# Obama's SoTU Speech Analysis **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 28, 2010, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715 "2010-01-28T02:10:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/101 "2010-01-28T19:10:21Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Tax cuts, spending increases - funny how the Bush policies go over so big delivered in blackface. This is so very repulsive I can hardly believe you wrote it, much less thought it a “joke.” ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/102 "2010-01-28T19:11:31Z")
> [@garygnu](#): > > I was more shocked by the call for new nuclear plants. No so much here. People are finally “getting it” that demand is going to keep rising and we can’t wish away the problem by demanding solutions that are either not viable or not available yet. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/103 "2010-01-28T19:19:56Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > This is so very repulsive I can hardly believe you wrote it, much less thought it a “joke.” I have no problem believing it. Not because I believe that **Shodan** is racist, but because I remember his stated intention of becoming a dedicated right-wing instigator (he used another word for it, actually) on this board. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/104 "2010-01-28T19:25:33Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > I have no problem believing it. Not because I believe that **Shodan** is racist, but because I remember his stated intention of becoming a dedicated right-wing instigator (he used another word for it, actually) on this board. This discussion probably belongs in the Pit, not in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/105 "2010-01-28T19:26:55Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > This discussion probably belongs in the Pit, not in this thread. I apologize (to you and to **Shodan** ). I actually came back in to retract that because I can’t find the post I thought I remembered him making about it, but I passed my five-minute mark while searching. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/106 "2010-01-28T19:27:57Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > In short - existing law prevented foreign donations, so when the court struck down these campaign finance laws the foreign donation ban was maintained. Claims that this decision opens the floodgates for foreign companies are simply false - whether willfully misleading or simply ignorant. Let’s leave aside for now the general thrust of Obama’s comment, that corporations can now buy all the air time they want. You’re not contesting that, but are instead picking a narrow side topic in order to declare victory while avoiding conceding anything in public. You know by now how well that works here. Now: Do you really think it’s difficult for a foreign company to set up a US subsidiary, or transfer funds to an existing one with similar interests, in order to buy advertising in the US, without violating US law? Are their lawyers all that dumb? Really? Unless you do think so, then yes, the “floodgates” are open, and the real world answer is that yes, Obama was right to say so. Alito may have been correct in the narrow, legal sense, but that only reveals his disconnect with the real world in which his opinions have real effect. It would help the Court’s decisionmaking immensely to be more aware of the bubble they surround themselves with. Kudos to Obama for pricking it. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/107 "2010-01-28T19:43:29Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Now: Do you really think it’s difficult for a foreign company to set up a US subsidiary, or transfer funds to an existing one with similar interests, in order to buy advertising in the US, without violating US law? I think it is very difficult in the wake of certain campaign finance scandals of the 1990s - this was illegal before McCain-Feingold and is still illegal. See US v. Hsia and US v. Trie. ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/108 "2010-01-28T19:55:32Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Tax cuts, spending increases - funny how the Bush policies go over so big delivered in blackface. At least he’s honest about why he postpones the “freeze”. Wonder what he will do if the economy isn’t doing so hot. > > Not that this - means anything. Medicare and Medicaid are 23% of the budget, Social Security is 21%, defense is another 21%. He didn’t mention interest on the national debt, which is around 8%, but since he isn’t Bush perhaps we can assume he isn’t violating his Constitutional duty by questioning the validity of the national debt. Add all the spending increases he is mentioning to the tax cuts he promised and it becomes clear he hasn’t learned anything over the last year. Maybe he is positioning himself for when the Republicans make gains in Congress during the mid-year elections, but I don’t think he is that politically sophisticated. > > OTOH, if BHO wanted to give me hope, this - > would do it. Nothing about global warming, though - I wonder if that was deliberate? > > This is the first I heard about Michelle picking fat kids as her campaign - has this been announced before? That is a harmless enough, non-controversial cause, especially for a [black woman](http://www.usnews.com/health/diet-fitness/diet/articles/2009/07/16/blacks-have-highest-obesity-rates-in-us.html). > > Regards, > Shodan Skin color can be a perfectly good descriptor, for of two people are standing by each other and someone asks you to clarify who “Bob” might be, you could point to their color. As someone that didn’t see anything wrong with describing your very tanned son by saying he’s almost as dark as the President, you’re just trying to be a douche now. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/109 "2010-01-28T20:00:34Z")
> [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](#): > > As someone that didn’t see anything wrong with describing your very tanned son by saying he’s almost as dark as the President, you’re just trying to be a douche now. Don’t insult other posters in this forum. Again, this stuff belongs in the Pit, not here. > [@Shodan](#): > > For now - maybe. I’ll stop being subtle, then: no more racial comments. They’re not appropriate in here and they really don’t belong on this site at all. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/110 "2010-01-28T20:26:20Z")
Campaign donations are beside the point. The ruling will allow foreign corporations to buy ads, which is effectively the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/111 "2010-01-28T20:50:44Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Don’t insult other posters in this forum. Again, this stuff belongs in the Pit, not here. > I’ll stop being subtle, then: no more racial comments. They’re not appropriate in here and they really don’t belong on this site at all. Well, to be fair, I didn’t say he\* was\* a douche. He’s trying to be a douche. That’s an important bit of flavor that’s being missed there. ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/112 "2010-01-29T05:54:39Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > In short - existing law prevented foreign donations, so when the court struck down these campaign finance laws the foreign donation ban was maintained. Claims that this decision opens the floodgates for foreign companies are simply false - whether willfully misleading or simply ignorant. He wasn’t necessarily being misleading, mentally he could have been including all the “US” companies that shipped themselves off to developing nations for cheap labor… ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/113 "2010-01-29T15:11:52Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Do you really think it’s difficult for a foreign company to set up a US subsidiary, or transfer funds to an existing one with similar interests, in order to buy advertising in the US, without violating US law? Are their lawyers all that dumb? Really? Unless you do think so, then yes, the “floodgates” are open, and the real world answer is that yes, Obama was right to say so. Alito may have been correct in the narrow, legal sense, but that only reveals his disconnect with the real world in which his opinions have real effect. It would help the Court’s decisionmaking immensely to be more aware of the bubble they surround themselves with. Kudos to Obama for pricking it. [hijack] I’m curious, would this decision allow for a foreign governments to pay to use American corporations for advertising? For example, could Russia secretly pay $2,000,000,000 to Wal-Mart to advertising against democratic nominees in the 2010 election? [/hijack] ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/114 "2010-01-29T15:14:34Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’ll stop being subtle, then: no more racial comments. They’re not appropriate in here and they really don’t belong on this site at all. Then put it like this - if Bush or another Republican had delivered the same speech with the same initiatives announced, word for word, there would be a six page thread in the Pit attacking every word, syllable and punctuation mark. Coming from Obama, with some reasonable exceptions, it gets a pass. Imagine that. Come on, it is almost line-by-line - the bank bailout was a great idea, I cut taxes, I want to cut taxes, I want to spend more, we need to spend more on education, terrorism, nuclear war, God bless America. > [@Simplicio](#): > > Read to the end of your cite. In the SOTU he said he cut capital gains tax cuts on small businesses and start-up companies. This was actually a campaign promise, so it doesn’t appear he’s being inconsistent. He didn’t say anything about the general Capital Gains tax in the SOTU, at least so far as I remember, so presumably he still plans to raise it. Nope - he said he _wants_ to cut all capital gains taxes on small business and also cut taxes on large businesses - > [@](#): > > While we’re at it, let’s also eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment, and provide a tax incentive for all large businesses and all small businesses to invest in new plants and equipment. (Applause.) And if you read all the way to the end of my cite, you see - > [@](#): > > But, as pointed out by Ben Smith, the president had promised to do this upon taking office, but the cut was deferred in his budget to 2014. He is certainly being inconsistent. First he promised to do it upon taking office - then he was going to do it after the end of his first term, now he claims he wants to do it now. I think this is an example of Obama in campaign mode. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/115 "2010-01-29T15:34:37Z")
He said during his campaign he would cut capital gains on small businesses. He said nothing in this speech he didn’t say in his campaign. As for Bush, you really think he would have given a SOTU in which he acknowledged “overwhelming scientific evidence” for Global Climate Change, called for the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t tell,” pushed for Health care Reform and said he would have all combat troops out of Iraq by the end of August? That sounds like a Republican speech to you? I think you’re reading off the wrong talking points. A lot of people, especially in the right wing media echo chamber, were smugly predicting that Obama would pivot to the right in this speech because he was supposed to be so chastened that a liberal, pro-choice, pro-government health care Repubican got elected to Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat. The pivot never came. Obama stuck to the same principles he’s always espoused, and, if anything, shifted his weight slightly back to the left. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/116 "2010-01-29T15:41:14Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > [hijack] > I’m curious, would this decision allow for a foreign governments to pay to use American corporations for advertising? For example, could Russia secretly pay $2,000,000,000 to Wal-Mart to advertising against democratic nominees in the 2010 election? > [/hijack] Absolutely not. From the Federal Election Commission compendium of election law: > [@](#): > > § 441e. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals1 > (a) Prohibition. It shall be unlawful for— > (1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make— > (A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election; > (B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or > (C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 304(f)(3)) (2 U.S.C. § 434(f)(3)); or > (2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national. > (b) As used in this section, the term “foreign national” means— > (1) a foreign principal, as such term is defined by section 611(b) of title 22,2 except that the term “foreign national” shall not include any individual who is a citizen of the United States; or > (2) an individual who is not a citizen of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act)3 and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as defined by section 1101(a)(20) of title 8.1 > § 441f. Contributions in name of another prohibited > No person shall make a contribution in the name of another person or knowingly permit his name to be used to effect such a contribution and no person shall knowingly accept a contribution made by one person in the name of another person. Footnotes here explicitly state that this applies to foreign companies and individuals alike, and this prohibition is further fleshed out in FEC regulations. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/117 "2010-01-29T16:07:09Z")
Your cite is not on point. The question was about who can buy advertising, not who can make donations. Wal-Mart is not a PAC. nothing forbids China from giving Wal-Mart money to buy advertising. Nothing prevents _anybody_ from buying advertising. Your protestations that they can’t contribute directly to candidates or PACS or parties is meaningless. They can directly buy advertising, which is the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/118 "2010-01-29T16:12:30Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Then put it like this - if Bush or another Republican had delivered the same speech with the same initiatives announced, word for word, there would be a six page thread in the Pit attacking every word, syllable and punctuation mark. Coming from Obama, with some reasonable exceptions, it gets a pass. Imagine that. So it goes with politics. But I think you’re wrong on some important points, and lucky for me **Diogenes the Cynic** already laid those out. > [@](#): > > Come on, it is almost line-by-line - the bank bailout was a great idea You had to expect him to defend the bailout. And he didn’t call it a great idea. He said it was necesary and said several times that he hated doing it. > [@](#): > > I cut taxes, I want to cut taxes, I want to spend more, we need to spend more on education, terrorism, nuclear war, God bless America. I take your point, but most of that isn’t Bush-esque at all. It’s just generic and therefore pretty typical for any politician. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/119 "2010-01-29T16:19:41Z")
He said during his campaign that he would cut taxes for 95% of the people, and he did. He has, thus far, raised them on nobody. He said during his campaign that he would remove troops from Iraq, but amp up in Afghanistan, and he did. Nobody wanted the bailout, but nobody (including both GWB, John McCain and Sarah Palin) though we had any choice. Just because I think it bears repeating, George W. Bush, John McCain an Sarah Palin all supported the bailout. Why don’t Obama bashers ever mention that? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2010, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715/120 "2010-01-29T16:24:43Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Your cite is not on point. The question was about who can buy advertising, not who can make donations. Wal-Mart is not a PAC. nothing forbids China from giving Wal-Mart money to buy advertising. Nothing prevents _anybody_ from buying advertising. Your protestations that they can’t contribute directly to candidates or PACS or parties is meaningless. They can directly buy advertising, which is the same thing. It is exactly on point - my cite bars expenditures by foreigners (directly or indirectly) for electioneering communications. Read it again - more closely this time. Other provisions of the law prohibit contributions in the name of another - thus Russia can’t legally run a disbursement for communications through the Wal-Mart network. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obamas-sotu-speech-analysis/526715.md?page=7)