State of the Union

The State of the Union speech was the first formal campaign speech of this long and dreadful campaign season that inexplicably is tolerated by the nation for 18 months now. Some of it was predictable: The battlefield will be over taxes on 1% of the country (who, from all indications, agree with the increase), the indefinable "fairness" concept that seems to be related to earned income but probably will mean anything and everything, and the accusation that the current economy is actually the Republicans' fault.

It is perhaps unfair to hold government officials for failure in areas they don't understand and can not control but they are volunteering. And they do not ascribe to the wise advice to physicians, "First do no harm." But the effort to deflect responsibilities for failure and disappointment on the Republicans offends at least logic.

When Obama took power he, for two years, had the largest Democratic majorities in the Senate and House since Carter. Carter. Four decades. His plans and expectations, as stated in a memo from Larry Summer to Obama in December 2008, was recently published in The New Yorker and includes the economic stimulus, bailing out the auto industry, turning housing around, and rescuing the financial industry. All of the plans became law. They just did not work. It was not that they were blocked by the Republican minority; the Republicans were powerless. The plans simply did not work. Additional laws were also passed: ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank, cash for clunkers, the housing tax credit, and much more. The only Obama priority that didn't pass was cap-and-trade, which was killed by Senate Democrats.

Whether or not it is sensible to have a presidential campaign based on the tax rates of 1% of the country and an arcane "fairness' concept is certainly debatable. But whether or not Obama and his party are responsible for the legislation and the lack thereof is not.