the Clarion - Brevard College

Jan 21, 2015 - right corner because Darius Moose was double teamed, which left Wallace open beyond the arc. This win was monumental, very similar to the.
867KB Sizes 5 Downloads 196 Views
The

Clarion

Volume 80, Issue 16

www.brevard.edu/clarion

Web Edition

SERVING BREVARD COLLEGE SINCE 1935

Follow us on Twitter @ BCclarion

January 21, 2015

Prose and Con(gress)

Free at last: President Obama delivers State of the Union Address By Sam Blakley Editor in Chief

As Editor in Chief, I will be introducing and authoring a new weekly column titled “Prose and Con[gress],” as a part of a “Persuasion and Political Reporting” class I am taking. I will be discussing and commenting on current and political news. Each week will be a new topic so look out for “P&C” in the next couple months. President Obama delivered his 2015 State of the Union Address last night. The State of the Union Address is a practice established in the Constitution and has become a tradition over the years. Every president does at least two or three, so why would the current state be that different from last years? What makes this address different? Well, the answer is simple. After a certain point in a Presidential term’s lifespan, the rest of government stops being concerned with that they do. What can a president with only two years left do, much less one that can’t ever run for President again? Obama has entered what the political world refers to as lame duck, or seen to have less influence with other politicians because of his short time left in office. Usually, during times of lame duck, the president seems to back up or will lose enthusiasm; well not this time. Obama decided to throw caution to the wind. He puffed his chest, stuck his finger to the sky and milked the opportunity for all it was worth, much to the disdain of John Boehner, Speaker of the House. Now, the White House this year made the entire speech available to the public before it was given, so readers can, “follow along with the speech as [they] watch in real time”. So going into the speech I knew what the main talking points would be. Not to mention the president has been traveling across the country for two weeks already to announce some of his proposals, but I digress. His big points were: Help the middle class by having a capitol gains tax on the very wealthy Make college affordable through community college

President Obama delivering his 2015 State of the Union Address

Reserve the right to unilaterally combat terrorism Easing the embargo against Cuba Encouraging the republican party to not try and kill everything (all of his work), because he would veto these attempts These are all fine and dandy, I particularly care for the idea of cheaper education, but when the speech was over and various groups gave their responses such as the republican party (GOP), issued by Senator Jani Ernst R-IA, or the Tea Party, given by Representative Curt Clawson R-FL, you wouldn’t know the president spoke at all. “Rather than respond to a speech, I’d like to talk about your priorities.” said Ernst. “I’d like to have a conversation about the new Republican Congress you just elected.” Clawson introduced his speech with a similar caveat: “I’m not here to pick apart his ideas one by one – but rather to offer a very different vision for our nation.” Each of these two, similar to Obama, presented their plan for the Union over the next couple years. But, neither of them had much to say about Obama’s speech. Responses are a fairly recent tradition for the State of the Union, only being introduced in the late ‘60s. Since this time, the “response” from the opposing party has become expected. However, the current standing of the country makes an actual opposing speech difficult on the

Republicans. Things are great, better than they have been years With Obama’s approval rate at 46 percent and there being nothing but good things to say about the country, it is kind of difficult to criticize. It’s hard to shoot the messenger with good news. So instead of criticizing what he said, they ignored him. As the New York Times so elegantly puts it: