The Immediate Responses to SOTU

The progressive blogs complained that President Obama made a Republican speech tonight echoing the lingo of business. Many commentators said that he spoke in soundbites that were taken from corporate ads. Others complained that he neglected to talk about climate change, while LBJ once did. It's so interesting to see progressives embraced LBJ now when we all remember how we became clean for Gene and drove him out of office over Vietnam. Rachel Maddow was disappointed that Obama didn't mention gun control when the public would have sided with him. Chris Matthews was right, I think, in saying the White House wanted a jobs headline out of the speech and didn't want to risk being overshadowed by a gun control headline.

Matthews also was very good in pointing out that this was the speech Bill Clinton had wanted to give in 1994 but was warned off by Alan Greenspan, who told him that if he didn't cut the deficit he couldn't expect help from the Fed. Matthews pointed out that with interest rates effectively zero Obama had latitude to discuss infrastructure spending and the like.

Ed Schultz wondered why you needed to invoke Sputnik to generate support for rehabilitating the infrastructure, which is crumbling around us. Other bloggers said that the decline of the Middle Class was absent from the speech and that he didn't talk about those who have been abandoned by the American Dream.

Robert Kuttner complained about triangulation and how the guy at the apex of trainagulation makes out but the party loses. I believe Howard Dean got it right that he was surprised by how strong the speech was and how many things progressives supported were strongly portrayed in the speech. He was pleased with the speech and delighted that President Obama said that tax cuts for millionaires have to end if we are to tackle the deficit. What also came across was that President Obama strongly defended Social Security contrary to expectations.

Rachel Maddow brought up the murders of 14 policemen and talked about how Michael Bloomberg was taking the lead on gun control. The Southern Poverty group came out today with revelations that there has been found a white supremacist manual on waging war against police. Chris Matthews said that President Obama was planning a separate speech on gun control and that there was a growing sense that somethng had to be done.

One progressive blogger, who had complained about the Republican nature of the speech and its Reaganesque quality, noted that Obama should always have two republicans follow him because he always comes off much better. Other complained that the delivery was flat and the language common to many other speeches of Obama's, Howard Dean felt it was one of his finer speeches.

The media believed that his Reaganesque tone was meant to answer critics who claim he denied American socialism and didn't understand the American Creed. They thought the speech gave a sense of optimism and they were right in saying it would lay down the language used in the re-election campaign, which begings tomorrow in Wisconsin. More fact-check types believed that Obama's reiteration of many of his goals such as doubling our exports by 2014 is heavily dependent on the rest of the world. While Obama said we make our future a few commentators said that America is more susceptible to how other countries act whether it is with currency exchange or policies.

Drudge pointedly led with Arizona's plan to pass a requirement for the 2012 presidential election where candidates must proved their qualifications and that Barack Obama would have to submit his birth certificate. He also ran a piece suggesting that Obama never mentioned any budget cuts. Of course, he did with almost $80 billion in defense and savings with a five-year freeze on discretionary spending and government salaries but you would actually have to know economics to get it.

Republican congressmen tweeted that Obama was still a socialist, suggesting how difficult the next two years will be. Michelle Bachmann did have her teleprompter set up properly so she did ,in the words of Chris Matthews, look like she came from another planet. CNN stumbled over itself to explain why she should get any coverage. The Tea Party people themselves denounced her because no one can oficially talk on their behalf. Paul Ryan went conservative depression on us saying the day of reckoning is upon us and that our children's future are jeopardized by Obama's spending.

Roughly 75% of the people on the MSNBC poll said that Obama got the challenges to the United States right and what we need to do for the future. Only 20% said no.

I think the American Creed language helps pull independents back to Obama and neutralizes the conservative assault on him. Hearing it, I'm not so sure he had the right lift. Keith Ellison liked Obama's adlib that Muslims were also part of the American family.

While Obama was conciliatory and reached out to those across the isle, I did not believe he gave an inch on the issues he campiagned on and fought for the last two years. Yes, he has to adjust to the new reality. But if this is triangulation, it's certainly different from Clinton. He was forceful about the Dream Act and immigration reform. While he wasn't explicit about climate change, he repeatedly talked about initiatives for a clean energy future. He was quite bold and will be attacked for declaring oil the energy of the past and asking that the billions in tax breaks for the oil companies be abolished. I guess he doesn't like the Koch Brothers. His call for further investment in our infrastructure was direct and runs right in the face of opposition by the Republicans on high-speed rail, for instance. I have always had a problem with his administration's view on educational reform but that was out there as directly as he ever said it. What you saw was Barack Obama. Somehow progressives would love for him to act like FDR, but as I've frequently noted his hand is much weaker and the American political culture is not supportive of a full-scale progressive change.

He needed to reassure Americans about their place in the world. President Obama was keen about correcting the widespread public opinion that China was the lead economy in the world. Nearly 45% of Americans believe that. And his speech meant to neutralize that belief since we are our economy is three times larger than theirs. Undoubtedly, in the week ahead--that's all the media attention it will get--there will be many conflicting views of the speech.

What I took away after hearing the Republican responses was that President Obama still controls the language of debate in this country. That's critical if we are to move forward.