Confirmed: Divisive president to deliver “aggressive” SOTU speech

Hot Air ^ | February 11, 2013 | Allahpundit

[Bratch]

This doesn’t mean it won’t be overlong, enervating, and instantly disposable like the last four were, just more peevish than usual. It’ll also be an occasion for O to “pivot to jobs” for the seventh or eighth time in his presidency, which I take it means 15-20 minutes about the middle class and the latest iteration of the Buffett Rule before he gets back to the stuff that really drives him, like banning assault weapons and creating an earned amnesty for illegals.

Emboldened by electoral victory and convinced the GOP is unwilling to cut deals, Obama plans to use his big prime-time address Tuesday night to issue another broad challenge at a Republican Party he regards as vulnerable and divided, Democrats close to Obama say…

When POLITICO asked how Obama is approaching the speech compared with his previous State of the Union addresses, a person close to the process of drafting the speech replied with a 2,500-year-old quote from Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu:

“Build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across.”…

That strategy could be dangerous. If Obama is perceived as too partisan, he’ll lose some of his personal popularity, which is the source of his political capital. But congressional Democrats actually fret about the opposite scenario — with several senior party aides telling POLITICO they fear Obama will fold on key issues, like entitlement cuts, if the GOP decides to bargain with him.

He won’t lose popularity, or at least not because of this. One of Obama’s few real rhetorical gifts is his knack for dumping on opponents stridently while not sounding strident. He’s always cultivated a cool-headed, above-the-fray, “adult in the room” image — it was key to his post-partisan shtick circa 2008 — and he does a solid job of maintaining it for the benefit of low-information voters who don’t follow politics closely day to day. There’ll be plenty of “we are one America” in this speech to cushion the “Republicans are destroying America” verbiage, and that’ll work just fine for casual watchers. Plus, if he throws some red meat to the left, he can count on some flattering post-speech coverage no matter how dull the proceedings get. There’s already buzz in political media about him taking on climate change tomorrow night. That’ll go nowhere in Congress, but luckily the press has had a revelation about the benefits of unilateral executive action since he took office.

Here’s Rand Paul previewing the tea-party rebuttal to O’s speech and addressing his perceived rivalry with Rubio. Exit question: Does Obama’s aggressiveness give Rubio more room for counter-aggression in the GOP response? Per Politico, “With Obama signaling a more confrontational approach, Rubio has apparently scrapped his first draft and settled on a tougher tack, according to former Bush administration operative Nicolle Wallace, appearing on ABC’s ‘This Week.’”

[Bratch]

If Nicholle Wallace has access to Mario Rubio's inner circle, I don't want him anywhere near the levers of power in the Republican party.

[skeeter]

I don’t care who gives the GOP response, as long as they start firing the h*ll back.

[albie]

I won’t be watching, I won’t be looking at “highlights” on youtube, I won’t acknowledge it even happened. I know everything I need to know about this less than human mass of tyranny and treachery. There’s nothing new to learn.

[beaversmom]

I agree with you albie!

[Pecos]

Will he use some of his time to justify his position as Executioner in Chief?

[dforest]

You can make that 2 of us. I will not watch this monster lie and ridicule the people. He is a demon and we already know what he will say.

[Diogenesis]

FLASHBACK: Ms. Wallace and her spouse PUT Obama in by
attacking Gov. Palin -- when the GOP team were ahead --
on the eve of Election 2008.

Late in October, The American Spectator's The Prowler revealed:
"Former Mitt Romney presidential campaign staffers…
have been involved in spreading anti-Palin spin to reporters, seeking to diminish her standing after the election.
'Sarah Palin is a lightweight, she won't be the first, not even the third, person people will think of when it comes to 2012,'
says one former Romney aide…
'The only serious candidate ready to challenge to lead the Republican Party is Mitt Romney.
"Some former Romney aides were behind the recent leaks to media, including CNN, that Governor Sarah Palin was a 'diva' and was going off message intentionally."

---

The Palmetto Scoop reported: "One of the first stories to hit the national airwaves was
the claim of a major internal strife between close McCain aides and the folks handling his running mate Sarah Palin."
"I’m told by very good sources that this was indeed the case and that a rift had developed, but it was between Palin’s people and the staffers brought on from the failed presidential campaign of former Gov. Mitt Romney, not McCain aides."
"The sources said nearly 80 percent of Romney’s former staff was absorbed by McCain and these individuals were responsible for what amounts to a premeditated, last-minute sabotage of Palin."
… aides loyal to Romney inside the McCain campaign, said The Scoop, reportedly saw
that Palin would be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2012 or 2016, which made her a threat to another presidential quest by Romney.

---

"These staffers are now out trying to finish her off ….hoping it would ingratiate themselves with Mitt Romney."

---

"Who's the Palin Leaker from the McCain Campaign?
National Review Online The publication of a Vanity Fair profile of Sarah Palin
appears to have opened old wounds in the McCain campaign.
... the source of the “Diva” leak was Nicolle Wallace’s husband."

---

"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"

"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"

"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"

"Romney Supporters Trashing Palin"

"Romney advisors sniping at Palin?"

---

[Williams]

Typical Obama speech: “Of course we need oil and gas ...(crickets) ....

BUT we’re not going to allow murderous thieving Big Oil to rape our children, despoil our land, and burn the Earth to a cinder, so we are going to insist on common sense reasonable restrictions for health, safety, economic justice, Global Warming, on and on (thunderous dem applause).”

IOW, no oil.

Next, “Of course we need a robust national defense.... BUT ....

[Doc Savage]

My Rebuttal Speech

"Tonight I am NOT speaking to 47% of Americans. You who comprise this group are, in addition to being hard core marxists, socialists, fascists, and anarchists, Democrat low information voters who have re-elected a communist muslim who fraudulently assumed the position of president of the United States in 2008. You are the union thugs, the people using food stamps to buy cigarettes and beer while your children starve. You are the shiftless, the eternal welfare recipients, the takers who have now broken the backs of we who support your decadence.

Tonight you have just heard a speech that could well have been given by Joseph Stalin, a communist dictator who killed tens of millions of his own people. You have chosen a fraud to run your country. His entire life has been a lie and a fabrication for the expressed goal of destroying the United States of America. You, the whiners, the complainers, the malingerers, the political elite are responsible for this destruction. You have stolen our country from the makers who built the greatest nation in the history of the world.

You are tonight being put on notice. We, the rightful owners of this country will NOT allow you, the filthy human excrement that you are, to take this country from us. There will be a price to pay, and WE do not intend to pay it. You have subverted and destroyed the Constitution, you have recklessly spent this country into financial oblivion, you have weakened our sovereignty and destroyed our national borders. But no more! You and this fraudulent tyrant you elected through your sheer stupidity and unbounded arrogance are now on notice. We will not give up our nation without a fight!

[Georgia Girl 2]

Me, me, me, me. Barry warming up for the STOTU.

[Williams]

Yeah, the problem is Romney. Enjoy the SOTU ....

[beaversmom]

Yes, you’re right! Prager did a good analysis of Obama’s Inaugural Address here:

The Obama Inaugural Address
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2983025/posts

Then slyfox has an interesting idea in post #7 about what Obama does with his speech...a sort of hypnosis:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2983025/posts#7

[jersey117]

FUBO! I won’t be watching. He’s not my president so I couldn’t care less what he has to say. I’m setting up for the Galt route anyway.

[albie]

I would only watch the “Republican response” if it was done by Dr. Benjamin Carson, Allen West or Sarah Palin.

[SueRae]

If they had any stones, the pubbies should get up and walk out, starting with Boehner (in full view of a camera) I’d pay money to see it. Sure would pour cold water on his aggressive speech, wouldn’t it?

[Williams]

TY for those links.

[beaversmom]

Not familiar with the doctor, but definitely on the other two. Or someone like Tom Sowell or Dennis Prager. Not a typical Republican politician type.

[Russ]

They should not get up and walk out. They should stay away in the first place. Why would any self-respecting conservative expose themselves to this fraud?

[Mouton]

Yeah, I’d love to see it. Frankly I even be happy if he just gave him the middle finger while he was speaking.

The ONLY chance of my watching this would be if someone told me the asteroid due to pass by on Friday had in fact been nudged to land on Pennsylvania Avenue on tuesday evening around 9PM EST.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”He won’t lose popularity, or at least not because of this. One of Obama’s few real rhetorical gifts is his knack for dumping on opponents stridently while not sounding strident. He’s always cultivated a cool-headed, above-the-fray, “adult in the room” image — it was key to his post-partisan shtick circa 2008 — and he does a solid job of maintaining it for the benefit of low-information voters who don’t follow politics closely day to day. There’ll be plenty of “we are one America” in this speech to cushion the “Republicans are destroying America” verbiage, and that’ll work just fine for casual watchers. Plus, if he throws some red meat to the left, he can count on some flattering post-speech coverage no matter how dull the proceedings get. There’s already buzz in political media about him taking on climate change tomorrow night. That’ll go nowhere in Congress, but luckily the press has had a revelation about the benefits of unilateral executive action since he took office.”

Democrats do way better at sticking together on delivering talking points than Republicans do.

Republicans talking points should be about making Obama sound unreasonable, claiming that Obama is creating each crisis, pointing out that he is failing to get resolution bills passed because of his weak leadership and his 'I must always get all the toys' ego, and that he is non-stop campaigning and vacationing instead of working.

Certainly on taxes that should be easy.

Have you noticed that while Hillary and Obama were filmed watching the attack on Bin Laden neither will admit being around when Bengazi was attacked? Obama was off campaigning at the time, as Hillary screeches : "What difference does it make....?", OH, that bitchy fat wrinkled Hillary is so adored by the masses.....I wonder who Bill is living with now, not that Jabba the Hutt.