(mis)Interpreting the State of the Union Address (Part VI)

The State of the Union given by President Oprama Weds. Jan. 27, 2010
What they said	What I heard
So let me start the discussion of government spending by setting the record straight. At the beginning of the last decade, America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion. By the time I took office, we had a one year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts and an expensive prescription drug program. On top of that, the effects of the recession put a $3 trillion hole in our budget. That was before I walked in the door.	Let me start talking 'bout gov'ment spending by blaming the Republicans right up front. At the beginning o' Jr's. reign, we had an impressive sounding budget surpuls. When I took office last year, we had a one year deficit of an even more impressive sounding amount 'n' we was telling anyone who'd listen that is was just going to keep getting worse if you didn't elect us to fix things. Let's just get one thing straight right here. Problems o' this nature 'n' magnitude don't happen overnight, no matter how hard we try 'n' get folks to think otherwise. So the budget surpluses under ex-President Slick may have actually been because o' Reagonomics finally kicking in. 'N' the staggering deficits under former President Jr. may just've been ol' Slick's chickens finally coming home to roost. But we ain't going to admit to the possibility o' either o' those. We's gong to give credit to 'n' lay blame on the ones who was in office at the time these things finally came to fruition. What I will say, though, is that the recession took another impressive chunk out o' the budget. Just don't pay no attention to the fact that it goes against basic math that the amount I just mentioned is actually three times larger than the amount fer last year's deficit that I mentioned earlier. Anyway, that's the way things were when I finally got to the oval office.
Now if we had taken office in ordinary times, I would have liked nothing more than to start bringing down the deficit. But we took office amid a crisis, and our efforts to prevent a second depression have added another $1 trillion to our national debt.	I'd love to tell you that the first thing I did was to start bringing down the deficit. But I didn't. In fact, I added another chunk o' change to that rascal. But we'll blame the Republicans fer my extravagant spending habits, too.
I am absolutely convinced that was the right thing to do. But families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions. The federal government should do the same. So tonight, I’m proposing specific steps to pay for the $1 trillion that it took to rescue the economy last year.	I ain't gong to accept no blame fer it. But folks've been having a rough time 'n' have had to make some tough choices. We in the gov'ment should have to do the same. So tonight, I'm going to tell you some specific steps we can take to pay fer my spending spree last year. 'N' take note o' that. I said "specific" steps, not the broad kind o' generalizations folks're used to hearing from politicians.
Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don’t. And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I will.	Starting next year, I'm ready to freeze gov'ment spending fer three years. I ain't going to mess with spending to keep our country secure, ner Medicare, ner Medicaid, ner Social Security, neither. But ever'thing else is fair game. I'm going to do things the way folks should be doing 'em at home: pay fer what you actually need, not fer what you just want. 'N' don't go thinking I'm afraid to whup out my big ol' veto pen to get' er done, 'cause I will.
We will continue to go through the budget line by line to eliminate programs that we can’t afford and don’t work. We’ve already identified $20 billion in savings for next year. To help working families, we will extend our middle-class tax cuts. But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, investment fund managers and those making over $250,000 a year. We just can’t afford it.	I'll continue going through the budget one line at a time to eliminate as many o' the Republicans' pet projects as I can. I've already identified a whole bunch fer next year. I'm also going to extend middle-class tax cuts. Again, I ain't going to do nothing to help lower-class families. I'm also going to use the deficit as an excuse to take away the tax cuts fer some o' the most hated groups in America: oil companies, investment fund managers, 'n' the rich. I ain't gong to impose no new taxes on those groups, even though it would make us a lot more money. Least, I won't impose none yet.
Now, even after paying for what we spent on my watch, we will still face the massive deficit we had when I took office. More importantly, the cost of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security will continue to skyrocket. That’s why I’ve called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. This can’t be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. Yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I will issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans. And when the vote comes tomorrow, the Senate should restore the pay-as-you-go law that was a big reason why we had record surpluses in the 1990s.	Now, even afger we get my tab paid off, we still got to pay Jr's. bills. Even more important than that, Medicare, Medicaid, 'n' Social Security'll continue to cost us more 'n' more since we ain't going to try 'n' do nothing to lower healthcare costs. That's why I want to create yet another do-nothing commission that sounds good on paper but won't actually accomplish nothing. To make sure o' that, I'm going to put both Republicans 'n' Democrats on it to make sure it stays deadlocked on ev'ry issue. I'll also tell you that it's based on an idea by Republican Judd Gregg 'n' Democrat Kent Conrad to make it sound like I'm giving 'em credit, but really so we'll all no who to take it out on when it don't work out. Yesterday, the Senate refused to let me create this commission. So I'm going to go behind their back 'n' use my power of executive order to create it. 'N' when the Senate votes tomorrow ('n' what it is they's voting on I don't rightly recollect, but they's voting on something, I'm sure.) they better restore the pay-as-you-go laws that we had under Slick.
I know that some in my own party will argue that we cannot address the deficit or freeze government spending when so many are still hurting. I agree, which is why this freeze will not take effect until next year, when the economy is stronger. But understand — if we do not take meaningful steps to rein in our debt, it could damage our markets, increase the cost of borrowing and jeopardize our recovery — all of which could have an even worse effect on our job growth and family incomes.	I know they's a lot o' my fellow Democrats who ain't going to be happy 'bout not being able to continue their tax-'n'-spend ways. Well, they ain't got to start worrying just yet 'cause I ain't freezing nothing 'til next year. That'll give us plenty o' time to try 'n' figger some way to get out o' that promise. But know this: I'm going to keep talking like this is a real threat 'cause we got to do something to try 'n' fix things. The big carrot I'm offering is that I'll back off on this if we see some real changes. The big stick I'm threating with is that I might just carry through on it if we don't.
From some on the right, I expect we’ll hear a different argument — that if we just make fewer investments in our people, extend tax cuts for wealthier Americans, eliminate more regulations and maintain the status quo on health care, our deficits will go away. The problem is, that’s what we did for eight years. That’s what helped lead us into this crisis. It’s what helped lead to these deficits. And we cannot do it again.	I 'spect a lot o' griping 'n' bad-mouthing from the other side. But they'd do that no matter what I say er do, so tough. I'm in charge now, 'n' we ain't going to keep doing things their way no more.
Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it’s time to try something new. Let’s invest in our people without leaving them a mountain of debt. Let’s meet our responsibility to the citizens who sent us here. Let’s try common sense.	Instead o' doing the same ol' nothing we been doing fer years in Washington, let's try to do something that'll actually help reg'lar folks fer a change, since that's what we're supposed to be here fer. Let's try using a little common sense fer once.
To do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now. We face a deficit of trust — deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years. To close that credibility gap we must take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly and to give our people the government they deserve.	It's time to face the fact that, even though folks keep voting fer us 'n' re-electing us year after year, they really don't like us all that much. So we should all get together 'n' work on getting folks to take out their anger 'n' frustration on the lobbyists.
That’s what I came to Washington to do. That’s why — for the first time in history — my administration posts our White House visitors online. And that’s why we’ve excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs or seats on federal boards and commissions.	I came to Washington to try 'n' give folks a more effective gov'ment, whether they deserve it er not. That's why I'm letting folks know who all comes through the front door o' the White House. That's also why I ain't letting 'em hire lobbyists fer policymaking jobs er seats on some boards 'n' commissions.
But we can’t stop there. It’s time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my administration or Congress. And it’s time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office. Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. Well, I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.	But we cain't let 'em off that easy. We need to make 'em tell us who all they've been trying to bribe 'n' influence. We also need to limit the amount of a bribe they can offer to candidates, 'specially now that I've already been elected 'n' it won't affect any o' my campaigns no more. Last week the Supreme Court really screwed things up by letting foreign interests try 'n' buy folks fer office. That ain't right. Only Americans should be allowed to buy American politicians. I'm even going to urge Congress to pass a bill that helps show the Supreme Court the errors o' their ways.