« | »

SOTU Speech Will Focus On ‘Income Inequality’

From The Hill:

Obama State of the Union to focus on income inequality

By Amie Parnes and Justin Sink | 01/23/14

President Obama will try to pump some vitality into a lackluster second term on Tuesday when he delivers his State of the Union address.

Yes, a speech will do that

The address will include a “healthy dose” of the income inequality message the White House has focused on in recent weeks, according to one senior administration official familiar with the text.

Even though nobody cares about income inequality. (As we have just noted, according to the latest Quinnipiac poll only 1% of American voters think ‘income inequality’ is a top-priority issue. Which comports with other polls on the same question.)

A president who has yet to add to the big legislative accomplishments of his first term will call for raising the minimum wage to $10 per hour and extending federal unemployment benefits that expired last month…

What were the "big legislative accomplishments of his first term"? Obama-Care? — But, sure, raising the minimum wage, extending federal unemployment benefits (which are really just welfare) and giving at least 11 million illegal aliens amnesty will do wonders for the economy — which is actually the top priority for most Americans.

Obama — who has trumpeted 2014 as a “year of action” — will also devote considerable time in the address, which he’s been working on for the past month, on how he’ll use executive action to move along his agenda, the official said.

In other words, he is going to brag about his plans to become even more of a dictator.

The emphasis on executive action and messaging on income inequality are both intended to rally Obama’s political base, which lost confidence in the president during the difficult first year of his second term.

A Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday found that a majority of Americans — 53 percent — did not believe the Obama administration was competent at running the government…

Note how The Hill fails to mention what the Quinnipiac poll found about the important of ‘income inequality.’

“He needs to get people excited about the Democratic Party again,” one former senior administration official said of the president.

Translation: ‘We have to prove our base that we are still Santa Claus. That we will take things from others to give to them.’

The White House sees the State of the Union, where Obama will speak to a primetime audience of millions, as a chance to do just that. They also want to cast the president as someone working to get things done in a partisan atmosphere.

“They’ve concluded the American people want to see a president who’s active, who’s progressive, but who’s not overly partisan,” said Tad Devine, a veteran Democratic strategist who has consulted with the White House.

It’s easy to avoid partisanship when you rule by executive order.

“This is a chance to draw contrast with Republicans, who are like [New Jersey Gov.] Chris Christie at the G.W. Bridge — they just want to cause traffic jams. So the president and his team just have to show they’re driving around it.”

Gosh, they are clever.

Obama has a “simple goal” in the address, a second former senior administration official said. “Stake a beachhead as the champion for the middle class economic security, come hell or high water.” …

And never mind that Obama’s plans for income redistribution will destroy the middle class. (Which, of course, is his intention. And the goal of all Marxists and socialists.)

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, January 23rd, 2014. Comments are currently closed.

6 Responses to “SOTU Speech Will Focus On ‘Income Inequality’”

  1. dasher says:

    I still think the House will stay in Republican control and I think the Senate is getting closer to flipping.

    Just playing Devil’s Advocate here: how many times total did W issue Executive Orders?

    Just want to know for comparison’s sake.

    Getting cold here in ATL.


  2. wirenut says:

    The biggest threat to our incomes, is POTUS.
    Dasher, I don’t have exact #’s but W is slightly higher in eight yrs. than pips-geek is at the start of his 6th.
    I would like to see executive orders reduced to war powers and emergency actions only.

  3. specialed says:

    We should help them fight this war on wage inequality! To do so, we should first try it out on those most in the public eye so that they can lead as an example for the rest of us little people. Just cap wages at 10x SAG minimum for all actors! Limit TV personalities and sports athletes to 2 million per year max. Anyone should be able to live off of that, right? These people could be an inspiration to us all!

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      I think you’re on to something. And, elected senators and congress-critters should use a weighted scale, limited to a percentage of GNP. Say… oh, .0000015% of it. And no allowance to gain income from outside sources while in office and absolutely no investing in businesses or corporations while holding public office…and perhaps for 5+ years thereafter. (In the interest of ‘fairness’, of course)

      Watch and hear them squeal then.

      Were it not for the hypocrisy of national socialists, they would have no personality traits at all.

  4. GetBackJack says:

    Obama’s going to discuss Income Inequality in Rome on the world stage with a guy whose house is adorned with one of the most stunning displays of Art, Statuary and resplendent fittings man has ever created. A man whose every meal is paid for by millions of others, a man whose clothes, barber, bed and everything else is paid for by others …

    .. just like Obama. And these two will tell you and me we’re mean and have too much.

  5. Astravogel says:

    I still hold to the opinion that Millard Fillmore was the last great President.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »