State of the Union

I watched some of Barack Obama's State of the Union address this year. Right after the one year mark of his inauguration, it's fitting to discuss his first year in office. It should be remembered, however, that it is only THE END OF HIS FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE. Everything can totally change in just a few months span. As a (very) independent voter, it's only fair that I think about what both parties have done this year.

Obama had lots of great rhetoric and made lots of promises during his campaign and transition to the White House. Unfortunately, he has failed to fulfill most of his promises so far. Ending "Don't ask, don't tell", which I am very much in support of doing, was supposedly an important issue. Yet he has barely touched on the issue during the first year, and has made no substantive effort in that area. (The LGBT has been very upset with him the fist year for a variety of reasons.) Shutting down Guantanamo Bay was also supposedly a major issue, and one I thought was important. (I very much support closing it.) And while there were some steps taken in that direction, the issue has been on the backburner and has many lingering issues that the administration has failed to address this year.

However, ending "enhanced interrogation techniques" (aka torture), like waterboarding, was also major campaign promise. He has ending the practices, which I applaud him for. This was an extremely important decision. I also applaud him for listening to Leon Panetta and the CIA in overturning his previous (and incredibly ridiculous and unwise) decision to publicly release the videos of the interrogations in which those techniques were employed.

There was a great deal of controversy at Attorney Journey Eric Holder and the Justice Department's decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed (the architect of the 9/11 attacks) in the civilian court system, and even more the decision to hold the trial in New York City. Though I don't feel as strongly as some on the issue, I think the decision is unwise. I think it would be safer and more wise to try him in under a military tribunal, but I certainly see the value, especially from a public relations standpoint, of trying him in the civilian court system. Even moreso, I don't agree with doing it in New York, where it brings up memories of the attack and most citizens polled disapprove of the idea. The trial will cost an estimated 100 million dollars to deal with major security concerns during the proceedings.

I admire some of Barack Obama's attempts in the education realm, and am happy he has shown some willingness to dialogue with more conservative educators (and not just teachers unions), especially on the issues of merit pay and vouchers.

Healthcare was a very important issue for Obama during the campaign. I give him credit for fulfilling his promises of trying to bring his idea of healthcare reform to reality. However, I disagreed very much, as did almost all Americans, with the way it was done. While Obama did show some willingness to talk to about their ideas for healthcare reform (especially tort reform and transferring all medical records to electronic systems), too often, on this issue and others, Republicans didn't have a seat at the table and weren't given a chance to be truly engaged on these issues. Some of the big government solutions, which would radically alter the healthcare infastructure and medical apparatus in the United States, were widely unpopular with the majority Americans, yet the Obama administration pushed hard for them, until many of them became untenable and their plans collapsed. Furthermore, there was widespread corruption and bribery throughout the process, with the "Louisiana Purchase" and the "Cornhusker Kickback", the buyoff by many of the Big Phrama companies that prevents the widespread importation of pharmaceutical drugs, and the lack of transparency throughout. This whole process, which the President and the Democrats made the central issue of the year and the central front of their agenda, turned most voters off and was a big part of the election of Bob McDonnell in Virginia, Chris Christie in New Jersey, and, of course, Scott Brown in Massachusetts.

I was disappointed by the president's advancements in the environmental realm. While I have mixed feelings about cap and trade, I would have liked to see more done in the research and development alternative, sustainable energy. While the issue certainly has gotten some attention, with oil prices now at under $74 a barrel and questions about the stability of the Middle East, efforts in the area should really been a top priority. I would like to see a more organized, collaborative effort in that area. I was happy to hear that the president finally mentioned an earnest desire to pursue nuclear energy.

I was disappointed in the president's approach to the economy. Unemployment increased to over 10.8%, despite the President's claims it would not rise above 8% if the stimulus bills was passed. I am very disappointed that the president and his aides keep invoking George Bush, blaming him, when he has had no real control of the economy for almost the last year and a half. (President Obama voted for the bailout, he can't complain Bush did that.) Moreover, even more tiresome is how he constantly blames the big baks and their "fat cats", despite his connections to the banking industry (particularly Goldman-Sachs) and the fact that the government has been the ones asleep at the wheel the last few years, deregulating the banking industry to allow the financial collapse. The administration's extreme spending, which hopefully will not cause hyperinflation, is extremely concerning. Raising the debt limit was somewhat symbolic of what's wrong with Washington.

Ending the war in Iraq was also a major campaign promise of Barack Obama. And, again, I do give him credit. He scaled down troop levels, and all combat troops will be out of the country by the end of August. While I think it is important that Obama not take his eye off the ball and neglect Iraq, he fulfilled his campaign promise. However, I am very concerned about his handling of the situation in Iraq. I do not think there should be troops in Afghanistan in the first place (because I'm generally antiwar), but even if I did agree with having troops there, I think the president failed to lead on the issue, and instead looked like a politician trying to compromise. First, he took too long to make the decision. He should have been prudent and taken a long look at the situation and all of the options, but three months, which he took, is rather absurd, and I think both sides would agree. Then he made a decision which had an embedded contradiction. He took agreed to send around 35,000 more troops, but said troops would start to be withdrawn by the July of 2011. If you add more troops, to win the conflict, then you're all in. You've played your cards. Then to also set a withdraw deadline at the same time, before you have even sent more troops in, and know the outcome of that maneuver, is silly. It makes no sense. Either you're there to win, or you shouldn't be there at all. Wartime is no time for a politician to waver; it is a time to show leadership. The decision showed the president was interested in being pragmatic, which is important, but taking so long and making such a confusing, contradictory decision appears like he is only trying to appease everyone. And because of that, the decision was pretty unpopular. It was also very important to me that the administration engage in a new kind of foreign relations that is more creating than building up the military and responds to threats not with "Cowboy Diplomacy", but with honest discussions, pushing pertinent, meaningful sanctions, and talking to any and all leaders, without preconditions. (Which of course, most Republicans objected to fervently.) He did this somewhat, but I don't think his vision for foreign relations has shown much clarity. Many Republicans also believed he should have responded more harshly to election protests and civil unrest in Iran. While I do think the president could have been more harsh, it's an extremely sticky situation, and one that I think he handled about as best he could. I do, however, think he should have certainly had more strong rhetoric in light of North Korea's missile tests.

Most importantly, I am disappointed in the politics that the president used. More than anything, Obama the candidate said he would set a new tone in Washington, working to promote bipartisanship, end corruption, earmarks, pork-barrel spending, kicking lobbyists out of town, and engage tough issues with new dignity. However, the president did a very poor job of this. In fact, he made the situation worse, often showing that he was more of a consequentialist. In attempting to pass the stimulus and healthcare bills, more earmarks than ever were tacked on to the bills. His supporting cast is filled with lobbyists and those who have ties to lobbyists. There was rampant corruption. And he certainly didn't change the tone. The administration's attack campaign Fox News certainly did great damage to his supposed attempts at to promote civility and bipartisanship. I would have respected him if he took on Fox News and called out MSNBC, which is more biased and vitriolic than Fox News. (But of course they support his politics, so he doesn't mention them.) He blamed Bush and the Republicans every chance he got. During the campaign he claimed there would be a new era of transparency, with complete CSPAN access and coverage of the healthcare proceedings and a vow to post all bills online for the public to read before they were voted on. Of course, neither of these things happened. Not surprising, considering during the campaign he promised a fair, open election when he would promised to take only public financing for the campaign, then broke his campaign and failed to do so. And showing great arrogance, and the height of hubris, he graded himself with an A- this year. It is incredibly inappropriate to grade himself, and shows incredible naivete and political imprudence to give himself such a high grade with so many Americans out of work and so many of his policies unpopular. The President has given LOTS of great speeches this year, but that's not good enough. Barack Obama has lots of great rhetoric, but it's time he live up to it. For his first year in office, I would give him a C-.


The Republicans, of course, have some blame and culpability as well. Too often they lacked vision, failing to offer or articulate alternative plans to the Democrats' big government proposals. Of course, sometimes they had hardly any choice, when they the Democrats had a supermajority and could have shoved legislation down their- and the American people's- throats, and they had such philosophical arguments that they just needed to stop Democratic proposals. (See healthcare.) However, they were often part of the problem, being just as corrupt as anyone and selling out, failing to live up to their responsibility as a watchdog. And while I think President Obama took too long to make a determination on Afghanistan, the Republicans very inappropriately put a tremendous amount of pressure on him to send additional troops, trying to rush him and giving him hardly anytime to think about the decision, which is the most important part of a Commander-In-Chief's job. Likewise, during the Iranian protests and North Korea missiles test some Republicans inappropriately made statements about his handling of the situation. For Obama's first year in office, I give the Republicans a C+.

Unfortunately this was a year of partisanship, in which the tone didn't change in Washington. In 2006 and 2008, Democrats were swept in office because of Republican corruption, extreme spending, and dense ideology. When the Democrats took control of Washington, they've done exactly the same thing. The record congressional approval ratings, the President's steep slid in approval, and the Tea Party movement show how upset people are. The The election of Republicans in New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts is about big government, partisanship, and the status quo, and both parties better realize that soon.