Why does the President of the United States give a State of the Union address? It seems like a totally pointless exercise to me, where the tradition of standing to applause is kept with no real regard as to whether the President is being truthful or in fact just spouting a crock of shit.
The State of the Yawnion is just an excuse for a jolly ol’ political ‘knees-up’ really isn’t it? I mean if the President was really going to talk about the State of the Union wouldn’t he also talk about the fact that the economy is struggling, “the war on turrr” has turned to shit, and the cost of that war in financial terms alone in spiraling out of control. Wouldn’t he have to mention something about the republicans getting whooped in the midterms?
Oh sure, we’ll hear all the good stuff (though I’m struggling to think what that might be), but I’m just thinking that when the President is obviously such a ‘lame duck’ and the union is in the trouble it is, I would have thought the President might just as well throw his arms up in the air and say “ya know what, things are pretty fucked up right now.”
It’s too much to ask of course, but wouldn’t it be cool if Mr Bush actually stood up and told the truth, the real state of the union. Would America get behind an honest leader I wonder? If he admitted mistakes and failings would that be more effective than simply reeling off a bunch of punchy sound-bytes that require a standing ovation every 36 seconds?
When YouTube is tomorrow full of the Presidents gaffs and muddlement over the English language, will anyone stop to think how sad it is that the buzz isn’t one of admiration of how the President stood up and told the truth? Surely an honest State of the Union speech now would be one that history remembers.
“My fellow Americans. Good news! Everything is fine in the Union today. Trust me, this time I’m telling the truth. We’re winning the war on turrr, the war in Iraq, and the war on drugs. We’re not leaving a child behind. We’re saving babies. We’re doing out bit to save the ecosystem and those fluffy polar bears. We’re breaking our addiction to foreign oil. It’s all great and y’all should be proud to be an American.”
By next week no one will remember or even care what Mr Bush said in his annual dance in front of the gathered clappers. But for now it’s show-time baby, nothing more, nothing less. So everyone, one more time lets rise to our feet and have a round of applause.
—
Full transcript of 2007 SOTU
President relents to new reality
Flat SOTU address still Earns requisite applause
Bush Urges Congress to Embrace Iraq Policy
Bush’s SOTU: Nixon Would Have Been Proud
Lame duck soup
The silliest speech in the union
Official 2007 SOTU Ovation Stats
[Video] Jon Stewart’s State of the Union preview
[Video] State of the Union cartoon
Wrote the following comment on Jan 24, 2007 at 3:45 pm
yeah. i agree. i didn’t even watch it the other night because a. i had something better to do (even if it was only studying) and b. i knew what he was going to say, because it’s what he always says.
i like the cartoons.
Wrote the following comment on Jan 24, 2007 at 5:51 pm
I didn’t even watch the State of the Union speech last night. I used to with previous Presidents, but since everything Bush says is pretty much a lie or reality as he sees it, there’s no point in watching.
Wrote the following comment on Jan 24, 2007 at 6:17 pm
All I can say is thank God the CW network chose not to run it – I actually had something else to watch!!
Wrote the following comment on Jan 24, 2007 at 6:21 pm
There should be an offense of bringing the presidency in to disrepute
Wrote the following comment on Jan 24, 2007 at 11:39 pm
Simon – I’ll be in London Feb.5-8. Any chance we’ll cross paths, let me know. I missed you at Rudz here in Houston. So if I can buy you a drink over there, I will do so.
Wrote the following comment on Jan 25, 2007 at 12:09 am
I vote Crock o’ Shit.
Wrote the following comment on Jan 26, 2007 at 4:53 pm
I read that more people watched what I consider to be the worst show on television (American Idol) than the SOTU. I watched about 15 seconds of the SOTU before I gave up. He says all the same things each time but somehow it’s worse each time. Funny that the more Americans start to hate/dislike/loathe the guy, the more he does what they hate. You’d think he’d want to be remembered as something other than an evil asshat. But I guess that would involve some actual thinking on his part, which we all know he is practically incapable of doing.
Wrote the following comment on Jan 26, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Mr. Jones,
In answer to your query:
Why a “State of the Union Address?”
It is a constitutional requirement.
Article II, Section 3 of the United States Constitution:
[The President] shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient”
Tradition has made it an annual January affair. What he says, and how he says it, is up to the Prez.
Wrote the following comment on Jan 27, 2007 at 12:42 pm
Tradition. It’s a show. On one channel you could watch American Idol, on the other you could watch American Idiot. Now to be sure I am not for the merest moment suggesting that anyone else would do better at the SOTU. It’s just a performance after all. You could say pretty much anthing and the audience will clap.
It’s probably a nice night out though. I imagine there must be some parties after? Though in truth, CNN, the BBC, ABC, FOX, NPR, MSNBC, and all of the other press outlets keep us very well posted on the tru state of the union.
Wrote the following comment on Jan 27, 2007 at 7:13 pm
SOTU – Absolutely a piece of American political theatre.
I’ve never watched ‘American Idol’ – the equivalent of chainsaw art.
But in future, please, please refrain from using the words, “truth” and “FOX” in the same sentence. You risk your keyboard exploding.
Wrote the following comment on Jan 28, 2007 at 12:43 am
LOL! You know what Laurence, I considered not putting Fox in the list at all! :-)
Wrote the following comment on Feb 12, 2007 at 2:19 am
What exactly do you have against the United States?
Wrote the following comment on Feb 12, 2007 at 3:15 am
Micheal, you’ve read one post and from that you have managed to conclude that I have something against the United States. You’re conclusion however is as far from the truth as say America is from Iraq ;-)
My advise to you sir is to stick around, read a few more posts and then make an opinion in a few weeks. This post would be a good one for you to start with. There are many others like it, but how about you start there and get back to me ;-)
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2007 at 3:51 am
I have read your posts and think you harbor some sort of hate for the U.S. That there is some sort of gigantic conspiracy to ‘take over the world’ or something.
If anything, the fact that the we are doing such a poor job at ‘occupation’ should invalidate any such imperialist claims against the US.
The US military is built to destroy shit and kill people. Period.
We don’t do occupation… That is typically a European strong suit…
Wrote the following comment on Feb 16, 2007 at 4:09 am
“The US military is built to destroy shit and kill people. Period.” – Nice.
You know Mike, it pisses me off when people come along and accuse me of hating the United States. I am constantly being called an “American” over here by people who know me and know how much time (and money) I choose to spend in your country.
After Katrina I booked 2 flights to Houston Texas and volunteered to drop everything and help do whatever was needed. One flight was due to leave in a matter of hours, the other a couple of days. As it was my offer was kindly put on ice until April the next year when I flew, at my own considerable expense, to Waveland Mississippi to help clean up.
While there my heart sank and I got angry at the fact that a country that spends $200 million dollars a day fighting a war on the other side of the world can leave it’s own people in such a fucking awful mess! – But unlike a lot of people in the United State Michael, I was there shoveling shit, building stuff, and getting my hands dirty to help the people of your country that you and others seem so keen to accuse me of hating!
I am critical of a nation that behaves in a the manner in which the Bush presidency has had it behave. If criticism is to be categorized as hatred then those who criticize me have lost sight of the liberty and freedoms they are so willing to export to countries around the world who never asked for it.
Keep reading Michael.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 18, 2007 at 8:31 pm
“export to countries around the world who never asked for it”
Wow… that is profound… Spoken like a true barbarian…
What ever happened to speaking up for those that can’t speak up for themselves?
Let me guess, you probably believe the ‘polls’ that claimed 100% support for Saddam?
Wrote the following comment on Feb 18, 2007 at 8:36 pm
Michael, if the freedom of the people of Iraq was the true reason for occupying their country in the first place then maybe you would have a point. But as it wasn’t I can’t see what you are wittering on about.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 18, 2007 at 9:53 pm
“occupying their country”
Why do you hang on the term ‘occupy’ like it is the second coming of Christ himself.
The Germans occupied France.
The Germans occupied Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Belgium, and The Netherlands.
Let me ask you a question…
Is Northern Ireland really separate from Ireland? I mean, they are made up of the same people (Irish). Yet, the UK manages to ‘occupy’ Northern Ireland.
I know Europe knows ‘occupation’ and ‘colonialism’ best, but please. Spare me your self-righteous bullshit.
Didn’t you and France try to invade Egypt just not too long ago?
Isn’t the whole Pakistan, India, Kashmir shit your fault? Vietnam, Algiers, Cote de’ Ivory?
Has Europe finished paying restitution for almost 500 years of colonialism?
An old saying: “remove the plank from your own eye before removing the spec form your neighbors”.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 18, 2007 at 11:08 pm
Michael, while you are most welcome to come here and comment as much as you wish I am under no obligation to have you come here and insult me. Either conduct yourself with some decorum or take leave of this site and go troll somewhere else. I have neither the time not the inclination to bicker with someone who stoops to personal insults.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 19, 2007 at 12:57 am
I’m not quite sure where the personal insult has occured, but when I said ‘you’ I meant the UK. And I realize that you had nothing to do with the events I mentioned.
Other than that, I’m not sure how I insulted you.
I am not trolling, I’m simply responding to disparaging comments about my country and it’s duly elected leader.
However, I do notice how you neatly sidestep anything that has to do with European self-interest as well.
Wrote the following comment on Feb 19, 2007 at 1:15 am
It was the “your self-righteous bullshit” comment I disliked Michael.
I am not by any stretch of the imagination holding the UK or Europe up to be blameless and never have I even eluded to this. However I do not believe the United States is conducting itself in a manner fitting a country that constantly harps on about freedom, liberty and the such. But I must remind you that in me the people of the United States have a friend. In fact you will have, I’m quite sure, seen my many posts made from and about America and how much I enjoy spending much of my time there.
Do not misunderstand my commentary as hatred. Though we clearly see things differently you should know that this blogger is no enemy of the State. Far from it my friend.
As for Northern Ireland, I would suggest you call someone from Northern Ireland “Irish” and see how they react. It was a mistake I will not make again. Are we an occupying force over there, well in many ways I would say we were. But to compare the two is to miss the point of what I am criticizing about the United States presence in Iraq. If human rights and freedom was so much of a big concern to Bush then how come other more pressing countries didn’t find themselves awash with the Star and Stripes long before Iraq?
America (and it’s allies) are in Iraq primarily because of the financial interest of the black gold Iraq seems to have an abundance of. This, like most modern wars if not all wars, was never about freedom and liberty, and frankly I would have more respect for your President if he would just be honest about that instead of talking about it as if it is some noble cause that he was morally bound to fight.
And with that Michael I’m going to leave this conversation. Stick around though my friend. But remember, I’m an Englishman and as such I like to communicate as a gentleman. Neither of us need lower our exchanges to that of some unsightly bar brawl, to do so would simply would not be cricket ;-)