My Thoughts on the State of the Union Address
I have a confession to make.
I did not watch the President’s speech last night.
No, after putting our daughter down to bed I did not turn on the computer. I did not watch or listen to our Commander in Chief and his stirring oratorical skills. I missed the Alito scandal altogether. I didn’t even check Memeorandum.
I turned, instead, to that most archaic of inventions: the novel. I am currently midway through the third of Steven Erikson’s oh-so-epic Malazan books, Memories of Ice, and I admit that learning more about the mysterious Pannion Domin and the Crippled God sounded far more interesting to me than another of the President’s rhetorical masterpieces. Perhaps this is because I have had my fill of Obama’s grand speeches (since about the 4th of November, 2008). Not that he’s a bad speaker – far from it – but because they become somewhat predictable after a while, no matter which president it is.
Or perhaps it’s just that I’m the sort of person who becomes lost easily in a good story. (I used to bring a book with me to college basket-ball games as a kid and read through the entire game. And I played basketball. So….) Either way, last night the book won out over the speech. I know, I know… Shame on the blogger who would skip the SOTU address to read a book – and not just any book, not some literary triumph, but a fantasy novel. It doesn’t get much lower than that. Of course, I almost never watch anything in the first place – especially not on politics – so this is really nothing new.
And it is a very good book/series. Any fantasy reader who’s still hung up on George R. R. Martin not finishing his Song of Fire and Ice books (or at least not very quickly) should check it out.
ADDENDUM: Consider this an open thread.
I was playing Mass Effect 2.
It’s awesome, by the way.Report
Looks awesome…alas no TV. No PS3 or Xbox….Report
I was talking on phone for the first 30 minutes.Report
The biggest question about the SOTU is actaully WTF is the deal with Chris Mathews? How big a chunkhead can someone be and still have a job.Report
I can’t even describe my reaction when I heard him say that (I had MSNBC on at the time) as a double-take….in fact, my reaction involved so many takes that I don’t even know if there’s an appropriate prefix.Report
A google-take????Report
I’ve always meant to ask E.D. Do you ever read and Terry Pratchet?Report
“Good Omens.” With Gaimon.
One of the funniest books ever.Report
Couldn’t agree more.Report
I always loved Witches Abroad.Report
I read Sourcerer and liked it a lot – but that’s the only one. Love Gaiman’s stuff, so I should really read Good Omens.Report
The poor fellow is on the downhill slope now. Cancer if my memory serves. But his diskworld novels are treasures.Report
alzheimersReport
Personally, I was amazed at the way Obama reframed what the Supreme Court decided on “freedom of speech” as a matter of “national security.” Amazed at the way Republicans cheered.
Question: What’s remedy does constitution hold for removing a SC Justice?Report
Article III, Section 1.
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Well, it seems to me that “good Behavior” (why the capital ‘B’?) is the out to get rid of a justice.
If I had to guess, I’d say that there would have to be an impeachment hearing.Report
Yeah, couple this with Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Yeah, you gotta have an impeachment.
I fully support the idea of having an impeachment hearing against Alito, by the way… but probably for significantly different reasons than you do.
I support it because I know that that genie ain’t gonna go back in the bottle.Report
I’m not sure what my reasons would be; perhaps, he hasn’t crossed the bar in an obvious way. But it feels imminent, and maybe it’s that he has and I just can’t see how quite yet.
Care to share your reasons for supporting an Alito impeachment?Report
Because then everybody will be impeaching everybody else and the federal government will be so engrossed in impeaching impeachers that they won’t be able to screw anything else up.Report
Would that also mean the judicial system would be so tied up in impeachment hearings that it would leave ordinary Joe’s with a bit of weed or too much speed alone?
I think I’d like that, very much.Report
One of the wacky things I’ve begun to notice in the last decade or two:
More and more normal people are beginning to resent law enforcement.Report
Your guess would be correct. There have been a few lower court judges who have been impeached, the most recent being the legendary Judge Kent of the Southern District of Texas for some fun activities described here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_B._Kent
Interesting sidenote – Kent’s judicial demeanor left quite a bit to be desired. This resulted in some unnecesarily harsh and hyperbolic, but nonetheless completely hysterical, opinions such as:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/obiwan4.html
and my personal favorite:
http://www.clr.org/Bradshaw-Unity.htmlReport
Hey, he’s from Colorado!Report
Well, you know what they say about judges from Colorado who move to Texas, right?Report
“Honk honk”?Report
I dunno. I was asking you.Report
Pff leave the poor Justices alone. Obama has better things to spend his capital on.Report
It won’t be Obama. It will be Congress, if it happens. Charges from the House tried by the Senate.
Great trick for when you need to distract the mob.Report
If I were a crazy person who was a fan of the recent FEC vs. Citizens United ruling for reasons related to free speech absolutism, I’m not sure that I’d have much difficulty spinning the impeachment as “the Democrats prove that they are to the First Amendment what the Republicans are to a balanced budget”.Report
I’m hopeful that you won’t have to Jay. If the damn fools won’t pass something that’s in their own best interests I doubt they’d actually try and go out wabbit I mean Alito hunting.Report
I went into the SOTU with carefully nurtured low expectations. I can honestly say that I was pleasantly surprised, I kept a few notes.
-I was astonished that Obama the great lover of bipartisanship threw so many jabs at the Republicans. Obviously he realized his base is a problem, it’ll be interesting to see if the independents give him the stink eye for it. Still it made him seem a little more human to me which was encouraging.
-I couldn’t believe the Republicans sat on their hands as he listed off his tax cuts. Did he slip them a C-note or something ahead of time to play the straight men to his act?
-Nuclear power got a specific shout out. I was pretty charmed by that. Clearly Obama must have operatives hiding in the bushes in Minnesota trying to find out what dog-whistle would work on me. As soon as he hit that note he got into the black by my measure. But I’m an easier sell than a lot of people here.
-Obama was a touch odd on health care. He didn’t back down on it precisely but he sure didn’t seem to be suggesting a course forward. Positive interpretation: he’s trying to extend an olive branch in hopes that some GOP moderates will suddenly decide to come in from the cold. Negative interpretation: He’s being a squish.
-DADT!!! I was not expecting that to show up on the SOTU. More importantly though we get to see Bob bloody Gates applauding the demise of the policy. That seems definitive for me, DADT is doomed, it’s just a question of when. Awfully nice of Obama to include that for me. His operatives here in Minnesota must be good.
-Bipartisan commission on reducing the deficit… huh pretty snore there. Ten certified experts sit around drinking coffee and rubbing their chins for six months then come out to say that we should end the wars, cut spending and reform entitlements! Amazing!! Maybe I should send in my resume.
Overall pretty decent. I would have liked more spit and vinegar but it’s a heck of a lot better than the panicked retreat or vacuous nonsense I was fearing. I’d give him an A- .Report
If anything I enjoyed making superficial comments more than substantive ones. The Democrats should stay away from bright colors, they looked like a Cheer commercial or alternatively as though they were sponsored by Crayola. FLOTUS looked amazing and the President’s make up made him look vaguely clay like for about twenty minutes.
Bob Gates is surprisingly short and I’m not sure Eric Holder’s mustache is doing him any favors. Poor Tim Geithner looked terrible. Finally, I thought it was a toss up as to who wields more power while being strikingly small framed, Olympia Snowe or Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
I also wondered just how much of America was struck by the sea of Lavender behind the President. Meta or just distracted, I can’t say.Report
I think the lavender was in honor of his DADT statement. His much abused gay base will appreciate the shout out.Report
I’m somewhat less freaked out by SCOTUS’s CFR decision than most liberals seem to be, and I don’t really think corporate money shifting from PACs and 527s and Party Committees to candidates isn’t the end of democracy. But that reaction shot of the Supreme Court was perhaps the most brutal part of the speech. Those people looked OLD. Half of them at least looked like they should have had respirators on hand. And they really did bring this on themselves. Respect for precedent and Congress…buzzwords, all.Report
Midway through Memories of Ice, huh? Well let me ask you this: would you agree that the Tenescowri are one of the more horrifying things you’ve read in a fantasy novel, like, ever?Report
Not quite midway, I guess. They’ve been mentioned and they sound awful, but I haven’t come in to contact with them directly yet….Report
It was a disjointed speech full of contradictions. It was patronizing, much like a lecture, which caused me to think how undeserved and unearned this air of superiority has become. There was no inspiration — it was simply a confirmation of a progressive agenda, flat, with a tricks thrown in to divert attention — not a good speech at all. If you listened to this speech, then followed it with a speech from Reagan, you could get a much better picture of the defeciencies.Report
Yeah one thing you can say for sure, the Gipper was a great limiter on government side, deficit size and budget size.Report
It wasn’t his fault! It was the fault of the democrats! It was the fault of the congress! It was the fault of the senate! It was the fault of the RINOs! It was the fault of the liberals! It was the fault of the libertarians!Report
All good points.Report
I wasn’t talking about Reagan’s accomplishments — he was a gifted speaker, but a go-along statist just the same.Report
Compared to an Arlen Specter speech it was good, but his speeches are always delivered well…it’s the content. Rather than tracking to the center, abandoning his radical leftist agenda he’s circling the wagons, throwing a bone or two here and there, and challenging his opposition.
If the story of Taxechewsetts tells us anything, it’s that his opposition is growing.Report
He and his congresslizards were elected to a 4 and 2 year term respectively. The special election of course is significant but if he and they think that HCR is a good bill (and despite it’s porktacular nature I’ve seen some good arguments to that effect) then they are entitled and somewhat obligated to try and herd enough cats to pass the thing and then face the voters. If they’re wrong well then let the Republicans run on repealing it and flatten the Democrats. That should settle the argument at least. But if the liberals are right, the thing isn’t death on stilts and the voters actually notice that once it’s all down in black and white then maybe it’ll be the Republicans running for the hills.Report
Yes, yes!!! Get it over with. Kinda like the Earps and Clanton’s at the OK Corral…that was Democrat/Republican thing too! Nobody wants to settle stuff today. It’s always BS, BS, BS!Report
The Earps didn’t respect the 2nd Amendment.Report
Not all that much, they were however, honest Republicans trying to carve out a little niche in Tombstone, plus they always got up close before firing. Ya gotta respect that! Which reminds me of Woody’s lament, “Some people rob you with a gun, others with a fountain pen.”Report
I had the SOTU on in the background while I played Dragon Age: Origins on my PC. It’s an excellent single-player computer RPG similar to the old Baldur’s Gate games.
Isn’t Whiskeyjack a great character?Report
Lots of great characters in these books, but yes – Whiskeyjack is great.Report
The novel’s not so archaic—only about 400 years old if you take Don Quixote to be the first true novel.Report
Well archaic was sort of tongue-in-cheek….Report