HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Democrats » Barack Obama (Group) » Kansas City Star: Obama’s...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Dec 7, 2011, 12:36 AM

Kansas City Star: Obama’s speech hit all the right points

President Barack Obama’s foray into Kansas isn’t likely to pick up electoral votes in that reddest of states. But his speech Tuesday at Osawatomie High School was good policy and good politics.

In keeping with his penchant for channeling predecessors, Obama chose the town where Theodore Roosevelt delivered his “New Nationalism” speech to outline his own intention to strengthen the middle class.

The elements of Obama’s speech were not new. He decried rising income inequality, blasted Republicans for wanting to roll back regulation of the financial sector, defended his latest nominee to head the Consumer Financial Protection Agency and demanded an extension of the payroll tax cut set to expire later this month.

The president has said those things before. He should keep saying them — and acting on them. Tuesday’s speech was significant because it provided a coherent framework for Obama’s economic policies and a credible rebuttal to Republican opposition.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/12/06/3305337/the-stars-editorial-obamas-speech.html#ixzz1fo05mZQN

9 replies, 1549 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 9 replies Author Time Post
Reply Kansas City Star: Obama’s speech hit all the right points (Original post)
ellisonz Dec 2011 OP
pipoman Dec 2011 #1
ellisonz Dec 2011 #2
pipoman Dec 2011 #3
sufrommich Dec 2011 #4
pipoman Dec 2011 #6
ellisonz Dec 2011 #8
treestar Dec 2011 #5
pipoman Dec 2011 #7
treestar Dec 2011 #9

Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Wed Dec 7, 2011, 06:22 AM

1. Yeah, yeah, yeah,

now go back to Washington and sign a couple of new 'free trade agreements'..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 7, 2011, 06:31 AM

2. Wah, wah, wah.

I don't like the course of the world economy over the last 3 decades, so I'm just going to stick my head in the sand and avoid 7 decades of Democratic policy towards trade. Those three deals are pittance compared to what we do with China and India. Isolationism and mercantilism is a DOA policy in Washington and on Main Street. We need trade reform, not trade cessation.

There is no backwards on trade liberalization, only forward and so we have to figure out how to make it work for America and its allies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 7, 2011, 07:25 AM

3. Yeah,

the labor party is dead, fuck it, we should just deal with no employment and act like we like it. Where is our party's balls? In the pocket of wall street, just like the rethugs. It'll be OK..soon we'll all be on the same level as the rest of the 3rd world. Our President or other elected has no obligation to fix the economy of every regressive, authoritarian, corrupt 3rd world economy on the planet..they are very busy working for wall street however. If O really cared about, “This is the defining issue of our time,” Obama said, referring to income inequality. “At stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home and secure their retirement.”, he would concentrate on making a requirement for trade with the US to hinge on moving toward standard of living parity..but no, that would defeat the purpose for wall street..cheap labor, economic inequality is the foundation of 'free trade'. I get that you like it, you're a free trade believer, the vast majority of the 99% are not. The first candidate who reasonably proposes actually effecting the plan will be elected regardless of party, then will be promptly executed by your 'free trade' friends. It is your willingness to accept the position of Wall Street which feeds income inequality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #3)

Wed Dec 7, 2011, 09:12 AM

4. Why are you posting in this group? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #4)

Wed Dec 7, 2011, 10:08 AM

6. Because I can?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #3)

Wed Dec 7, 2011, 04:01 PM

8. It's actually way easier to complain and call for a return to the past...

...than to rebuild a productive future. The rabbit is definitely out of the hat on this one. We need to be increasing American exports and internationalizing our education system rather than fighting the inevitable on the trade policy issue - "winning the future"

You sir, are a pessimist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 7, 2011, 09:35 AM

5. It is overly simplistic to demonize "free trade agreements."

Without judging each one on its merits, and without understanding them.

Just a short cut for the lazy brain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 7, 2011, 10:13 AM

7. It's not just free trade agreements

It is the unbelievable position of our party that we should send our jobs to 3rd world countries with no intention of improving the quality of life of their workers, and Democratic policy of encouraging same, all the while stating stupid shit like, “This is the defining issue of our time,” Obama said, referring to income inequality. “At stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home and secure their retirement.”

edit, oh, and I love this, "build a modest savings"..modest...nice..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #7)

Sat Dec 10, 2011, 12:09 PM

9. There is no way that is the position of our party

It is not.

Our party wants good jobs here, it does not believe we should send our jobs to 3rd world countries.

The sole reason for this transfer of jobs is cheaper prices due to cheaper labor. It is up to us all as consumers to decide higher prices and employed Americans are better than cheaper prices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread