When the Prez first took the stage, I thought I was at a pep-rally. He seemed forced and insincere...which he doesn’t do well...although there were glimmers of hope in the speech, most of it was vague and completely disingenuous. Hints at using exec. powers, not only to raise min. wage requirements for new fed. contracts, but also to expand ‘opportunity’ still make me wonder if he tends to use exec. powers to fast-track TPP.

Jeremy, I could not have said it better myself. Jeremy Scahill on The De-clawed, toothless tiger Obama, State of the Union;

“...Does the average American benefit from the continuation of these wars? Who benefits...corporations...war corporations...John Kerry...is giving these awards for ‘corporate excellence’ around the world. He’s giving them to Citibank, to Apache, to Boeing, to Coca-Cola, so you have this neoliberal economic agenda which is...the hidden hand...of the US Empire, and then you have this iron fist of US militarism that is being sold to the American Public and increasingly to the world as ‘National Security‘ policy...When corporations control our political precess through a legalized form of corruption...What does that say about the state of our democracy? In a way there has already been a coup in this country, but it’s been a silent coup...It reminds me of that famous line from the movie ‘The Usual Suspects’, at the end of it Kevin Spacey’s character says, ‘The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.’ In many ways a coup has happened and the brilliance of it is that it’s not sparking major uprisings because we’ve been pacified and taught to just accept this is how things work. We have 2 parties in this country... ...corporations are in control and these wars are fought in our name, but without our consent. “ democracynow.org

Actually, I think there have been major uprisings...but the media doesn’t cover them. Even well meaning media never finds out about them to cover them because they are being squashed at the local level. Which is why again, I’ll say, wanna fix the gubmint? Gotta fix the media first.

I was listening to your show earlier re: the upside down stars on the flag. I just caught a clip of the video again. I may be wrong, but when a service member dies, the flag is folded into a triangle and given to the family. Many then encase the flag in a frame to protect it. If you look carefully, not all the stars point directly down.

The SOU speech was just what I expected it to be. I agree with all Thom's points, but I also believe the President should have mentioned the Citizens United decision directly to the Justices sitting in front of him. He should have made the repeal of this decision paramount to his goals for 2014, by supporting an amendment to confirm what a living and breathing person really is and what it is not. Doing so would separate him from the control of plutocrats and send a message that he is no longer part of the problem of maintaining the inequality within our nation. By not even mentioning the role the Supreme Court has played in turning our elections over to plutocrats and oligarchs, he has shown that he is not going to be part of the solution, but continue to be part of the problem. Nothing is going to change, until the American people educate themselves in the history, economics, politics and the philosophy of our Republic. Until enough individual time the time to learn the facts, they will continue to face the problems of our governments with their eyes tightly closed.

I agree with your comments, but I would like to ask a question. While reading the book "The Bully Pulpit", by Doris Goodwin, I read an article by Lincoln Stephens written for McClure's Magazine about the corruption of state politics in Missouri. In the article the corruption of politics was labeled as treason because the governing of the state subverted the will of the people and violated the state constitution. Do you believe that such a strong word of condemnation should be used today to describe the corruption of our governments?

If corporations ship jobs overseas, those corporations should be made to pay the equivalent taxes that the outsourced employees WOULD have paid, until those employees are re-employed at a salary equivalent to what they were on when they were retrenched. If they never again achieve the level of income that they had when they were retrenched, then the employer who outsourced their jobs overseas would continue to be responsible for the difference in taxes paid by those employees.

In one stroke that would recoup the lost taxation income to the government and act as a disincentive for companies to ship jobs overseas, all without raising tax rates on the corporations. The companies that outsource would still benefit from paying the slave wages that are the going rates in the third world, but they would still be responsible to pick up the loss of taxation revenue to the US government. Our country would benefit from still having enough funds to cover infrastructure and services costs.

Woulld this measure be an administrative burden on corporations? Well, yes, but the tax system is already so complicated that they already pay accountants and auditors to manage their taxes who could manage this.

Although I did not listen to the SOTUA, from what I've been hearing about it, I would say the Prez "toed the party line". The question is "which party?"

I avoid listening to long winded prevarications, so I almost never listen to political speeches.

Some guy called Thom at the end of today's show and wanted a pity party for business owners in regard to the proposed increase in minimum wage. I would have simply redirected him to a talk show in Australia where the minimum wage is over $16. I'm pretty sure the small business owners over there haven't packed up their toys and gone home. They still make plenty off the backs of their fellow man.

A good politician gave a very good video on our problems in this country. Ignored by the media and president as usual.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lh7LBtrBq1g#t=250

Amen Aliceinwonderland:

Also consumers, workers need liviable wages--extra money left over after bills--to keep small business afloat--or there will be NO money/profit for them--why don't they understand that?

My uncle had a small, very successful, heating AC business. He took care of his customers and his employees and their families. (He has since retired, but his employees are still loyal to him and come to his aid when he needs help.) He provided well for his family, but they did not live "high-on-the-hog." They lived in a modest home, did not go on fancy vacations every year, need new vehicles every year, fancy worthless toys...I think you get the picture,

He saw his business as a way to MAKE A LIVING not as a get rich quick scheme and a way to USE others to pay for a grander lifestyle. I wish that there were more businesspeople like him. The world and our economy would be in a better place.

Your shadow government in action.

Good luck.

Ozzy scott -- The dems can even get a bill passed to stop giving tax incentives to ship jobs overseas. It was filibustered in the senate by every repug and no dem. It seems that tariffs have always worked. Why not use tariffs? Actually, tariffs are now being applied but they are in the 2%. We need to change them back to the values they have been for 200 years until raygun came along -- typically, they were around 20%.

Elioflight -- Most business people are like your uncle. The problem is that private equity firms like Bain capital just buy them out.