<-It Makes Me So Angry . . . . (Updated) |Main|Concerning Cold and Offices->

The State of the Union

January 28, 2008 9:31 PM

generally don't watch the State of the Union address, mostly because it's boring and dumb. It's not that I don't think politics and policy are interesting, it's that I think that the State of the Union, especially in the hands of untalented orators, is an extremely tedious exercise. The idea of our country's chief executive going to the headquarters of the Congress--the only branch of our government that is elected directly by the people--and telling them what's up is a very good, profound idea. But presidents tend to use the State of the Union not as a platform to inspire and lead--and certainly not to inform--but rather as forum from which they can repeat their tired ideas and criticisms. And what's perhaps worse than the uninspired speeches and the terrible delivery is the fact that everyone in the fucking room feels the need to stand up and clap every time the President stops to take a breathe. I understand showing respect, but I think it's pretty pathetic to give a man thirty-seven standing ovations in a speech that's less than an hour long. It's pathetic that members of the opposition party sit in their chairs and clap even when the President says something that is abhorrent to their beliefs but then think that they're making a statement when they refuse to clap once. The whole thing is both too political and not political enough or, more accurately, it's political in a very stupid way (it's all about posturing and scripted, planned--but quiet and respectful--dissent) and stupid in a very political way (nothing new or unexpected happens, and the whole thing is filtered through pollsters and pundits).

Still, I caught the latter half of tonight's speech. And it was pretty much what I expected.

First of all, President Bush is an unbelievably bad speaker. Seriously. While I understand that even JFK would have a hard time making that speech interesting, the President failed in so many different ways. His delivery was flat to say the least. The man has no passion or, at the very least, is utterly incapable of expressing that passion. His tone was exactly the same whether he was berating the Democrats for not protecting communications companies from lawsuits, thanking our troops for their service, or reminding us that our country is about "we the people." And, by the way, what the hell kind of an end was that? He starts waxing philosophical and then just stopped, almost as if he was thankful that the whole thing was over. Pathetic.

Also pathetic were several of the mistakes I heard the President make. First, I swear he called Iran "Qu'ran." I've watched it over a few times on the DVR and he definitely said "Qu'ran." That's not exactly a good mistake to make. Second, he said "Zimbawe" rather than "Zimbabwe." Also not a good mistake--in your eighth year as leader of the free world, you'd think you could get some basic country names right.

The content, of course, was just sad. Too ridiculous for me to even get into.

Second, the gallery was pathetic. I understand that the Republicans wanted to show support for their president, but hooping and hollering about shielding phone companies? Really? Come on, guys.

Nancy Pelosi was the worst, though. Aside from looking bored out of her mind, she seemed completely out of place. She kept looking around when the President would pause to see whether the people on her side of the aisle were going to stand. Then she'd decide whether to stand. Isn't the Speaker supposed to be the leader rather than, you know, not? And what the hell is she--or any Democrat, for that matter--doing standing when the President was talking about continuing the war, "winning" in Iraq, and not bringing the troops home right away? Weren't they opposed to that? But now we're standing? Ok, cool.

The gallery and their perfunctory ovations are perhaps the most infuriating things about the speech to me. If I were president, I'd tell them all to shut the fuck up so I could get on with the speech.

Third, Kathleen Sebelius was terrible. I didn't know much about her before Tim Russert's introduction, and I was pretty excited about her after he spoke so highly of her. But, no, it turns out that she's the only public speaker in America that is more lifeless and flat than George W. Bush. Her comments were uninspired and uninspiring. And she's a liar: she starts off by saying that she's not going to deliver a Democratic message but rather an American message. Then she talks about how awesome the Democrats are while implying--though never saying--that the Republicans are holding up progress. If she wanted to give a completely pro-Democrat speech, she should have and that was her right. But she shouldn't have tried to tell me that's not what it was.

Judged entirely by this speech, it appears that the Union is pretty much completely out of new ideas. It also seems that our government is operating at about the same level as a middle-school debate competition. I half expected someone in a furry mascot costume to start running around the chamber.


Leave a comment