SOTU

So I didn’t actually watch the speech — which is still going on as I type — but worked on the family puzzle in the next room (did the last bits — the next and final step is to find the lost final piece) and idly listed to it.  But now let’s read though — or at least skim through and talk about the interesting bits of — the text, from Time.com, one of the first hits.  (Fun fact:  another one of the first hits was the White House website.  But the text didn’t seem quite right — only after looking at this a bit did I realize that this was the 2014 SOTU, but it was so similar I didn’t figure this out at first.)

So:

He starts of with the pitch that the economy is doing well, and, of course, it’s because of his policies.  (Even though, ironically, he boasts of lower gas prices but he himself said gas should cost more, rather than less.)  His list includes 11 million new jobs, the “highest math and reading scores on record” for “our younger students,” an all-time high high school graduation rate, a reduction in the number of uninsured, etc.  He calls this “middle-class economics.”   And he promises to veto any bill that “takes away health insurance,” or “unravels Wall Street regulations” or “refights past immigration battles.”

His first new item:  ” my plan will make quality childcare more available, and more affordable, for every middle-class and low-income family with young children in America – by creating more slots and a new tax cut of up to $3,000 per child, per year.”  Now, we’ve heard of bump in the tax credit for childcare before, but I’m not sure what he means by “creating more slots”; that makes sense only if we’re referring to government-provided childcare, since there is no shortage of private childcare.

He asks for a bill providing 7 days of paid leave.

He asks Congress to “pass a law that makes sure a woman is paid the same as a man for doing the same work.”  Really?  Does he not understand that this law already exists?

He calls for a minimum-wage hike, because you can’t “support a family” on minimum wage.  Well, of course not.

He, of course, touts his community college plan, but deceptively:  the plan as previously announced is for the first two years, and only for full-time attendance.  But he touts this for single parents, older students, and others who are, in practice, attending part-time, and may have taken classes in the past.

He claims improvements have been made at the VA.

He asks for a bipartisan infrastructure bill:  “So let’s set our sights higher than a single oil pipeline. Let’s pass a bipartisan infrastructure plan that could create more than thirty times as many jobs per year, and make this country stronger for decades to come.”  Which is I suppose his way of rejecting the Keystone Pipeline.

He asks for authority for new trade deals.

He announces a Precision Medicine Initiative.  Which is great, but doesn’t that require spending money that he doesn’t have appropriations power over?

He blandly calls for more technology.

And here’s where the rubber hits the road:  his plan for tax increases.

He repeats his tired claim that we need to “close loopholes so we stop rewarding companies that keep profits abroad.”  And he says, “let’s close the loopholes that lead to inequality by allowing the top one percent to avoid paying taxes on their accumulated wealth.”  — which I imagine refers to the proposed limitations on deferred taxes on income build-up in 401(k)/IRAs, but sure sounds like a wealth tax.

On foreign policy:  he touts his “diplomacy” and “coalition-building” and claims that “American leadership – including our military power – is stopping ISIL’s advance.”  Really?  Last I read, we were doing a lousy job, if at all.

He implies that we’ve “fixed” Russian aggression because “its economy [is] in tatters” — though they are still controlling Crimea and the Ukranian borderlands.

Unsurprisingly, he touts his Cuban “deal”/giveaway.

He says he’ll veto any sanctions on Iran and says he’s hopeful that we’ll prevent a nuclear Iran by negotiation.

He asks for legislation to counter cyber-attacks.

He touts the role U.S. troops played in Africa fighting Ebola.  (Funny, it was just the other day I read an article that said we were basically there after the crisis was receding.)

He repeats the bit about 2014 being the warmest year on record (wasn’t that retracted just as quickly as it was claimed?) and calls for action to reduce emissions.

He says we lead by the example of our values, so he’s prohibited torture, and “worked to make sure our use of new technology like drones is properly constrained” (really?), and we ” continue to reject offensive stereotypes of Muslims,” and repeats his determination to shut down Gitmo.

Then he brings back his old “not a black America and a white America” speech ans says “I still believe that we are one people.”  And he speaks very passively, that “pundits” say that our politics are more divided than ever.

And he starts into a section on “a better politics” and claims that we’ll all pull together.  Pardon me if I’m skeptical of his examples.  He claims that he’s not demanding that the GOP just adopt all his ideas but that we work together, but then his “compromises” are these:

for abortion:  “every woman should have access to the health care she needs.”  Come on, everyone knows that abortion-rights folks have defined “healthcare” to include aboriton.

for immigration:  don’t take a hardworking mom from her child.

with respect to “the events of Ferguson and New York”:  he calls for reforming the criminal justice system “so that it protects and serves us all.”

So that’s it.

I thought there would be something in it that’s interesting to talk about, but it’s not.  Just an hour of, well, nothingness.

What did you think?