Mein Kampf and the other was that the people had fallen asleep.  Where is Trump’s Mein Kampf?  That would probably be “the Art of the Deal”.  That is hardly the blueprints for a new Nazism.  In fact, it’s the opposite.  It’s closer to what the Founding Father intended for this country.  It is true that the people have fallen asleep but that is what “Dreams of My Father” Obama had hoped.  Their social engineering wanted enslaved cogs to command.  Trump is getting people active again in the body politic, which the Founding Fathers knew would defeat what would later happened in Germany.

 

Heavens, calm down.

[RavenHawk]

39 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I just cant take you seriously with this. Do you even know why Trump's speech was divisive? 

You’re not paying attention to what I’m saying.  Trump’s speech was not divisive.  It was the environment that was seeded by Obama and decades of rule by the Progs before Trump became President.  They planted the seeds of hatred.  And now, when someone with an upbeat, positive message comes around, it is considered divisive. 

 

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight!”

 

LOL are you sure it isn't Trump you believe in ? 

That’s what I said.

[Kenemet]

7 hours ago, OverSword said:

One guy shouted liar and his party rightly reprimanded him for it.

 

And I never heard of the other part and when I google

House Republicans Want To Cancel President Obama’s State Of The Union Address

The only thing that comes up is the story you linked to so probably not true, and a big nothing sandwich. 

You didn't read the article to see that they quoted from Politico?  https://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/lame-duck-congress-agenda-113222#ixzz3KfSPXt70  

Politico said it was an idea that was floated around, among many other things.  

Previously, some Republicans boycotted the Clinton State of the Union address: http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/1508216/four-republicans-boycott-state-union 

and a radio host called for a boycott of Obama's SOTU: http://therightscoop.com/mark-levin-calls-on-republicans-to-boycott-the-state-of-the-union-and/

So we should not pretend that these are unique actions or that they're the provenance of one party.  Both sides of the aisle are guilty of this kind of behavior.

 

[Paranormal Panther]

8 hours ago, .ZZ. said:

Most of the news around here is about the Democrat response from Joe Kennedy.

Was that drool coming out of Joe Kennedy’s mouth?

Source

I can't mock him. I had vomit coming up in *my* mouth when I watched his speech.

[Paranormal Panther]

It was a great speech! 75% of CBS poll respondents feel the same way. I feel optimistic that America will become even greater, even if we have to drag the Resist Movement kicking and screaming to a better future. Progressive Democrats, as well as their cultural sycophants, may go the way of the dinosaur if they don't do some deep soul-searching.

[+and-then]

8 hours ago, OverSword said:

and a big nothing sandwich

I prefer that to a "sugar-coated Satan sandwich"  

http://gawker.com/5826569/all-hail-the-sugar-coated-satan-sandwich-debt-deal

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

We had 8 years of divisiveness from the prior Administration.  Trump is inspiring.  We went from "you didn't build that" to "yes we can".  Do you realize what happens to the psyche when a person is told they are no good or you'll never amount to anything?  Eventually they become that.  It's very similar to the Stockholm Syndrome.  Through his sheer will, he is trying to break that cycle and return dignity back to America.  The only ones that would see that divisive are Progressives because that threatens their power base.  That speech was directed at ALL Americans.  He's trying to free minds and he is succeeding.

1

Yup...and it's scaring the HELL out of the leadership of the Left.  

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, toast said:

9000hrs of chaos to be forgiven by a 1,5hrs speech? Thats funny. Not. 

Neither is blaming the firefighter for the fire.  That chaos is bought and paid for by Soros and his puppets on the Left.  And apparently, 43% of DEMOCRATS liked the speech and saw it as an attempt at reconciliation.  If that wasn't bad enough (and it IS bad for Dem leadership), the all-important Independents were onboard to the tune of 72%.  They can continue to ignore trends if they choose but it's beginning to look like simple denial.  If no proof is forthcoming in the Mueller Inquisition and the economy continues to gain momentum, November is apt to be a VERY chilly month in DC.  

Edited February 1, 2018 by and then
spelling

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

And now THERE’S a phrase to chill the blood.

Was it chilling when Churchill swayed Britons in the same way?

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, RAyMO said:

I don't know what it is like in the US but over here it is quite common for the opposition to government to fail to acknowledge any good in the government - why should they? 

Why clap if you don't believe the policies of the speaker were responsible for the outcomes claimed, or if you don't even believe the outcomes claimed, Why clap for aspirations that match yours if experience shows - its word play not likely to backed up by action or that actions to achieve those aspirations are contrary to your principles. Why applaud an individual if you believe his policies and methods are likely in the long run to weaken you country or sections of it you support.

It is not the job of opposition parties and peoples to give succor to an government party or leader - unless they have earnt it - and very few really do earn it.

All politics is phoniness to some extent but it has been the tradition in this country to exercise civility and a degree of dignity in certain settings.  The SOTU address has always been one of those rarified settings.  I have always thought of the British Parliament as being a loud and discordant verbal brawl but I respect the traditions of Britain.  Those traditions just happen to be different from the U.S.

[Merc14]

snip

Edited February 1, 2018 by Merc14

[RavenHawk]

5 hours ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

When he does so, it will truly be the triumph of the will.

Isn't that what Hilary was going to title her book if she won?  Perhaps this explains why Congressman Luis Gutierrez stormed out of the chamber?  He incorrectly over heard a comment from a fellow Prog and thought they said "Trump of the Will".

[Astra.]

10 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

It was a calculated political move to shore up the far left side of their base who don't view it as pouting but as taking a moral stance.    

Seriously Farmer, IMHO the woman looked like she had just sucked on a lemon. It was very unbecoming. Truly, whether she was trying to take a moral stance or not as to make some kind of a point, well she only made herself look more ridiculous. The same could be said about a few other sour faces. I now understand even more as to why the D's have the nick name of being called snowflakes. If anything it seems to me that they really need to start getting their act together and try acting more like grown ups  

  

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

1 hour ago, and then said:

Was it chilling when Churchill swayed Britons in the same way?

Of course not, Churchill won. Same as how the Spitfire is a marvel and all who flew them heroes, while the Messerschmidt reviled and all who flew them villains.

But those words, those specific words, that specific symbol have become so infused with evil that their use now can only evoke evil.

[Merc14]

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

You’re not paying attention to what I’m saying.  Trump’s speech was not divisive.  It was the environment that was seeded by Obama and decades of rule by the Progs before Trump became President.  They planted the seeds of hatred.  And now, when someone with an upbeat, positive message comes around, it is considered divisive. 

 

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight!”

That’s what I said.

It was a divisive speech if your political power depends on dependency.  The modern democrat party depends on dependency and black/hispanic unemployment at historic lows is bad news for the DNC because that voter block, tied to their fear mongering threats of devastation if they aren't taken care of by the feds will start to understand that depending on the government means generational poverty and violence and nothing more but a guaranteed democrat voting block.  It is the most disgusting thing our democracy has ever done.  

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Of course not, Churchill won. Same as how the Spitfire is a marvel and all who flew them heroes, while the Messerschmidt reviled and all who flew them villains.

But those words, those specific words, that specific symbol have become so infused with evil that their use now can only evoke evil.

I wasn't aware of the allusion.  I simply took the statement to be one of an orator raising the hopes and courage of people dealing with a severe challenge.

[RAyMO]

6 hours ago, and then said:

I have always thought of the British Parliament as being a loud and discordant verbal brawl but I respect the traditions of Britain.  Those traditions just happen to be different from the U.S.

Order ORDER! I can't disagree with anything there.

I would add just that imo and viewing from afar - things are changing in the US, for better or for the worse, only time will tell.

[RAyMO]

8 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Trump’s speech was not divisive.

Reality doesn't matter much when it comes to politics, its perceptions that count - if some people believe it was divisive, then by default it was. 

Edited February 1, 2018 by RAyMO

[bee]

5 hours ago, Merc14 said:

It was a divisive speech if your political power depends on dependency.  The modern democrat party depends on dependency and black/hispanic unemployment at historic lows is bad news for the DNC because that voter block, tied to their fear mongering threats of devastation if they aren't taken care of by the feds will start to understand that depending on the government means generational poverty and violence and nothing more but a guaranteed democrat voting block.  It is the most disgusting thing our democracy has ever done.  

 

I think that Trump is highly motivated to bring prosperity to Black and Hispanic people... 
Because IMO he has a Fair and Good Heart... but also because of what you've said above...

The more he is (falsely) called a racist - the more he will be motivated to show that he isn't ...
Democrats like Pelosi, Schumer and Waters will be so p***** off if Trump significantly improves the lives of
Black/ Hispanic people - and puts more money their way..  not that they or the MSM will admit it -
a negative spin can be applied to anything but hard cash can't be argued with - like all the people who
will be better off when the tax cuts come through to them -
 

Edited February 1, 2018 by bee

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

2 hours ago, and then said:

I wasn't aware of the allusion.  I simply took the statement to be one of an orator raising the hopes and courage of people dealing with a severe challenge.

For some background, “The Triumph of the Will” was a Lenni Reifenstahl propaganda film that tried to sell the Nazis as heroic Demi-Gods. It is stomach churning when viewed historically, and just plain scary if viewed contextually.