Prepared Remarks for State of the Union

By Jeralyn, Section Obama Administration
Posted on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 07:18:26 PM EST
Tags: SOTU (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Big Tent Democrat will be here to share his thoughts on the President Obama's State of the Union address which begins at 9pm ET. Until then, here's the speech as prepared for delivery and sent out by the White House.

He doesn't seem to think much of the proposed plan to seat Dems and Republicans together:

What comes of this moment will be determined not by whether we can sit together tonight, but whether we can work together tomorrow.

There's a lot of bipartisan talk:

With their votes, they’ve determined that governing will now be a shared responsibility between parties. New laws will only pass with support from Democrats and Republicans. We will move forward together, or not at all – for the challenges we face are bigger than party, and bigger than politics.

Obama has a new target: Medical malpractice reform "to rein in frivolous lawsuits." Of course, that's nothing new. He voted for it while in the Senate and pushed it in 2009.

With 45 minutes to go, here's a place for your pre-speech concerns.

< Ghailani Sentenced to Life Without Parole for 1988 Embassy Bombings | Obama on Immigration Reform >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Prepared Remarks for State of the Union | 30 comments (30 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I'll say this once. I much preferred Pelosi (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:11:07 PM EST

up there. That was truly moving as a woman.

I was sad when (none / 0) (#12)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:14:27 PM EST

the 111th ended. Seeing that orange jerk up there doesn't make me feel very conciliatory.


: Nope. And he needs to learn the basic art (none / 0) (#18)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:24:20 PM EST

Of attaching a memorial ribbon to his lapel.

Very (none / 0) (#1)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 07:22:54 PM EST

Bridge to the 21st Century.

Always hated these speeches.

Probably will play well.

: Hmmm --the "bridge to the 21st century" (none / 0) (#25)
by christinep on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 10:54:33 PM EST

Heard that in DC on January 20, 1993. I always liked the idea...maybe it will be real.

I hope wal-greens isn't busy, my head (none / 0) (#2)
by seabos84 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:00:18 PM EST

is all stuffed up from this cold.

listen to 0-$ell Out lie to me is WORSE htan listening to bush & raygun lie to me -

I consider them fascist toadies, so, they're supposed to lie. oh well.

As my wife says "He's a HARVARD man! The system worked GREAT for him! He's got the keys to the right doors - why would he change anything?"

rmm.

Just reading the text (none / 0) (#3)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:06:11 PM EST

Better than Gloria Borger, who insists that the floor conversations are "more collegial." I guess we know she doesn't watch C-SPAN.

Speech starts.

God, the dating narrative (none / 0) (#4)
by lilburro on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:07:06 PM EST

I thought maybe he'd propose something different re: the 1099 provision in the health bill to be bipartisan-y. Wish Giffords was there.

Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, (none / 0) (#5)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:09:24 PM EST

Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan show up.

Debated whether to watch (none / 0) (#6)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:09:31 PM EST

Decided to take it in on c-span without the blather. Watching as theater and performance since we already know the substance. Sometimes the PPUS sounds better than it reads.

Please let me know if the Pres. mentions (none / 0) (#8)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:12:05 PM EST

gun control Or Roe v. Wade.


Jeralyn linked the text (none / 0) (#10)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:13:29 PM EST

here.

I usually skim ahead. . .


Maybe I can do a search function? (none / 0) (#13)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:14:49 PM EST

: None of your search terms are there (none / 0) (#15)
by andgarden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:17:46 PM EST

The closest "contentious social issue" he touches is when he take a victory lap on DADT repeal (which he only alludes to).

: You guys cheat (none / 0) (#16)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:21:17 PM EST

Maybe he'll go off script and call for reinstating the assault weapon ban.

Will do. I like to have an assignment (none / 0) (#11)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:14:15 PM EST

: You're off the hook. I skimmed. Not there. (none / 0) (#21)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:34:41 PM EST

I give myself half (none / 0) (#9)
by Maryb2004 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:12:49 PM EST

an hour at most before I can't take any more. Not. SOTU fan.

I kind of enjoyed hearing Bill Clinton. (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by oculus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:15:42 PM EST

Long-winded but seemed to believe what he was saying.


: And enjoyed giving the speech (5.00 / 2) (#17)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:22:41 PM EST

It was infectious up to a point.

Isn't medical malpractice reform (none / 0) (#19)
by jbindc on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:27:55 PM EST

AKA "Tort reform" 1) a biggie with Republicans, and 2) a very small fraction of a percentage of medical costs? I mean, I don't have a problem looking at systems that may be broken and saying "We could do this better" - but does that really merit space in a SOTU?

The answers (none / 0) (#23)
by Zorba on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:04:26 PM EST

to your questions 1) and 2) are: Yes, and Yes. Malpractice costs are a very small fraction of medical costs. Link


if so trivial... (none / 0) (#28)
by diogenes on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 07:16:44 PM EST

If this is so trivial then why do the trial lawyers contribute so much money to prevent tort reform?


Easy ... because: (5.00 / 0) (#30)
by Yman on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 07:44:29 PM EST

They earn money by settling/winning trials for medmal clients, and
They realize that injustice results from arbitrary caps that limit the damages that can be recovered by victims of medical malpractice.

Neither of which negates the fact that malpractice costs are a tiny fraction of medical costs, and that tort reform (which has been enacted by most states since 1986) does nothing to reduce healthcare costs.


Did you (none / 0) (#29)
by Zorba on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 07:32:53 PM EST

even bother reading the link? It's a nice pile of change for the trial lawyers, but it is a minuscule
part of our annual health care costs (2.4%).


A negotiating sop (none / 0) (#26)
by christinep on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 11:02:11 PM EST

Cspan just lingered on (none / 0) (#20)
by ruffian on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:28:08 PM EST

someone whom was openly disdainful of the energy policy. His 'date' had to pat his knee in a 'now now' gesture. Pretty funny.

It's now out in the open and official (5.00 / 2) (#22)
by jbindc on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 08:39:10 PM EST

Congress is EXACTLY like high school


or perhaps junior (none / 0) (#24)
by BackFromOhio on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 09:14:29 PM EST

high school. Bullying, pressure to be in with the in crowd, and so on....


: And (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by jbindc on Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 08:10:29 AM EST

all in their "ugly" stage.
<snark>