State of the Union - 2011
Our elected officials sure did get a workout last night! (Man, if they did that everyday, they might actually get pretty darned fit...) According to The Washington Post, referencing a study by centrist group "No Labels" -
"the rate of ovations has risen dramatically in recent years"
"as recently as two decades ago, presidents rarely received bipartisan ovations."
"President Jimmy Carter never received a bipartisan standing ovation during his State of the Union addresses, the group found."
"The modern era of stand-sit-stand calisthenics began with President Bill Clinton" who "ended up averaging 20 per year during his tenure."
"President George W. Bush averaged 22 per year, with most coming after statements about national security and combating terrorism. Obama had 30 in 2009 - also a joint address - and 34 in 2010, but mostly for talking about the economy."
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/24/AR2011012405382.html)
An interesting trend, wouldn't you say? But what are increasing bipartisan ovations indicative of ? Bipartisan policy making on the rise, perhaps? Seems very unlikely. On the other hand, there's plenty of evidence suggesting collaborations behind closed doors. There's plenty of agreement regarding our military occupation of dozens upon dozens of foreign countries, and plenty more about what amounts to financial fraud and driving the US further and further into debt at an alarming rate. The need for these emotionally charged stunts is directly proportional to the outlandish goings on in foreign and domestic policy. The outrageous legislation passed during Bush's tenure (Defense Authorization Act, Military Commissions Act, Patriot Acts ...) and his abuse of executive privilege and Presidential signing statements to subvert due process are widely acknowledged. And it's not exactly a secret that Obama is on a very similar trajectory -
During his presidential campaign, Obama rejected the use of signing statements. He was asked at one rally: "when congress offers you a bill, do you promise not to use presidential signing statements to get your way?" Obama gave a one-word reply: "Yes." He added that "we aren't going to use signing statements as a way to do an end run around Congress." On March 11, 2009, President Obama issued his first signing statement, attached to the omnibus spending bill for the second half of FY2009. The statement indicated that the President would ignore several provisions of the bill, including sections dealing with negotiations with foreign governments, restrictions on US involvement in UN peacekeeping missions, protections for government whistleblowers, and certain congressional claims of authority over spending. Since then, Obama has issued more signing statements. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement)
Nor is the President's hawkish foreign policy rhetoric (and track record) a secret, or why he appointed the foxes (who were complicit in causing the financial crisis) to guard the henhouse. You be the judge:
"The Warning" - trailer - (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACkiKVtF3nU) ... entire film - (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/)
"Inside Job" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzrBurlJUNk (trailer)
"Inside the
Meltdown" - http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Frontline+Inside+The+Meltdown+
(1 of 6)