More of the same in Obama’s SOTU; Rubio hits the right notes in GOP response
Toward the beginning of his State of the Union address Tuesday night, President Obama said we need a “smarter government,” not a “bigger government.” He then proceeded to request a long wish list of new government programs that make clear that, in his mind, the only smarter government is a bigger one.
So, we would have the federal government providing everything from universal pre-K to a network of manufacturing hubs to rebuilt bridges to refinanced homes — none of which is a bad thing, but also none of which require the involvement of a federal government already well beyond its ability to pay for the things it already tries to do. His assertion that this wish list would not add “a single dime” to the deficit didn’t pass the laugh test, particularly when administration officials after the speech declined to provide cost estimates for the new programs.
One can only guess his proposals won’t add “a single dime” to the deficit because they would, instead, add many billions if not trillions of dollars to it.
But if you missed the speech, fear not. You have heard every thought in it before; it was a pastiche of speeches he’s given over the past four years. I wouldn’t even say last night’s rendition was better than all the other times he’s given it. The only unifying theme was that Washington needs to do more. The only memorable moment came toward the end, when the president employed his familiar cadence of repeating a particular phrase time and again — this time, it was to say the various victims of gun violence he mentioned by name “deserve a vote” on his gun-control proposals. It will have zero effect on policy making. It was campaign-rally, rah-rah stuff.
If you expected anything different, you haven’t been paying attention. If tax dollars are still paying for a White House speechwriter to recycle the same ideas and phrases, then what Americans “deserve” is a refund.
The GOP response from Sen. Marco Rubio was the party’s strongest counter-argument yet during the Obama presidency. If you missed it, you might not see much about it in the news beyond the (admittedly awkward) moment during the middle of it when a clearly parched Rubio reached quickly for a bottle of water. As someone said on Twitter at the time — I lost track of exactly who it was — that’s largely a function of how a speech given to a camera is inherently inferior to one given to a live audience, during which the speaker can pause during applause to take a quick swig. Rubio’s Water(bottle)gate was but the latest reminder of that fact, which has dogged SOTU respondents from both parties for years now.
Those who can look past that moment will find the reasons Republicans are so excited about Rubio as a future presidential candidate. He makes the case for conservative principles with illustrations, and from angles, that are necessary to cast them in their proper light: as principles that can boost Americans of all backgrounds and income levels. This was a case Mitt Romney did not, and perhaps could not, make effectively. Rubio is obviously fluent in conservative ideals and language in a way that neither Romney not John McCain was. His ethnicity is icing on the cake.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
403 comments Add your comment
Del
February 13th, 2013
3:15 pm
getalife,
did you mean THE president. I didn’t watch the president because I already knew what he was going to say, which as it turned out like usual, pretty much nothing of substance,
Politico
February 13th, 2013
3:19 pm
“We had no debt. ”
That is incorrect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt
You can make a point without falsehoods and lies.
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
3:20 pm
From Mr. Dyson, a “brilliant scientist,” one would expect something better than suggesting that atmosphere and the ocean are not the real world we live in.
Let me spell it out a little more slowly for you, MarkV. Mr. Dyson’s objections centered on the fact that the computer models currently used by the anointed climatologists don’t account for the effect that clouds and dust have on temperature. Nor do they include the effects of regular old water vapor. They basically center on one factor, and one factor alone, i.e. CO2, which is why it has been mislabeled as a “toxin” or “poison”. Here’s a link straight from NASA to explain it in more detail for you.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html
In terms of “greenhouse gases”, methane needs to be feared far more than CO2, since its impact on global warming is estimated to be 20 times as great. I’ll include a link from the EPA in my next post, since there is a one-link-per-post limit here.
Politico
February 13th, 2013
3:21 pm
Del
That is exact reason why I gave the speech last night as many minutes as I gave Bush’s SOTU speeches.
Dusty
February 13th, 2013
3:22 pm
Come on, MarkV.
Tomorrow is Valentine’s Day. Now say somethnig delightful .with heart warming charm. We’ve got enough cold gray drizzle outside for the day. Now smile!!. Even if it hurts!! (Nevermind. That reminds me of my dentist. This won’t hurt! eeeeekkkkkk)
I’m gone now to work on my taxes.
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
3:22 pm
http://epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html
The bottom line, MarkV, is that you don’t know your ass from your elbow when it comes to understanding Science in general, and climatology in particular. Like JDW, all you can do is make blind appeals to authority since you don’t have the education or intelligence to discuss the pertinent issues on your own.
You really need to work on that bad attitude.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
February 13th, 2013
3:26 pm
You can make a point without falsehoods and lies.
I did. Our debt was around 200 billion.
Yes we had some. Thank you for being so diligent and pointing out a fact that doesn’t change my original assertion one bit.
Politico
February 13th, 2013
3:29 pm
Cheesy
If that makes you happy to double down on stupidity, I’m not stopping you. Your original assertion said “no debt”.
That was either willful ignorance or purposeful deception.
Your choice, but it was one of the other.
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
3:32 pm
Now, if you want to truly educate yourself about Global Warming, MarkV (and JDW), you need to look at the graph below which charts global temps back 400,000 years or so using Antarctic Ice Core Data:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/IceCores1.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/&h=380&w=750&sz=16&tbnid=ZGU2Pnf9DeQpQM:&tbnh=61&tbnw=121&zoom=1&usg=__fCGxa49tbDa7xy4UFvW1jNBJb6Q=&docid=n1vx4sQhW9XwTM&sa=X&ei=lPYbUaHoOYaS9QS1r4CYCA&ved=0CD0Q9QEwAQ&dur=380
You may notice, shock of shocks, that the Earth has warmed and cooled many times in the past. In fact, the Earth has been warmer in the past than it is now, all long before man had any impact at all on the climate. What that suggests is that there are built-in homeostatic forces at work in which both warming and cooling cycles are self-limited. But, none of the current computer models take such homeostatic forces into consideration, because they’re not well-understood.
So, tell me again how your Lib buddies have it all figured out. You really need to heed the wise words of Richard Feynman, who is likely the smartest human being to walk the Earth since Einstein:
“I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it is much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers that might be wrong. If we will only allow that, as we progress, we remain unsure, we will leave opportunities for alternatives. We will not become enthusiastic for the fact, the knowledge, the absolute truth of the day, but remain always uncertain … In order to make progress, one must leave the door to the unknown ajar.”
MarkV
February 13th, 2013
3:38 pm
Dusty @ 3:22 pm
Dusty,
For you I would be happy to say things with heart-warming charm, especially since you have been rather subdued in your attacks on the President today. But Valentine’s Day is tomorrow, not today, so “Good Luck with taxes” will have to do for now.
Just Saying..
February 13th, 2013
3:42 pm
“Rubio might be another great one too. Looking forward to that. .”
But Dusty, you’ll have to wait til 2020.
After Mitt’s second term…
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 13th, 2013
3:43 pm
It’s great big circle day with jdw -
Once again, from your own article -
The CBO expects tax revenue in 2009 to fall by $166 billion, or 6.6%, from the previous year’s collection.
So where did the other 834 Billion go? Why do we have to keep showing where it went to you?
Just Saying..
February 13th, 2013
3:46 pm
“It was w that wrote the blank check with no strings attached to bail out the banks.”
Oh, give ‘em credit, getalife.
There was that 3 page Paulson outline…
MarkV
February 13th, 2013
3:50 pm
Bruno @ 3:20 pm
Let me explain things for you again, because apparently once is not enough. Mr. Dyson, at least according to what you write, is one of the braggers like you, who think that they can tell people in another discipline how to do their job. If you believe that the climatologists are not aware and are not taking into account the greenhouse effect of water vapor and methane, then your ”knowledge” of the subject is less than rudimentary. That is really part of most basic science of this subject, and even a non-climatologist like I am is fully aware of it. You, on the other hand, seem to be quite unaware of the fact that there is a direct link between CO2 and the generation of the vapor in the atmosphere, as well as a link with methane generation.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
February 13th, 2013
3:55 pm
Your choice, but it was one of the other.
It was neither. Considering what our debt is now I consider 200 billion “nothing”
The Air Force blows that much every other day on a jet nobody wants and will never be used.
Politico
February 13th, 2013
4:05 pm
“The Air Force blows that much every other day on a jet nobody wants and will never be used.”
And I’m sure you are intelligent enough to comprehend that 200billion in 1950 equates to more than that today, right?
Comparing what the Air Force “blows every other day” in today’s dollars is not the same as 1950 200b dollars.
But carry on with your analogies that have no relevance to your original, incorrect assertion.
Triple down if you must
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
4:07 pm
If you believe that the climatologists are not aware and are not taking into account the greenhouse effect of water vapor and methane, then your ”knowledge” of the subject is less than rudimentary.
That so?? Let’s let them speak for themselves, shall we??
http://stratus.astr.ucl.ac.be/textbook/chapter4_node7.html
From the article: “The water-vapour feedback and the lapse-rate feedback can combine their effects. If the temperature increases more in the upper troposphere causing a negative lapse-rate feedback, the warming will also be associated with higher concentrations of water vapour in a region where it has a large radiative impact, leading to an additional positive water-vapour feedback. The exact changes in temperature and humidity at high altitude in response to a perturbation are not well-known.”
Got anything else??
Politico
February 13th, 2013
4:09 pm
http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm
1950: $1.00 is worth $9.73 in 2013.
250B X 9.73 = 2.43T
MarkV
February 13th, 2013
4:09 pm
Bruno @3:32 pm
Bruno, talk to the people who are interested in your “discoveries.” I am not among them. Your comments only reinforce what I have already touched upon. The incredible arrogance of people like you, who think they have discovered some secret knowledge that the climatologists, who deal with these questions as a matter of their specialization, are not aware of. Those ignorant experts all over the world, who overwhelmingly make the same conclusion about global warming, are of course quite unaware of “global temps back 400,000 years or so using Antarctic Ice Core Data.” They did not notice that earth has cooled and warmed up many times in the past, etc., etc. They need Bruno and the rest of the deniers to tell them how to do their job. Where do you find this stupidity and arrogance?
As for Mr. Richard Feynman, “the smartest human being to walk the Earth since Einstein” (according to Bruno), he must have been greatly indisposed when he gave preference to ignorance over knowledge: “I think it is much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers that might be wrong.” But it gives me an understanding of what you stand for.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 13th, 2013
4:10 pm
When a lib opens their mouth, a lie will emerge -
In December 2007, the USAF requested continued production beyond the planned 183 F-22s. On 6 April 2009, Secretary of Defense Gates called for the phasing out of F-22 production in fiscal year 2011, leaving the USAF with a production run of 187 fighters, minus losses. On 17 June 2009 the House Armed Services Committee inserted $368.8 million in the budget towards a further 12 F-22s in FY 2011. On 29 July 2009, the Air National Guard’s director asked for “60 to 70″ F-22s for air sovereignty missions, noting that these could lack capabilities such as ground attack. President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 in October 2009, without F-22 funding. General John Corley, head of Air Combat Command, wrote in a 2009 letter to a senator, “In my opinion, a fleet of 187 F-22s puts execution of our current national military strategy at high risk in the near- to mid-term”. But Gates replied “Nonsense”.
So who do you believe, an obozogoon who will blame Bush when something goes wrong or the men who put their lives on the line for this country?
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
February 13th, 2013
4:11 pm
And I’m sure you are intelligent enough to comprehend that 200billion in 1950 equates to more than that today, right
Yes there is a thing called inflation. Even you know that.
What are you the mayor around here ?
The thing is. By nitpicking with the numbers you feel better.
But you haven’t disputed the original point.
I’m sure somebody somewhere on ajc.com is misspelling something.
You are needed there
MarkV
February 13th, 2013
4:12 pm
Bruno @ 4:07 pm
Do you need to confirm what I had written?
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
4:13 pm
Here’s a more general discussion of computer models in relation to climate forecasting:
http://stratus.astr.ucl.ac.be/textbook/chapter3_node22.xml
“Despite very careful design, there is no guarantee that a computer model will be adequate for its intended use: some processes treated as negligible can turn out to be more important than initially though; a parameterisation may not be valid in the particular conditions of interest or may be incompatible with other hypotheses employed; the selection of parameters can be far from optimal; and so on.”
And in case you are unaware, and I’m sure that you are, virtually none of the dire predictions associated with Global Warming have come to pass. The sea hasn’t risen 6 feet, and there are less violent storms now than in the recent past. Link to follow.
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
4:14 pm
http://www.c3headlines.com/2013/01/extreme-violent-storms-decline-us-co2-growth-has-minimal-impact-temperatures-climate-change.html
indigo
February 13th, 2013
4:16 pm
Aesop – 9:01
Obama is not a Socialist.
See below.
How many times will you repeat this bald faced lie?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism
Scrivener
February 13th, 2013
4:18 pm
In re: Mark V: Your comments only reinforce what I have already touched upon. The incredible arrogance of people like you……. Where do you find this stupidity and arrogance?
Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Projection much, Mark?
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 13th, 2013
4:20 pm
indie – Just because obozo hasn’t started mass migrations to the countryside and genocide yet, doesn’t mean that he hasn’t displayed some of the traits of being a marxist. Why are you stuck on this?
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
4:20 pm
The incredible arrogance of people like you, who think they have discovered some secret knowledge that the climatologists, who deal with these questions as a matter of their specialization, are not aware of.
That so?? All I’m urging is for folks to keep an open mind for now. No one knows the real truth about climate change, yet that doesn’t prevent blowhards like yourself to declare it a settled science. All you have are blind appeals to authority. I’ve given you many chances today to discuss the pertinent issues at hand, but you haven’t offered anything other than that you trust the “experts”, and the supposed 97% of scientists who agree with you. That, and you love Obama.
JDW
February 13th, 2013
4:23 pm
@Bruno…”you need to look at the graph below which charts global temps back 400,000 years or so using Antarctic Ice Core Data:”
You are beginning to remind me of a frog in a pot trying to convince everyone that the temp goes up and down instead of trying to figure out how he might get out of the pot.
Scrivener
February 13th, 2013
4:24 pm
Indigo, looked at your link, and guess what? It only goes to bolster the notion that Obama IS a socialist. One of the definitions: “System of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control; also, the political movements aimed at putting that system into practice. Because “social control” may be interpreted in widely diverging ways, socialism ranges from statist to libertarian, from Marxist to liberal.”
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
4:26 pm
Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Projection much, Mark?
Scrivener–I haven’t seen you here on the blog before, and don’t know your political orientation, but I think that I’ve laid out plenty of reasons to keep an open mind regarding Climate Change, Global Warming, or whatever the nom-du-jour is.
Now, I’m waiting for MarkV to make the leap to claim that I obviously don’t think pollution is a serious problem, or that I’m some kind of a Bible thumper. Folks like him can only imagine two possibilities. indigo already tried to run that rap on me because I don’t swallow the Evolution crap hook-line-and-sinker. Not surprisingly, neither can defend their positions using their own arguments, and are reduced to parroting things they don’t really understand.
Matz
February 13th, 2013
4:31 pm
I have to disagree with Mr. Wingfield’s take on Rubio’s speech. Water bottle aside (still not as funny as “binders full of women,” but dang, what IS?), he didn’t actually say anything. He blathered on about “values,” and enumerated in an impassioned whine, the many reasons he imagines Obama is attacking Republican “values,” sans examples of course. He explains that yes, here in America, any person can dream big and have a real chance of making it (like he did), but in the next breath, tries to relate that the very factors that enabled him to succeed are now somehow poised to stop everyone else from succeeding. His delivery reminded me of an Amway salesman who knows darn well you’re not interested in his pitch, but delivers it with gusto and calculated hand and facial gestures anyway, because that’s what “hard work” means to him.
I kept waiting for him to make a point and he didn’t, but it did occur to me that he should go for that Vatican gig that’s opening up. He certainly has the ego for it, and IMO, would look FABULOUS in those blinged-out dresses!
Don Abernethy
February 13th, 2013
4:40 pm
Lots of opinions and NO solutions.
Politico
February 13th, 2013
4:41 pm
Cheesy
Well your tax bracket deal is sort of misleading as well. How many people actually paid 70%? It is the same lame argument that some on the right speak of when talking about today’s brackets and not the average percentage paid out, which is almost always lower.
But nice try.
MarkV
February 13th, 2013
4:47 pm
Bruno @ 4:20 pm
“All you have are blind appeals to authority.”
Which is exactly what Bruno has been doing, with his appeals to Dyson, except that he is appealing to a person outside the field being discussed. There is no “appeal to authority” when one takes as the likely most factual what most of the specialists in the field agree to. If we did differently, in any endeavor based on science, no practical action would be possible, because some people would always find some fanciful things that can be questioned.
The issues the deniers have been raising about global warming have been thoroughly discussed in the most reliable and detailed sources, such as the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. A draft of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been leaked, and according to Scientific American,
“the draft reaffirms humanity’s starring role in global warming, which, along with sea level rise is now “unequivocal.” Also human caused CO2 increases are now “virtually certain” to be responsible for trapping extra heat. And it is “extremely likely that human activities have caused more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperatures since the 1950s.”
http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=leaked-report-confirms-human-induce-12-12-16
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
4:55 pm
You are beginning to remind me of a frog in a pot trying to convince everyone that the temp goes up and down instead of trying to figure out how he might get out of the pot.
And that’s where you’re dead wrong, JDW. I oppose polluting the planet as much as anyone. Differently from Al Gore, however, I put my money where my mouth is by living a simple life and by contributing regularly to a host of environmental cause, most particularly the Nature Conservancy.
As predicted above, I was expecting one of you to pull out one of your tired false dichotomies. In your world, either you’re an intelligent, caring person who doesn’t question Anthropogenic Global warming, or you’re a stupid, Bible-thumping dolt.
ODD OWL
February 13th, 2013
5:05 pm
Republicans like Marco Rubio and Rand paul are stuck on stupid… They can’t remember to do basic things like useing a podium when they speak to avoid appearing awkward and inept… George Bush forgot to flip down a step on the podium so that the head of the Queen of England could be seen and not just her large hat… The non rich Republican voters are even more clumsy than the elected rookie Republican back benchers… Republican are pathetic and not ready for prime time…
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 13th, 2013
5:16 pm
And the odd bird swoops in to confirm that dummycrats choose their candidates not based on sound policy but instead on how they would score on American idol.
MarkV
February 13th, 2013
5:16 pm
Bruno, February 13th, 2013 @4:20 pm
“All I’m urging is for folks to keep an open mind for now.”
Bruno, February 12th, 2013 @10:02 pm
“Yet many brilliant scientists like Freeman Dyson aren’t buying the hogwash.”
How many sides of the mouth do you have, Bruno?
3d
February 13th, 2013
5:18 pm
A politician is a politician is a politician.
Obama and the other side have no clue what’s going on out here in the real world.
Keep watching your paycheck shrink. At least for those who don’t live off of Uncle Sam.
JDW
February 13th, 2013
5:20 pm
@Bruno…”In your world, either you’re an intelligent, caring person who doesn’t question Anthropogenic Global warming, or you’re a stupid, Bible-thumping dolt.”
There is a difference between questioning and belittling. There is no question that temperatures are rising and that extreme weather events are increasing in frequency. The best models we have at our disposal indicate that unless we act there will be adverse consequences. Now we have a couple of choices. First, we can all attempt to convince ourselves that because our information may in fact be wrong we do nothing or second, we can act in the most prudent manner possible based on the best information available. I choose option B.
It is basic logic …there are only four basic courses of action. You should choose the one that prevents disaster.
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
5:25 pm
Which is exactly what Bruno has been doing, with his appeals to Dyson, except that he is appealing to a person outside the field being discussed.
My reference to Freeman Dyson is simply to say that there are numerous, brilliant, seasoned scientists who have found gaping holes in the new orthodoxy. But, any appeal to him only makes sense if what he says checks out, which I demonstrated via NASA and EPA links.
On the other hand, now you appear to be holding up the IPCC as some kind of gold standard. You parrot their conclusions without giving any supporting evidence. And, in case you forgot, they used very sloppy methodology in creating their Fourth Assessment Report.
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/02/an-overview-of-ipccclimategate-criticism.html
Aquagirl
February 13th, 2013
5:29 pm
There is a difference between questioning and belittling.
I’m not up for belittling people who do something for a living based on my U. of Google degree. The idea thousands of climatologists overlooked something you found on a crazy website is not a sound thought process.
I do the same with doctors, if 99 out of 100 of them said I had a serious problem, I’d go with the 99. This is not a radical idea, it’s common sense.
Archibald Leach
February 13th, 2013
5:33 pm
More of the same from Kyle Wingfield… “His ethnicity is icing on the cake.”
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 13th, 2013
5:38 pm
I do the same with doctors, if 99 out of 100 of them said I had a serious problem, I’d go with the 99. This is not a radical idea, it’s common sense.
How much money did you blow on al-gore’s Y2K, aq?
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 13th, 2013
5:40 pm
If every scientific theory didn’t conclude with humans either need to be eliminated or taxed, they would be far easier to believe.
Kyle Wingfield
February 13th, 2013
5:45 pm
Archibald @ 5:33: You’re not the first person to bring that up, but I’ve been busy working on other things and haven’t had time to respond.
If I hadn’t been a bit groggy when writing that, here’s how I would have phrased it instead:
“His ethnicity — which is often mentioned as one of his best political advantages — is just icing on the cake.”
I’d assumed the part between the dashes would be assumed by most readers, but clearly I was wrong.
indigo
February 13th, 2013
5:48 pm
Aesop – 4:20 “Why are you stuck on this?
Me?
You’re the one who keeps calling him a Socialist.
Bruno
February 13th, 2013
5:51 pm
There is no question that temperatures are rising and that extreme weather events are increasing in frequency.
Sorry, but you’re only half-right, maybe only 1/4 right. Yes, global temperatures have risen slightly (less than 1 degree Celsius) in the 150 years or so that we’ve been measuring them. Not a long enough time frame to make any definitive judgments IMO, and possibly small enough to fall under the range of normal variations. As for the “urban legend” regarding the severity of storms, I already put up a link above to dispel that rumor.
Just Saying..
February 13th, 2013
5:56 pm
Marco’s working class home:
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/content/tour-marco-rubio-675000-working-class-home
Only $675K.
Cause he likes you…