Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels delivered the Republican Party response to the president's Syaye of the Union speech Tuesday evening. He mirrored Obama's opening, saluting him for taking down Osama bin Ladden and other Al-Qaeda officers and talked about other political things before denying the positive messages of Obama's speech. Daniels said Obama was not responsible for the economic problems the US has faced, but he did allege that Obama has done nothing that improved economic conditions durring his three years in office. Daniels also announced opposition to the growing gap between the top and bottom of the income ladder before saying the US was likely to follow the economic path of Greece and Spain if no new action is taken.
A notable political point Daniels made regarding helping his state: "First, make money. Be successful. If you make a profit, you'll have something left to hire someone else, and some to donate to the good causes we love."
Daniels talked about opposition to "extremism" regarding energy policies and called for greater private sector activity to create jobs and a simplied tax code to minimize loophole abuse and be less favorable to the rich. He called for Medicare and Social Security reform. He also blamed the Democrats of the Senate for all the gridlock in Congress and said that the Republicans were responsible for anything Congress managed to accomplish.
He ended his speech saying that Republicans can restore America from the damage done and make "our 'city on a hill' shine once again."
I was bothered that there were no details regarding Social Security and Medicare reform. I also feel that he was too extreme in saying the US could follow in the footsteps of Greece and Spain. Both this spreech and Obama's seriously bothered me as they both projected American exceptionalism.
So AP Gov folks, what do you think of the GOP response?
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
It is clear that Daniels used his time in television to lash out at Obama and praise the Republicans. In his speech he tried to make us believe that the GOP is eager and ready to change the course of our economy for the better. Perhaps, the Republican s are right that Obama was trying hard to appeal to his liberal base.
However, I could see that Daniels had made a few fouls when it came to the facts. When Daniels criticized Obama for dictating what light bulbs we should use, I found it unfair for them to criticize Obama when it was President George W. Bush, a republican, who had signed the legislation into law. In fact, wasnt it Obama who had signed a spending bill in December that included a provision about blocking Energy Department from enforcing these regulations? Also, Daniels slightly depressed exaggeration about “nearly half of all people under 30 did not go to work” does not take into account that many 16-19 yr olds are not part of the labor force and may not be looking for a job.
I agree with Katherine's points; Daniels did try to paint the GOP as the "party of change," a motif that helped Obama win the 2008 election. It is also imperative to be on the lookout for political spin, as evidenced here by Daniels' attempt to twist the unemployment figures.
One of the GOP rebuttal remarks with which I disagreed somewhat was that "the answers to the [economic] problem are simply mathematical." As we learned in the Paul Krugman article from first semester, freshwater economists' endeavors to create a perfectly mathematical model for economic conditions are ultimately vain. Although math is relevant to a very significant degree, there are numerous other facets of the problem that cannot be quantified. I think that Daniels' labeling of the solution as "simple" (mathematics) was a clever political attempt to amplify what the GOP deems as Obama's embarrassing failure to fix the economy.
I firmly believe that much of the partisanship and polarization that plague our political system today is born from remarks like Daniels', where he asserted that the Republicans are responsible for any improvements, and it was the Democrats who were at fault for the lack of compromise and achievement. As leaders of America, it is these politicians' jobs to enact policies that help American citizens, and they have been unable to do so in the midst of their partisan bickering.
While I believe that Obama's speech may have been a bit too optimistic, I also believe that Daniels' speech was extremely pessimistic, not to mention pretty uninteresting to listen to.
Like Joseph, I too was disappointed to hear very little regarding Social Security and Medicare reform from Obama. This seemed more like a campaign speech emphasizing Obama's achievements than a speech describing the state of the Union.
Post a Comment