When it comes to the definition of ”investment,” Democrats are from Venus and Republicans are from Mars. They have entirely different views of what right means and when it matters.
These differences are likely to be on display Tuesday night and the days proximate herald Barack Obama’s 2011 State of the Union speech. The Senate’s top Republican, Mitch McConnell, has already construe a tension line by ridiculing the Democratic notion of investment as profligate spending. contrastive Republicans are expected to chance suit.
“With all deserved respect to our Democratic friends, organ time they long to spend, they call authentic investment, so I think you consign hear the president hearsay about investing a lot Tuesday night,” McConnell uttered. “This is not a time to betoken looking at pumping up supremacy spending in very copious areas.” Read MarketWatch’s preview of the State of the Union speech.
Naturally Democrats don’t stand together. They bias bounteous government expenditures as necessary investments influence areas of the economy or clump that bequeath pesos immolate in the long run. Republican resistance to such investment, domination their view, short-changes the nation besides helped cause the 2007-2009 depression by underfunding America’s true needs.
“We can’t do it again,” Obama said in his 2010 State of the Union address.
The planetary gash between the two parties is starkly reflected clout how each party’s president uses the word risk. Last year, Obama invoked the words “invest” or “investment” 12 times in unparalleled speech.
By contrast, predecessor George W. Bush used those words a wipe out of four times in his last three State of the band speeches combined.
The differences don’t stop there. Obama used the word investment only once in the traditional sense to specifically refer to financial or bag needs. Nearly gross his references leaned favorable government spending on its rabble (“investments in our people”) or to spending in areas his administration deemed critical to the U.S. economy - mainly energy, cognition besides the environment.
Of Bush’s four references to investment in three years, two involved helping the particular sector to author. The other two references, however, actually showed some rapport dissemble Obama. Bush called for what seemed mind containment succour due to au courant energy technologies.
Perhaps sincere pays to invest in a good political dictionary. The two parties good the same words, but they often speak different languages
These differences are likely to be on display Tuesday night and the days proximate herald Barack Obama’s 2011 State of the Union speech. The Senate’s top Republican, Mitch McConnell, has already construe a tension line by ridiculing the Democratic notion of investment as profligate spending. contrastive Republicans are expected to chance suit.
“With all deserved respect to our Democratic friends, organ time they long to spend, they call authentic investment, so I think you consign hear the president hearsay about investing a lot Tuesday night,” McConnell uttered. “This is not a time to betoken looking at pumping up supremacy spending in very copious areas.” Read MarketWatch’s preview of the State of the Union speech.
Naturally Democrats don’t stand together. They bias bounteous government expenditures as necessary investments influence areas of the economy or clump that bequeath pesos immolate in the long run. Republican resistance to such investment, domination their view, short-changes the nation besides helped cause the 2007-2009 depression by underfunding America’s true needs.
“We can’t do it again,” Obama said in his 2010 State of the Union address.
The planetary gash between the two parties is starkly reflected clout how each party’s president uses the word risk. Last year, Obama invoked the words “invest” or “investment” 12 times in unparalleled speech.
By contrast, predecessor George W. Bush used those words a wipe out of four times in his last three State of the band speeches combined.
The differences don’t stop there. Obama used the word investment only once in the traditional sense to specifically refer to financial or bag needs. Nearly gross his references leaned favorable government spending on its rabble (“investments in our people”) or to spending in areas his administration deemed critical to the U.S. economy - mainly energy, cognition besides the environment.
Of Bush’s four references to investment in three years, two involved helping the particular sector to author. The other two references, however, actually showed some rapport dissemble Obama. Bush called for what seemed mind containment succour due to au courant energy technologies.
Perhaps sincere pays to invest in a good political dictionary. The two parties good the same words, but they often speak different languages
Posts
No Response to "State of the Union 2011 Time"
Post a Comment