The Republicans are the New Zealanders, and Obama is the All Blacks.
I am mildly suspicious of this, for some reason. -.- <–note squinty eyes.
BTW: The Democrats actually did this once in VA to Gov. George Allen (R) back in 1995 for the State of the Commonwealth. It rallied public opinion solidly behind the Governor.
Curious side fact: The governors actual office in the VA State Capitol is not very large at all. It’s about the size of a small bedroom.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
Considering his love of basketball, it’s more like Obama is the Tall Blacks.
I think the Prez should have to wear a powdery white wig and be heckled by weirdos. It’d be like Britain.
Hear! Hear!
Prez should give the speech drunk, stop halfway to piss from the podium…
Maybe they could compromise and have him give it from the back of the building.
If he hit Scalia, would his approval ratings go up?
Scalia, wisely, typically does not attend these circuses.
See? At the Dope you learn stuff even in the Pit. I did *not *know that.
Can he aim for Sam, then? Or will Alito also not be attending? is his allegiance more to Nino or the Prez?
Why is that “wise” as compared to “arrogant” or just plain “snotty”?
Because he is a Supreme Court Justice - theoretically above the partisan sideshow that is the SOTU?*
Seriously, why would any SCJ need to attend?
*Yeah, I couldn’t keep a straight face either.
I actually think it’s probably better if Supreme Court Justices don’t go. While the State of the Union is supposed to be a report on the state of the nation, it is also inevitably a partisan political address. While the Supreme Court members are all a part of the third branch of the national government, they are unlike the President and Members of Congress in that they are not supposed to be allied with any political party in their jobs.
If they go to the speech, they end up just looking silly because they need to sit there stoically while the rest of the crowd cheers and applauds. They can’t get involved in the crowd responses themselves, because that would draw people’s attention and lead to accusations of partisanship.
I’m not naive enough to think that politics aren’t already deeply embedded in the Court’s decisions, but it seems to me that having them up there whooping and hollering for the President (or booing and jeering, for that matter) like the Congresscritters would be a bad move for the integrity of the court and the integrity (if there’s any left) of the government as a whole.
So, if they attend, they are left sitting there looking like disapproving parents at a kids’ party, which makes them look almost as silly as if they were to get involved in the cheering.
As for Scalia, he is hardly the only one of the justices who makes a habit of not attending, and in looking at the attendance record over the past couple of decades, there doesn’t seem to be too much correlation between which justices attend and who is president. The last time Scalia attended was in 1997, when Clinton was president, meaning that he missed all 8 of GWB’s addresses. Roberts, on the other hand, has turned up every time since his ascension to the court. Breyer has also been consistent, attending every one from 2001 onwards. In 2000, not a single justice attended.
It seems that the most consistently partisan, in terms of attending for a president of one party but not the other, is Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who attended all but two of Clinton’s, all of Obama’s, and none of Bush’s.
Having them sit there like a bunch of Vulcans would be kinda cool, actually. It could add a little to the tradition.
For anyone interested, here’s a table showing the Supreme Court members who attended the State of the Union, going back to 1995. Going further would have required more effort than i was willing to make. I have also only counted the current members of the Court, not those who have retired since 1995.
An “X” indicates the Justice attended the speech.
A blank space indicates the Justice did NOT attend.
A dash (-) indicates that the justice was not yet a member of the Supreme Court.
Year Pres Alito Breyer Ginsburg Kagan Kennedy Roberts Scalia Sotomayor Thomas
2014 BHO X X X X X
2013 BHO X X X X X X
2012 BHO X X X X X
2011 BHO X X X X X X
2010 BHO X X X - X X X
2009 BHO X X X - X X - X
2008 GWB X X - X X -
2007 GWB X X - X X -
2006 GWB X X - X - X
2005 GWB - X - - -
2004 GWB - X - - -
2003 GWB - X - - -
2002 GWB - X - X - -
2001 GWB - X - - -
2000 WJC - - - -
1999 WJC - X - X - - X
1998 WJC - X - - - X
1997 WJC - X X - X - X - X
1996 WJC - X X - X - - X
1995 WJC - X X - - X -
As you can see, Breyer is easily the most consistent in the long run, while Kagan and Roberts are the only ones with a 100 percent record, each having attended every speech since taking their seats on the court.
Unless I’m misreading, which is entirely possible, your comments on Scalia’s attendance don’t match your chart below. You say he hasn’t attended since 1997, but the chart shows him attending three of GWB’s and all of BHO’s. Can you clarify?
You’re misreading. That’s Roberts.
Obama has made it clear that he doesn’t need Congress. Obama has his pen and a phone.
The usual procedure is for the POTUS to ask Congress if he can address its members. The Congress usually invites him inside.
Obama can give his SOTU address from anywhere. He can even use his pen to write it and then phone in the results to his favorite media outlet. Will the same, so-called stupid voters once again rally around Obama because Congress doesn’t want to associate with someone who doesn’t want to associate with them?
Yeah, it’s Roberts.
Unfortunately, the limitations of the “code” tag and tab-separated tables is that it’s difficult to make all the spacing perfect when inserting tables into the message board.
You’re right.
Take note, Republicans! The public will be on your side if you tell Obama to drop the speech off with the door man and you’ll read it later, thanks!