THE STATE OF THE UNION/PRESIDENCY

Last Wednesday's State of the Union Address told us more about the state of the presidency than it did about the state of our union. We know all too well the state of our union: 1. high unemployment 2. skyrocketing deficits 3. terrorist threats 4. two wars---not pretty.

I fell asleep watching Mr. Obama's speech---twice. It's not that I was particularly tired, instead, I found the president to be tiresome. He is always elegant and eloquent and maybe that's the problem--he's set the bar too high, even for himself. Elegant and eloquent weren't enough to keep me awake, I wanted to hear bold and concise statements on how America is going to move forward.

The speech seemed more practiced than passionate. He read off a laundry list of first-year achievements that was not unimpressive, but didn't ring true. The president boasted of the jobs that have been saved or created by the Stimulus/Recovery Act. Most of these jobs have been in the government sector or in the car and housing industries, both of which have been propped up by taxpayer money. We need private sector jobs that are sustainable. We needed someone to tell us that while it might take a little longer for a recovery, throwing our tax dollars toward a temporary fix was not a smart idea.

I was pleased with Mr. Obama's ideas on clean energy and his interest in leading the world in this industry. However, I don't like Cap & Trade--it's not good for our recovering economy and it doesn't do enough to reduce emissions. He acknowledged that he is aware of the doubt surrounding the evidence on climate change. He could have pointed out that the evidence is moot. Regardless of the climate getting warmer and whose fault it is, we still need a better energy policy, because what we do know for sure, is that we are all healthier breathing clean air. More importantly, the people that we are making rich by buying their oil don't like us and we may be funding our own demise. This would have been a great time to challenge every American to use less energy and to come up with new technologies that can free us from our dependency on foreign oil--a 2010 version of the race to the moon.

The president gave lip service to how unpopular the bank bailout was and compared it to having a "root canal". I agree that the bank bailout was probably a necessary evil; as bad as we hated it, it seems to have stabilized our financial world. Most banks have paid the government back with interest yet Mr. Obama proposes to charge them a fee to recoup some of the tarp funds and has threatened their bonuses. What about "main street"? Wall Street may not be completely innocent but there was complicity all across the country from people who took out loans they had little to no chance of paying back. For the president to single-out and scapegoat the banks smacks of populism. He should have told the banks that if they are not operating on taxpayer money they could do whatever they like with their bonuses. He could then invite them to work with him to set some regulations that would provide an atmosphere for growth and profit while minimizing excessive risk that could lead to cascading bank failures in the future. He should have then told the American public that owning a home is a privilege, not a right. And, if something looks too good to be true, it probably is.

The Afghanistan and Iraq wars were given short shrift no doubt because they are very unpopular and there is no easy out. We are fighting two wars that have cost billions of dollars and many lives, yet the only thing regarding our military that is being talked about post-speech is the "don't ask, don't tell" law. Mr. Obama should have looked right into the camera and let it be known to all nations that America will no longer be held hostage to war. It is reported that Al Qaeda operates in over sixty countries--we cannot send troops to sixty countries. We have to find a better way to fight the war on terror. And, while America will continue to be a champion for democracy, we will no longer referee, or fight the worlds battles only to later suffer insults and accusations of imperialism.

The president seemed to still be suffering the effects of the Scott Brown phenomenon--he threw a little something at everyone trying to make political points. We need a president that is not worried about getting re-elected or his legacy. We need the president to create an atmosphere for growth and success and to challenge and inspire us to make the most of our opportunities because while government will be there in a time of crisis, we, not the government, are ultimately responsible for our fates.