You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 6:10 a.m.

President Barack Obama delivers his first State of the Union; Washtenaw County lawmakers weigh in

By Amalie Nash

President Barack Obama said he gets it - he knows America is not happy.

"I campaigned on the promise of change, 'change we can believe in,' the slogan went," he said Wednesday night in his first State of the Union address. "And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren't sure if they still believe we can change, or at least that I can deliver it."

He knows, Obama bluntly acknowledged, that Americans are frustrated and disappointed, that "change has not come fast enough."

State_Of_union_Obama.jpg

President Barack Obama delivers his first State of the Union address.

The Associated Press

Fighting to recharge his embattled presidency, Obama offered a vow to get jobless millions back to work and stand on the side of Americans angry at Wall Street greed and Washington bickering. Defiant despite stinging setbacks, he said he would fight on for ambitious overhauls of health care, energy and education.

"I don't quit. Let's seize this moment," he told a politician-packed House chamber and a TV audience of millions. "As hard as it may be, as uncomfortable and contentious as the debates may be, it's time to get serious about fixing the problems that are hampering our growth."

Reaction to the speech from Democratic lawmakers who represent Washtenaw County was generally positive.

U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said Obama had the right focus in his address and set the right tone.

"His focus was right where it belongs: on jobs and the economy, and on reforming the financial sector to end the abuses and excesses that put us in the economic hole we’re in," Levin said in a statement. "The president was eloquent in his optimism, and he rightly said that we’re all responsible for working together to tackle the challenges we face. He acknowledged his own mistakes, and he avoided pointing partisan fingers."

U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Dearborn, weighed in on several aspects of Obama's speech, including health care, jobs and education, a discretionary spending freeze, campaign finance and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"After a year in office, we have seen that President Obama is a thoughtful leader on foreign policy matters. Instead of rushing his decisions on Afghanistan, he listened to his team of military and civilian experts and launched a sound plan for a military and civilian surge that will assist Afghanistan in its fight against extremism," Dingell said in a statement. "In the transition of our military from Iraq to Afghanistan, we in Congress must provide our troops and Foreign Service officers with the tools they need to stay safe, assist both nations in building their governments’ capacities, and eventually turn security over to each nations’ security forces.”

U.S. Rep. Mark Schauer, D-Battle Creek, said in a statement after the speech that he will push to establish a tax credit for businesses that hire more workers, and support efforts to freeze government spending to reduce the deficit.

"Unfortunately, families all over the state of Michigan are still struggling," he said in the statement. "Businesses can't obtain credit to expand their operations, far too many unemployed workers still can't find a job, and those who do have jobs have seen their wages and benefits cut due to the economic crisis. Michigan can't afford to waste another day on failed policies that reward companies for shipping jobs overseas, or allow Wall Street CEOs to waste our money on taxpayer-funded bonuses."

On the University of Michigan campus Wednesday evening, the U-M College Libertarians held a viewing party to watch Obama's address. They sharply criticized his first State of the Union, saying he did not present new ideas and is working toward increasing government, not reducing it.

“Clearly, the president truly thinks that our problems will be solved by more and more government," sophomore Sam van Kleef said in a statement. "He has a fundamental misunderstanding of our economy and our world.”

Here's a round-up of coverage, analysis and opinions from Obama's first State of the Union:

So what did you think of Obama's first State of the Union? Did you agree with his proposals and his priorities? Leave your comments below.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Comments

bedrog

Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 5:46 p.m.

@freedom lover...on the complex matter of combatting islamic radicalism judge obama by what he does, not necessarily by he says....by his more temperate tone than bush's ( to say nothing of rush's) he's giving our enemies an "out" in the unlikely event they want to try sanity for a change...but he's properly acting as if he doesnt expect that to happen (.e.g increased drone attacks on al qaeda/taliban; sanctions on iran; build up in afghanistan...which will no doubt be calibrated to needs on the ground...etc... thank god we've finally got a pres with a brain and some subtlety....plus the guts to not kowtow to "tea partiers" and their FOX network instigators. by the way, in the past i was astrong mccain supporter, until he sold out his principles to the becky/dittoheads by bringing sarah palin into a national spotlight... so gimme.. and the pres.. a break.

TFF3

Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 4 p.m.

Obama can do no wrong. If things get better, it was all because of his ideas and his policies. If things stay the same, or get worse, it is all Bush's fault, because it was impossible to fix 8 years of problems in 4.

Hot Sam

Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 6:56 a.m.

"""Please provide a scintilla of proof that we have too much government. """ Start with reading the constitution and paying some extra attention to the tenth amendment. There is not enough room on the Ann Arbor.com server to list all the excesses we have in Washington. Want one "scintilla"? How about the Department of Energy. Started in the 70's with the goal of reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Grown to 26,000 employees with a budget of over 43 Billion with a B dollars. Working for ya??? This is one of HUNDREDS!!!

FreedomLover

Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 12:49 a.m.

bedrog, when the President refuses to call it a "war on terror" but instead chooses to call it an "overseas contingency operation" he is appeasing the terrorists. Never in my life have I seen a president apologize for his county as much as this one has. I really don't think he likes the USA at all! Show me a free democracy that has gotten that way without the help of the USA. A Limbaugh - Beck trained seal and proud of it! Obligatory insurance, although unconstitutional, would be better than having free handouts to all from the government. One of the Republican ideas that never saw the light of day was to offer tax cuts to people so they could purchase health insurance. The Democrats however want to make sure they have government control of your health care through a 2000 page bill that they are afraid to make public before it is voted on. Keep government thieves out of our lives or they will control our every breath.

bedrog

Sun, Jan 31, 2010 : 5:12 p.m.

the previous post by FREEDOM LOVER is precisely why i DO support obligatory insurance; i.e the uninsured but marginally sick using E.R. rooms as primary care facilities ( well -insured i almost died,although i and the triage people didnt know that at the time ) because i was stuck in an ER queue behind the less ill who, from surrounding chitchat, were doing just that. And as to Obama generally,ANYONE who makes a fetish of his middle name has lost any argument with me and is written off as a limbaugh -beck trained seal. while it's true the economy has yet to recover, i absolutely regard those who view him as an appeaser of terrorism or weak on that front as just not paying attention...and to his former allies who fault him for, say, the afghanistan build-up decision, they too are not paying attention to events that a president must address, no matter how distasteful.

FreedomLover

Sun, Jan 31, 2010 : 5:01 a.m.

Those of you who push government provided universal health care have never experienced it. I have! As a member of the US Air Force for 20 years I lived with government provided health care. Here is how it worked. Everything was free, we paid for nothing out of our pocket, it was an entitlement. Medical care was provided at a base hospital. When your child got the sniffles you called the doctor to get an appointment. Since lots of kids get the sniffles every year, lots of people were trying to get appointments. When you found out the next available appointment was in two weeks the alternative was to take your child to the emergency room. Why not, it was free! The emergency room was always full of people who may need to see a doctor but it wasn't an emergency. As a result you waited hours in the emergency room. The prescription drugs were also free. The attitude was give me as many prescriptions as possible because it was free. For a period of time even over the counter medicines were free. Again, let's stock up just in case we need them. This system was inefficient and the result was poor medical care. There just weren't enough medical provider available to take care of everyones perceived needs. The only answer was to expand the hospital staff which the taxpayers would have to pay for. But there is one more solution; rationed care. But if you ration care, who will decide who gets the health care and who doesn't? Do you trust your government to do this? The bottom line is anything that is free will be wasted and taken advantage of unless it is highly regulated (rationed). I've lived my whole life believing that there is no "free lunch". When you work for something and pay for it with your hard earned money you will take care of it much better than if someone gives it to you for free, especially when you know if you break it or use it all up someone will give you more. Government provided rationed health care is not the answer.

groland

Sat, Jan 30, 2010 : 3:51 p.m.

all I said is investment by government can and often does pay off. What have our free enterprise leaders done for us lately? The corporate cultures at GM, AIG, or Merril Lynch were not exactly models of efficiency. There is a middle ground when you consider how important technology and education are to our economic growth, you cannot leave it entirely to markets.

David Briegel

Sat, Jan 30, 2010 : 1:33 p.m.

groland and eyeheart, read up on the war between JPMorgan/Chase and Goldman Sachs to see how "free" our markets are. Manipulation is the norm as Wall Street continues to have it's way with us as they rent our govt to make their misbehavior legal!

groland

Sat, Jan 30, 2010 : 1:02 p.m.

So many philosophical differences seem to boil down to whether we believe free markets are the solution to our problems or whether some kind of planned investment by the public is more effective. As a scientist I analyze evidence. America still leads the world in some sectors. These would include medical research and biotechnology, space exploration, weapons systems and aviation, satellite technology and communications, high energy physics and material sciences, earth and marine sciences, and higher education (yes believe it or not the USA has 30/100 top universities in the world and 6 of the top 10). The common denominator among all of these industries is significant government investment, i.e. in research and development. Meanwhile in Autos, consumer goods textiles, and many other private sector industries, we are being outcompeted by other countries. So the pure free market mentality just does not serve us well.

groland

Sat, Jan 30, 2010 : 11:20 a.m.

While we are on the subject of health care costs, nothing would help make America more competitive than a single payer national health system, something like Medicare for all. Uwe Rheinhardt, a renowned health economist, while going over the books at GM proclaimed that GM is a health insurance company that also builds cars. Toyota, VW, Honda do not have the same legacy costs precisely because their workers and retirees are covered. I will never understand why corporate America has not pushed for more comprehensive coverage. The truth is we all are already paying for it one way or another.

Jon Saalberg

Sat, Jan 30, 2010 : 9:39 a.m.

@EyeHeartA2: I guess you don't think Medicare works for millions of senior citizens. This is seen by both sides of the aisle as an effective program.

Jon Saalberg

Sat, Jan 30, 2010 : 12:01 a.m.

To the GOP contingent - I assume that you do not want all Americans to have affordable health care, and want medical companies and insurance companies to continue cherry picking who they cover and what they'll pay for. Correct? Otherwise, please explain why you do not want universal health care. Don't you get that if all Americans have health care, cost will go down, as millions of Americans will get preventative care, thus avoiding later, more costly medical services?Also, it is tiresome when GOPers say they are "tired of too much government." What does that mean? You'd rather have your water, fire services, police, etc, provided by private companies? Or you'd rather have law making farmed out to...uh...contractors? Please provide a scintilla of proof that we have too much government. Gridlock in Washington is not "too much government" - it is the GOP doing all it can to pander to the right by doing all it can to stop whatever President Obama wants to accomplish.It is a tall order to clean up Bush's mess: a surplus turned into a record deficit, two wars, banking and housing ruins, failed education policies, inaction on global warming, and more. And with the impediment of recalcitrant Republicans, who seem unconcerned about any of these issues, it will take a few years and beyond, to resolve these problems.

David Briegel

Fri, Jan 29, 2010 : 11:15 p.m.

stunhsif, you are so wrong. I wrote several times asking why Hank Paulson would leave the chairmanship of the billionaire boys club to become Treas Secy. It is obvious to everyone but you. It was to preside over the looting of our Treasury. Goldman Sachs got 10% of the AIG bailout. Pretty nice kickback wouldn't you agree? All nice and Republican LEGAL!! If there was truth and justice in the new "American way" Paulson would be in prison where he belongs! But Obama can't look back!? Isn't it funny how Hussein was a great name when Ronnie sent Rummy and Cheney to pay him his tribute and provide him with his chemical WMD's? And yet you celebrate the name Walker from the middle names of the last two Republican failures? How ironic!? Walker was also a criminal banker who should have been imprisoned had there been any real "justice" in our once proud nation!

David Briegel

Fri, Jan 29, 2010 : 10:54 p.m.

Mike, You and I pay for every single person who is fortunate enough to be insured either through our taxes or the cost of the goods and services we buy. We really should pay for everyone and not just the few. Good post mama247 and groland and cyclochemist. Can you imagine ANY Republican standing up to the opposition like Obama did and EVERY Brit PM has to do regularly? We are so fortunate to have this brilliant man as our Pres!

stunhsif

Fri, Jan 29, 2010 : 10:45 p.m.

Mr. Briegel, You speak of "the only socialism we are experiencing is the losses of the bankers while their profits are private. Aren't we just the best"? This is your quote "word for word"! Pray tell me my friend, whose "socialism" did "bail out" the banks? Oh, my goodness, it was your President Mr. Barack Hussein Obama!!!!

groland

Fri, Jan 29, 2010 : 5:29 p.m.

I think here in Ann Arbor most people are disappointed with Obama because he has not done enough. Also, he has reached out to an opposition that has no interest in helping solve any problems. The GOP had a majority of 51-49 at times in the senate, yet they passed every piece of Bush legislation. Obama cannot get his agenda passed despite a majority of 60-40. Therein lies the difference between the two parties. The GOP is all about obstruction and power. The health plan is an abomination precisely because Obama wanted to make it bipartisan, and still he could not get votes. The GOP had the Presidency for 20/28 years, a majority in Congress from 1994-2006, and 7/9 supreme court picks (until Sotomayor). And yet, they continue to portray themselves as victims. Why does the party that preaches personal responsibility not take responsibility for deficits, wars, and other failures that all occurred under their watch?

mike from saline

Fri, Jan 29, 2010 : 10:41 a.m.

I believe every American has the right to have health insurance, and if don't have any now, I suggest you GET SOME. I, as a tax- payer, have no obligation to provide it for you.

mama247

Fri, Jan 29, 2010 : 10:11 a.m.

Stillatownie got it right. It ain't easy out there, and worse in Washington. Thank goodness we have an intelligent, diligent and compassionate person at the helm NOW. Laughable how the governor of Virginia described U.S. health care as the "best in the world"! Yes, if you're rich/insured adequately.

mike from saline

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:36 p.m.

I've never needed a trial lawyer in my life, but I have needed health care, and it's been wonderful fo myself and family

MyOpinion

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:16 p.m.

I liked the suggestion of breaking up Health Care reform into separate bills and let the Party of No vote no on each of them. However, the difficulty of having the conditions separately, such as "No denial based on pre-existing conditions" is that insurance companies can't really afford to cover sick (expensive) people unless they have lots of healthy (cheap) people. That's why mandatory has to be coupled with "no denial." It is a tough nut to solve.

David Briegel

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 8:05 p.m.

Yeah, those trial lawyers are real evil. Representing you and me! But those Saintly, wonderful corporate lawyers are all just the noble patriots on the planet? Defending the indefensible on a daily basis. You ever notice how the corporate criminals never, ever go to jail? One example are the plight of the illegals. Yet not one single solitary white man is in jail for actually hiring an illegal! Those Saintly corporate lawyers get them off every time IF they are EVER even prosecuted! Ain't it just great?

Smiley

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 2:31 p.m.

Tort reform references our ridiculous trial lawyer culture that other countries find laughable. Don't be discouraged though -- utterly frivolous lawsuits against obstetricians presented to illiterate jurors so that John Edwards can live in an 80-room house, we're No. 1 in that category!

David Briegel

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 2:19 p.m.

Yeah, tort reform. That old dog won't hunt. When you get butchered by the lack of health care or the loan sharks at your bank, who ya gonna call? Ghostbusters!?

woodsyh

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 1:47 p.m.

EyeHeartA2: thanks for finally bringing up tort reform. Through this whole mess, I haven't heard any mention of it. I beleve it's a major obstacle that has to be cleared. I'm still curious how the pols think that by offering a $3500(or whatever amount) tax credit to small business, that any would actually add jobs. Seems like many are barely getting by, so why would they add a $35k employee(wages/benefits)for a measely credit. It truly shows that many politicians have no idea what it's like to own a business or work in the private sector.

k. syrah

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 1:46 p.m.

Blah, Blah, Blah. Same old Barack. Arrogant. Barack = my way or the high way. Real unity there - NOT! That's ok, he will be a one term president.

packman

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 1:38 p.m.

Obama has not yet learned the difference between being good and sounding good. He reads a great speech...give him that. Even the comics are making fun of the teleprompter now. His criticism of the recent SC decision on free speech is hypocritical (sp?). Why is it OK for CBS, NBC, ABC, and MSNBC, and others to use their conglomerate cash to support the leftist agenda during elections and not OK for other corporate conglomerations to counter? We are not stupid...America is a conservative nation...there isn't enough money to do what O wants done.

Top Cat

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 1:20 p.m.

To be fair, I'll give Obama credit for one thing. He is getting us out of Iraq.

sbbuilder

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 1:17 p.m.

Well, Dave, at least you're consistent. Hope is a wonderful virtue. Change can be good, too. False hope is doubly bad, and almost impossible to stomach, and the wrong sort of change is ruinous, and eats away at hope. I'll have no more of his 'change', and as for his 'hope', I never placed any currency in it, so have nothing to lose.

CycloChemist

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 12:54 p.m.

It is critical to pass health care reform. The US spends more than any other country on health care and has misserable statistics (like a 6.8/1000 infant mortality rate). It's rediculous! The slimey part of the current Senate bill is, I agree, the deals - cut to get Dems on board! Enough! Get rid of the deals, put a few Republicans in a full-Nelson and get the job done! Obama's speach was so well delivered, I'm so glad we have a president who has a command of the English language. Although not successful on all his goals, he looks and sounds like he thoroughly enjoys the job.

David Bardallis

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 12:47 p.m.

One word: Secession!

David Briegel

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 12:10 p.m.

I wish he would have been firmer when he said we tried your failed policies for the last 8 years. You posters here hate the results. So do I. How's that trickle down workin' for ya? A rising tide lifts all yachts! The American people repudiated the failed lies of the past. You lost. You deserved to lose! You failed miserably and now you need to support the new direction. The Dems are confused by the Republican lite, blue dogs and need to use 51 votes in the Senate so they can get something done. 41 is not the majority! They need to dump Lieberman! I wish he had been firmer at standing up to the conservatives in both parties! I would take the health care issues one at a time and make the Repubs vote against enial for pre existing conditions. Against portability. Against Medicare for all. We have one of the worst health care systems on the planet and it is a lie to say it is the best. 46 million without, 44,000 dead every year, 28th in life expectancy, 34th in infant mortality. These are the outcomes of the best healthcare anywhere? Right. And we spend $3,000 more than anyone comparable!! And we pay for the insurance of every single person who is insured! At least he isn't calling you "America hatin', terrist luvin' defeatists"! The only socialism we are experiencing is the losses of the bankers while their profits are private. Aren't we just the best? So yes, I wish he had stood firmer and made his parents and grandparents proud! He still believes he can work with Repubs. He is foolish to even try without putting them in their place!

Umich2008

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 11:56 a.m.

ann arbor reader and the rest of you Obama lovers. O has had the WH for a year. He controls both houses of congress. Unemployment is even lower then before he took office. He has exponentially increased the deficit more then the previous 43 administrations combined. Yet, he and the rest of you still keep blaming Bush. Your ilk were quick to point out that W couldn't blame Clinton any more after he was in office for a year? Why the change in rules? O has been in control for over a year and has broken nearly every single campaign promise? Transparency? Gitmo? Iraq? Healthcare? He is a talking piece elected purely due to skin color. If conservatives had not stayed home due to lack of a candidate, he would be one of the schmucks in the Senate signing up for earmarks today.

stunhsif

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 11:50 a.m.

@Freedom2010 Well said. To shorten what you said we need but only use one word to describle the President. " Empty Suit ".

Freedom2010

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 11:12 a.m.

President Obama will be bedeviled during his four years for two main reasons. He ran the general election as a moderate, a unifier, but his views and impulses are farther to the left. His most ardent supporters, whose more liberal, pro govt. views coincide with his own, only make up 20-25% of the electorate. Not enough to carry the day. He thought that with the majorities he had in Congress, he could get his way. The Stimulus Act enforced this view when he and the Dems managed to get almost $800B passed for their pro govt programs with only 3 Rep votes in the Senate. But now he is finding the majority of the public is just right of center and their representatives are going to more closely adhere to these views. He cannot expect to be successful in getting his policies passed when he was not willing to fully advocate those views in the campaign. Second, while he is naturally gifted, he lacks experience. He has never had to run anything for an extended period of time and thus, other than getting the next promotion, has accomplish very little. Instead, he was always able to get "promoted up" based on his persona and potential. Unfortunately for us and him, the presidency requires one to actually accomplish things, not just talk about it. And because there is no next job for him to be promoted up to, he cannot escape having to demonstrate actual results. Now that the Dems have seen he has lost the mojo and cannot save them (see VA, NJ, MA), they will act in their own self-interest and not tie themselves to his policies. He will soon find he is not able to accomplish any of the policies he and his base covet.

Hot Sam

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 11:02 a.m.

If you inherit a fat dog, you can either put him on a diet or feed him an unlimited supply of Delmonico steak...

cd_booth

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 11:01 a.m.

I thought he did a good job. It's time to work together and stop blaming others, which is all I see from other comments.

TXteacher

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:59 a.m.

Policy is not made according to the constituents' desires. The entire system is controlled by corporate money and will continue to be so. Stop expecting otherwise. We don't live in a representative gov't anymore. We live in a "corporatocracy".

Atticus F.

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:57 a.m.

We gave Bush 8 years, and look where it got us. Now all of these hyper-partisan Obama haters expect the president to snap his fingers and fix the mess in less than a year. Just a bunch of people who mostly voted for bush, and now are looking for someone else to blame for their own foolish decisions.

chosen1

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:48 a.m.

Here's an idea for our elected officials, go to your constituents and see where we are with the healthcare bill. If we aren't for it or are for it vote according to the majority of the people who voted you in office. Your vote should reflect us not some political party.

capersdaddy

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:44 a.m.

To some of the posts here, maybe heed Conan O'Brien's parting shot: "Cynacism sucks." I was VERY happy with the speech, and understand that some insist on being displeased no matter what Obama says, does, doesn't do, etc. Is there no credit given for the fact that WE are all trying to solve incredibly huge problems? So easy to throw a stone - could any of the naysayers do any better standing in his shoes? What I most enjoyed about the speech is that it asked us to work hard to make things better - as compared to 8 years of scare tactics (i.e. "9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11"). Obama gives me hope, hope that we can rise above us vs. them. And as a nod to the superficial: Gimme Michelle Obama over Laura any day of the week - she's smokin' awesome loveliness. I'd keep him in office just to keep her! Ok, continue with the stone throws if you must...he's still my president and I think he's fantastic - FoxNews can never take that away from me.

stillatownie

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:20 a.m.

I find it ridiculous how people are blaming the Obama administration for the current state of the economy. They *did* inherit an incredibly bad situation and have actually made things much better than they could have been. Obama continued the bailout plan that Bush et al. started. ANY president, republican or democrat would have done so because the vast majority of economists recommended this action. I'm so sick of people blasting out this partisan drivel. Do you people really think that another president could have done much better with the economic situation? That said, I think everyone is responsible for the current state of healthcare reform. The democrats are weak willed and scatterbrained. The republicans will oppose ANY plan laid out by the democrats, simply because it is from the democrats! The political climate in this country is disgusting, but is made even more so by the vitriolic partisan banter that (most of) you comment writers spew. You have completely bought in to the system that both parties want you to have: With them, no matter what they say or do. Think for yourselves! Go ahead, try it!

Smiley

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:06 a.m.

We dont need Washington's constant strategic manipulation for America to prosper. If they would simply lay out rules that are simple and easily understood and then get out of the way, ambitious, free Americans would create jobs and prosperity. Our founders did this by announcing in the Constitution that we would be a nation of limited government. They laid out simple rules, got out of the way, and America became the most prosperous country in the world. Our government and politicians think they can take our founders concepts and make them better, but this only results in micromanagement, inefficiency, ineffectiveness and ultimately destroys prosperity.

Ann Arbor Reader

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:01 a.m.

Eyeheart: President Obama stated that he would have all the issues fixed in one year? Can you provide a link for that, please? I distinctly remember his repeatedly saying that we had a long road ahead of us and that there were no quick fixes. Top Cat: Can you explain to me, who is paying for their healthcare if not us?

stan

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 9:44 a.m.

I'm appalled that 42% (combined A and B percentage at the time of this posting) have given him an above average grade. The guy blames the previous administration for EVERYTHING. This country does not want bigger government. He fails to recognize that at his own peril.

Hot Sam

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 9:39 a.m.

Bush is gone. I don't think it is necessary to include a Bush criticism along with an Obama criticism. We had 8 years to criticize the last guy, and we did. Part of what people are fed up with is that seems to be all he can do. It's Obama's ball game now, and the line up is not getting the job done.

Top Cat

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 9:28 a.m.

Ann Arbor Reader...Please substantiate your comment "our providing free healthcare to all Iraqis and Afghans".

Ann Arbor Reader

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 9:28 a.m.

Hot Sam: I am definitely not saying to increase spending; in fact, I am very much a fiscal conservative. I am just pointing out the partisanship and hypocrisy of people who continually insult and bash the president while conveniently ignoring President Bush's outrageous spending.

Hot Sam

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 9:17 a.m.

Ann Arbor Reader... Two wrongs do not make a right...yes Bush spent too much...no reason to triple the insanity!

Ann Arbor Reader

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 8:58 a.m.

The three things that occur to me when reading these posts and other sites: 1. All of you who are blasting Obama and the Democrats for spending...who spent hundreds of billions on Iraq and Afghan? Wouldn't that have been the Republican White House and the Republican-controlled congress? I noticed that the Republican response to the State of the Union (the new governor of Virginia) conveniently neglected to mention Bush's runaway spending as well. 2. All of you who are complaining about providing healthcare to our fellow Americans. Are you also complaining about our providing free healthcare to all Iraqis and Afghans? Just wondering... 3. This president inherited an economy that was in the dumpster, a crumbling infrastructure, a crumbling education system, and two war fiascos. Who in the world would think that in one year, he could fix all the mess that eight years of mismanagement had created? That is naive, at best.

xmo

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 8:43 a.m.

he is an empty suit. that's all he does is talk and blame ex-pres. Bush. I thought that he was smarter than Bush but I was wrong.

stunhsif

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 8:31 a.m.

Thus far 57% of those polled by A2.com give the President a C or worse with 38% giving him a D or an E. He still keeps toting that verbage "change". Yep we got some great change this past year didn't we. That is all I have left in my pocket is change. Takes a "Carter" in office before we can get a "Reagan".

81wolverine

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 8:26 a.m.

He was right about one thing - Americans are NOT happy with the way our government is being run right now. "Very angry" would probably be a better description. How can you have faith in the political process when both parties are constantly quarreling and bickering with each other, and have long forgotten their main purpose of serving the average American? Or when the highest court in the land makes a decision to allow powerful corporations to flood the political process with as much money as they want? The average American has NO say in what goes on in Washington. Almost all of our national policies and laws are greatly influenced by special interests, corporate dollars, and greed. As a country, we need to reform our laws and government to serve the people again like it was meant to several hundred years ago. Otherwise, well-intentioned politicians like Obama will continue to flail away trying to fight the institutionalized network of power and influence that's been in place for many years without much results.

Top Cat

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 8:16 a.m.

The American people see very clearly that the Emperor has no clothes. November 2, 2010!

Smiley

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 8:16 a.m.

My apologies - I think that was a bad link. One that works... http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2003/11/10/352872/

Smiley

Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 8:11 a.m.

I think most independents, myself included, are with in4mation as far as Obamacare. The country, as a whole, would be worse off with that plan, but certain reforms are necessary. I always enjoy the President's speaches, but much of what he talks about is just not realistic (a common quality for politicians, of course). I was disappointed that nothing was mentioned about fair trade (not to be confused with free trade). Without fair trade, any "fixes" will be short-lived. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090819/bs_nm/us_buffett;_ylt=AreAqoaEBDXzaIlv36su3XwDW7oF