Not the State of the Union address

I understand that the rule is that it can't be the SOTU, but it makes no sense to me: Obama came out and reported on the sorry state of the union, and gave some ideas as to how to improve it. He was good, he was composed, he was lyrical, and he sold his ideas. To judge by the audience monitor lines on the tube, he sold to both sides of the political divide across the country.

Jindal, on the other hand, seemed a poor choice of respondant. And he flat-lined at neutral among democrats. He rambled on about how during Katrina he encouraged a sheriff to ignore regulations, and took that as a message that government's role is subordinate to everything else. Somehow, I think that the perfect response to him would be a short address:
"Yes, Governor Jindal, government failed New Orleans before, during, and after Katrina. But that is not an argument against government, it is an argument against giving over government to those who do not believe it can be effective for good!"

I'm left hopeful by Obama's message tonight, but fearful by the Republican response.

Yours, thinking about mixed blessing,
N.