State of the Union Observations

"Politics, n. Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles." ~ Ambrose Bierce

I suppose I should comment on President Bush's State of the Union address last night since that is the prevailing story of the day, although I didn't see much in it that was remarkable or unexpected.

Using computer terms, (or "Geek speak" as an instructor of mine used to say) one could have pretty much copied and pasted almost any one of his speeches from the previous four years into the same window, and the results would have been much the same.

I did watch the speech with interest, however, because I had heard that Cindy Sheehan had been given a pass to sit in the gallery. I was absolutely positive that she would attempt a dispruption.

My feeling about that beforehand, was that if she did what I would expect her to do, it would become something of a lose/lose situation for the President, and I wondered how he would handle that. I expected her to stand up and start shouting at the President at the precise moment when he introduced the family of a fallen soldier. And yes, I expected him to make such an introduction, which he did.

It was only afterwards that I dicovered why she didn't disrupt the speech.

She had been arrested and removed before the speech started. Not because she was being disruptful, but because Sheehan had worn a T-shirt with an anti-war slogan to the speech and covered it up until she took her seat. Police warned her that such displays were not allowed, but she did not respond, the spokeswoman said.

Whatever. Simply wearing a T-shirt, with a message or not, during such an important event is a breech of decorum and protocol anyway. Wearing the anti-war message on it was the violation, though. It's only a misdemeanor, but it solved the problem without too much attention being focused on her.

Actually, that was the only scenario I hadn't envisioned. I expected a visible confrontation of some type right smack dab in the middle of the speech, and I wondered how it would be handled. If the President responded to her outburst, he would have lost, in the eyes of the majority of the press, and if he had allowed security to escort her out, he would have also lost. I didn't see a favorable outcome either way. As I said, a lose/lose situation. So I am glad it happened the way it did.

No doubt the Liberals will call what security did gestapo tactics and blame the whole thing on Bush anyway.

One other thing, which I thought was deplorable, but not altogether unexpected, was the shameful exhibition of several members of the Democrats when Bush made his statement concerning how the Congress blocked his proposals on social security reform.

The camera put Hillary Rodham in center frame as she literally bounced out of her seat with the most gleeful expression I'd ever seen on her face. She actually isn't bad looking when she isn't scowling. She should laugh more often. It can be a catharsis. Nevertheless, I considered that to be a shameful display of disrespect for the office of the President. She wasn't the only Democrat to do that, but as I said, she was center frame, so it was impossible to miss.

What happened to respect for the office of President, regardless of who holds the office?

I don't recall Republicans behaving like that when Clinton was President. And before any of you Democrats jump on me about that, I said, "I don't recall", I didn't say it didn't happen. If it did, it would have been every bit as shameful as last nights display from the Democrats.

Other than that, the image of Democrats sitting on their hands while Republicans were engaged in standing ovations was expected, so that is an issue with which I have no problem.

By the way, I was able to get my son to watch the speech by predicting to him how the different sides of the aisle would behave. He watched it just to see that.

Little victories, eh?