Should the Democrats walk out on the Bush State of the Union?

[Cascadian]

Poll question: Should the Democrats walk out on the Bush State of the Union?

This is a great idea. The time has come to not listen to the lies of the Bush and his crime family. Would a symbolic walkout from the floor of the House during the State of the Union speech send a strong poignant message to the neo-cons? Your turn! Also, be sure to give your reasons.

John

[FDRrocks]

1. Yes

but they won't b/c most of them are accomplises in this bullshit. The carrot and the stick.

[JohnKleeb]

2. No if the dems walk out

Who is gonna throw the eggs :)/

[POed_Ex_Repub]

3. Have a DEM only meeting...

Call it "The REAL state of the union"

[calimary]

75. Picture of Clinton addressing both houses of Congress:

"This is your State of the Union."

Picture of bush doing the same.

"This is your State of the Union on drugs."

[Dookus]

4. no...

it would be silly and childish, and it would backfire terribly against the Democrats.

[Cascadian]

6. Well, haven't the Republicans been silly and childish too?

eom


John

[0rganism]

30. Yes, but that isn't covered in the press

When a Democrat is silly or childish, it's a scandal.

When a republican is silly or childish, it never happened.

[greekspeak]

67. Agreed...it would be childish

Besides there are better forums for dem senators and representatives (the ones with spines at least) to voice their arguments. The "liberal" media would hamstring every democrat there is as unpatriotic and bigoted. As for the argument that the repukes already behave this childishly, dems should, first of all, be above this. Second of all, dems do not get free passes like the repukes do. There is a big fat double standard in media spin.

[Marian]

70. Realistically, I'm

afraid you are correct.

However, I would love to see it. No one deserves to be walked out on more!

[liberalnurse]

5. I like the idea of turning their backs.

Walking out or no-show is too dramatic....A planned episode to turn their backs is a silent but effect message. I can see them being united on this....It would show how great a "Uniter not a Divider" *bush really is....

[patricia92243]

12. No - make us look spiteful, childish, and foolish - definitely no!

[The Zanti Regent]

49. Turning our backs and remaining silent shows the world what an ass Bush is

It's time to get the backbone and stand up to this god-damned Fascist!

[lostnfound]

43. That's a much better idea. Change my yes to no. n/t

[banana republican]

73. Support the Moon Shot

[laruemtt]

80. i love that idea!

of turning their backs. it would be powerful! and humiliating to that 8&%()$)(@~!

[MrSlayer]

7. It would be a ballsy move.

And probably will never happen. There is far too much fear in this party. We need leaders who are willing to lay it on the line, balls out, to defy what we all know is wrong. Screw the media and how they will portray you, do the right thing. There are a lot more of us then they think.

[Punkingal]

8. That would be a hoot,

but they won't, because of the "respecting the office, not the man" thing. But they could sit on their hands and not applaud.

[liberalhistorian]

72. That's an even better

and far more effective and dramatic action, that's exactly what happened at the Academy Awards a few years ago when Elia Kazan was given a lifetime achievement award and many members of the audience, including well-known actors and actresses, simply sat silently, refusing to applaud or react.

[punpirate]

9. Discourtesy is exactly what the Repugs...

... would take advantage of. However, the mindless idiots in Congress shouldn't jump up and applaud every time Bush stops to take a breath, or stops for dramatic effect.

The State of the Union is a Constitutional obligation. Ought to be treated as such. But approval in any form of what the President says isn't a Constitutional obligation. Silence is best.

[Cascadian]

18. Well they wrote the book on discourtesy.

I am sick of the Democrats doing nothing and allowing the right-wing neo cons' takeover! Why do people not want to start fighting back????


John

[punpirate]

29. Constitution, remember?

They may not respect the rule of law, and may demand utter loyalty for the most specious of reasons, but our legislators can still register their displeasure and meet the rule of law.

That said, how many will shun this abomination on the presidency and the country? Very few, I would guess.

Cheers.

[Wapsie B]

48. If I remember anything about

the Constitution I believe it does not require a speech before Congress & Senate. A letter would suffice.

[LiberalFighter]

78. From Jefferson to Taft SOTU was submitted in writing.

Source

A seemingly well-established misconception found even in some academic literature, is that the State of the Union is an orally delivered message presented to a joint session of Congress. With only a few exceptions, this has been true in the modern era (ca. 1933-present, see Neustadt or Greenstein), but beginning with Jefferson's 1st State of the Union (1801) and lasting until Taft's final message (1912), the State of the Union was a written (and often lengthy) report sent to Congress. Although Federalists Washington and Adams had personally addressed the Congress, Jefferson was concerned that the practice of appearing before the representatives of the people was too similar to the British monarch's ritual of addressing the opening of each new Parliamnet with a list of policy mandates, rather than "recommendations." This changed in 1913. Wilson beleived the presidency was more than a impersonal institution; that instead the presidency is dynamic, alive, and personal (see Tulis). In articulating this philosophy, Wilson delivered an oral message to Congress. Heath reasons prevented Wilson from addressing Congress in 1919 and 1920, but Harding's two messages (1921 and 1922) and Coolidge's first (1923) were also oral messages. In the more strict constructionist style of 19th Century presidents, Coolidge's remaining State of the Unions (1924-28) and all four of Hoover's (1929-32) were written. Franklin D. Roosevelt established the modern tradition of delivering an oral State of the Union beginning with his first in 1934. Exceptions include Truman's 1st (1946) and last (1953), Eisenhower's last (1961), Carter's last (1981), and Nixon's 4th (1973). In addition, Roosevelt's last (1945) and Eisenhower's 4th (1956) were technically written messages although they addressed the American people via radio summarizing their reports. Any research design such recognize these facts.

[Robb]

40. They should applaud at NOTHING.

NOTHING that moran says. Nothing. I don't care if he says "Babies and freedom are great, and this country kicks ass." I want to see my Democrats motionless.

Never happen. Spineless punks.

[Granite]

56. Exactly

There should be strict party discipline enforced - everyone sits, no applause, no handshaking/shmoozing, etc. Just sit there, then pull out the "big guns" to present the Democratic response to the SOU afterwords. Don't send out a state governor, etc.

This might be extreme, but its less than walking out while still getting our point across.

[LiberalFighter]

79. And tie up that idiot Zell Miller

[theoceansnerves]

10. remain in chamber

but clap at NOTHING...
no standing ovations, nothing.

[Cascadian]

13. Maybe they should just sit there.

no clapping. No nothing.

John

[BrotherBuzz]

20. I would suggest the dems sit on their hands...

in total solidarity...well, I can wish.

[JasonDeter]

11. They better be very selective in what they applause for!!

But I don't hold out much hope they stand up to the republicans. They have been weak, very weak so far.

[Cascadian]

14. Hey NO people. Here's another question....

If you don't think they should leave the chamber, then should they not clap or stand up?

John

[Dookus]

15. Let's just leave the SOTU alone...

it's one of America's great traditions. Using it to protest in any way will just backfire.

How about a shot of Bush saying "And tonight we thank the brave men and women serving their country in uniform", cut to a shot of the dems sitting there looking sour.

Four more years of Bush will be the guaranteed result.

Leave the SOTU alone.

[Cascadian]

17. Oh please!

The Republicans already messed with tradition, the presidential elections in 2000. I guess it's pay back time!


John

[Dookus]

21. I half wish they WOULD do what you suggest

just so you could see how horribly trounced we would be in November.

I know you're angry at W. We all are. But cheap political stunts like this won't do a damned thing to help our cause.

While you're cheering, tens of millions of Americans will be making up their minds to vote Republican.

[mouse7]

16. no... Dems should just provide translators

Dems should have the Bush audio feed running underneath a translator fed that translates "Lying Rat Bastard English" (also known as Lie-bonics) to the same dialect of English that we use on a daily basis.

[hellhathnofury]

19. Has it ever been done before?

My feeling is no, you attend to see the Officer, not the man.

[AndyTiedye]

23. There Has Been a Bad Cold Going Around

There could be quite a bit of coughing,
and one cannot rule out the possiblity that somebody
might be overcome and :puke:

[Dookus]

22. ooh! I know!

Why don't we just have all the Dems punch him in the neck as he walks down the aisle? (well, Barbara Mikulski would have to punch him in the gut, but you get the idea)

[economic justice]

24. No.....

It would be a huge mistake and a VERY immature thing to do. It would cost us seats in congress and in races from dogcatcher to the WH. The image: radical punks who have no respect. I sympathize with the reasons for wanting something dramatic, but talk about backfire. It's not worth the cost.

[DarienComp]

25. No.

Blast him on TV and on the floor of the House and Senate. Never let up. Call him a liar. A pathological liar. Repeat it often.

But don't walk out on the SOTU. The Republicans are always disrespecting the office with their theatrics- calling the police on the Democrats, shutting the government down, oh and remember Trent Lott and those pit bulls? Democrats should be statesmen.

[dweller]

26. Sabot

throw a shoe everytime he tells a lie.
hell, they don't have to hit him, just launch one in his general direction...

just a messge to let him know he's going to be kicked out soon.
dp

[Piperay]

27. No

it would just backfire on the Democrats. I admit I would love it but in the long run it would just hurt the Democrats. :-(

[Buns_of_Fire]

28. No, that would backfire badly. But...

there's nothing that says they have to applaud every breath he takes between the time he staggers to the podium and the time he staggers out again.

[BeachBuckeye]

31. I was there last year and they wouldn't let us walk out!!

Was in the gallery and halfway thru the speech I wanted to leave but it wasn't allowed. The Capitol Building was in "lockdown" mode and no one was allowed in or out until Shrub left the building. Outside it was like a war zone with dozens of helicoptors hovering above and men with assult rifles behind every tree on the grounds. It was truely a spooky thing to see. I'll be there again this year and I have no reason to doubt it will be the same scene.

[mmonk]

32. absolutely

desperate times call for desperate measures. Will anyone do it? No. They are political cowards. It might cost them their jobs. Too risky.

[imax2268]

33. They should

either not show up...or they should just stay in their seats and not applaud...simple as that...but most won't because they don't want to look bad on tv...

[mmonk]

34. yes

and how TV would spin it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

35. Yes. The times call for a courageous act.

It would make the American people take a long look at what is happening to our country.

However, for the timid, don't worry, the politicians have little stomach for opposing the DumbSon in any way that might jeopardize their seats.

[KG]

36. why would the dems want to do that?

from insane tax cut, attacks on civil liberties, war, and unreal expenditures, the dems in congress have on the whole given the chimp everything he's asked for.

in the face of tons of evidence to the contrary, the congressional dems decided to buy into the bushco lies for political expedience. aside from the fact that the dems simply don't have the stones to do such a thing, after 3 years of rolling over for the little moron that kind of protest would look just plain silly.

[snippy]

37. Absolutely not. This is a terrible idea.

Why not suggest that they lay face down on the floor and hold their breath until blue in the face while pounding the floor with their hands and feet?

If the democrats act like childish brats, only childish brats will vote for them.

[Hubert Flottz]

38. Yes,,,because Shrub's brain can not be *UL* Approved!

Bushit alert :nuke: Code Brown :nuke: = .More Death and Pestilence Ahead

If the Democrats are going to show up at all, then they had better wear a pair of Hip boots to WADE out in afterward, once the old Bushit starts to flow from those smirking jaws of our own 'Frequent Flyer In Chief', like at last year's fib-fest! Think of the Impact the Democrats in Washington would have on the entire world of politics, if they all showed up wearing hip waders! The press conference would be great after this year's SOU yarn! The background propaganda banner on the wall behind the gaggle of hip booted Democrats shown afterward at the Democrat's P C, could read, ******"Danger Deep Bushit"******!

I'll vote for any man or woman who falls out to hear the CIC's latest salvo of tall tales and war stories, wearing their American Flag Colored, Patriotic, Made in China, HIP WADERS!

I wouldn't even show up for the speech in the first place, if I were the Dems, because (1.)you can't bushit a bullshitter and (2.)I personally don't like to sit and listen to lie after lie and little pampered posers crying Wolf, just to scare and trick people into voting for them! Despots like Saddam use FEAR and DIRTY TRICKS to win elections if you'll notice!

BTW, seen any good Mushroom Clouds lately? Just judging by the quality of Bush's last SOU addy, I'd say the only real connection to mushroom clouds, is the kind of "mu(shrooms)" our fearful leader has got to be eating buy the bag, have now completely "clouded"(fried) Shrub's fragile, non UL approved, military mind beyond repair!

Only one other man on Earth, even comes close to Shrub's speaking style and KKKrudability! I now submit to you that other dude.............

[NicRic]

39. How about they all wear boots !

Have there pants tucked into the boots .This would be a good way to get the point that they know they are about to be fed a bunch of B/S ! Bush likes to use flight suits etc as props ,so whats wrong with the Dems doing this to make apoint. It would say to the American people ,that the Dems know bush is about to lie to them about the state of the union ! Perhaps if they all wore nose plugs also ?
Take Care Nicric

[Gin]

41. Show him their backs.....don't know how they could do that...but the

Brits do that in Parliament.

[Hubert Flottz]

42. How bout if they all yell out Bushit every time Shrub lies!

The down side of that plan would be, they would all suffer the next day from laryngitis from all that yelling they'd have to do! Did anyone ever think of remain seated and be counted? The Brits give Tony Poodle hell every time he tells a big fib on the floor! The Brits don't sweat being reelected, because they know they are expected to defend the people who elect them! A little peaceful protest might cheer up the downtrodden and the disenchanted in our apathetic party! We played 'Goody Two Shoes' in 2000 and look where it got us!

Whatever the Democrats yell at the SOU they should yell it VERY SLOWLY, so that even Shrub will understand!

[are_we_united_yet]

44. Dems would be seen as

"UNPATRIOTIC"! Maybe they should leave waiving an American Flag and chanting God Bless America.

[Lone_Wolf]

45. Yes

It would make a bold statement. The Bush cabal are extreme radicals and appeasment policy has not worked with them. We need extremism of our own.

[Hubert Flottz]

46. You're right about appeasement!

Appeasement does nothing to contain or control a would be dictator! You concede an item to a despot and he moves on to take the next item in line, by hook or by crook!

[gulliver]

47. Clap and laugh at the wrong time.

Pick appropriate places in the speech and interrupt with applause. That will throw Bush way off and dissipate his applause lines.

For example, say Bush plans to say "Space exploration is a vital calling of America. We will put a man on the Moon and next on Mars. (applause)"

Dems should make it play as "Space expoloration is a vital calling of America. We will (strong Dem applause interrupts Bush) ... we will put a man on the Moon and next on Mars (crickets chirping)."

There are probably several places in the actual speech where Bush can be laughed at. The Dems should pick a couple.

[mmonk]

51. laughing would be good

[Individualist]

55. I like your idea gulliver

We already know that shrub can't tolerate being laughed at. It would be beautiful to see him implode during the SOTU.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

50. No, but...

seeing them all fall asleep would be great. Seeing Joe Lieberman start to nod off last year made my day.

[Sophree]

52. No.

They should all be present and witnesses when B*sh LIES HIS ASS OFF to the American people again. Just like last year's 16 words.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

53. The way they jump up and applaud

is disgusting, like a high school pep rally.

It would be dignified, but pointed, for them to sit silently with their arms folded.

Lieberman and Zell Miller would still go on Fox News and slam then.

But so what?

By the way, does anyone remember whether the Republicans jumped up and applauded Clinton's SOTU addresses?

[Silverhair]

54. Dumb idea.

When I was in the Army, we had to salute even the officers that were hated. We were taught, and it is correct, that it isn't the man, but the position that we were showing respect to, and by extension, the organization that we were both part of.

The SOTU speech is a constitutional requirement. If the Dems walk out, they would be showing disrespect to the office itself, and by extension - to the country. It would backfire badly and cost votes at a time when every vote is needed.

Sure, the Angry Left would love it, but the Angry Left is NOT a majority of voters.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

57. Saluting officers.

When I was in the marines there were damned few officers that we didn't hate, not to mention the organization that they represented. But, not saluting was punishable. So, we saluted at every opportunity.

Especially near the PX when the officers were carrying a double armload of groceries. Amazing things happen when "reflex actions" take over. More than one "gentleman" was left picking up the cans of tomatoes while we watched sympathetically. Being in the air wing, it was also miraculous how certain pilots who were notorious martinets and disciplinarians, just couldn't seem to get a plane off the ground so they could collect their flight pay. Tsk, tsk, "Sorry lieutenant, but there's another leak in the hydraulic system." Screwdrivers have a nasty way of slipping at times.

As for the SOTU and not showing respect for the office itself - hogwash. If the Dems had the courage to walk out, it would be viewed as a purely political act aimed at the DumbSon himself not at the presidency or the country.

[candy331]

58. No I don't think they should walk out

but if the party was unified then they could buy media time and speak right after the SOTU speech in reply and rebuttal to his speech. I know they will have a repub and a Demo speak after the speech but this would be a separate 20-30 minute speech with Democratic plans and solutions. I believe that much of the world will be watching the speech and would be interested in a speech from the other side of the isle since they too see this administration as dangerous to world peace.

[Silverhair]

64. Now that is a reasonable and dignified response.

The other is simply pitching a fit. Your method could win votes, the first idea loses them.

[Terwilliger]

59. That's right...dumb, sheeple Americans are the majority of voters

you're right

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[drdigi420]

63. Didnt the repugs do the sitting on the hands thing

when Clinton gave his SOTU following the impeachment?

[qanda]

65. Only if they want to appear childish and petty

eom

[mot78]

66. It's bad politically

Would only hurt us in November.

[Beam Me Up]

68. YES

We are no longer in "politics as usual". We need to take the OFFENSIVE and begin to frame the situation:

BUSH = LIES

[Marian]

69. This reminds me of the Black Congressional

Caucus walking out during the 2000 debacle. I was so proud!

This isn't a tea party; this is politics.

I'd love to see just who would have the integrity to just not listen to the lies!

[jsw_81]

71. No way

Such a foolish stunt would make us look as bad as the GOP when they wanted to walk out (and even heckle) President Clinton during his speeches. It would be a HUGE mistake, especially in an election year.

[mlawson]

74. The question is moot.

No matter WHAT the bush criminals do, between now and the SOTU, the Dems will stand and applaud him. There is no crime he could commit, that would change this, IMO.

[Military Brat]

76. If I were there, I'd stare straight at him and never let up

It is extremely unnerving to have somebody stare straight at you with no hint of expression on their face. This is what I would do. bush would become quite flustered. I believe.

If the Dems want to applaud anything he says, they don't have to take their eyes off him in order to do so, and they don't have to smile and "make nice" for the GOP.

The question is, how long can anyone look at the chimp without becoming physically nauseated?

[Pobeka]

83. I seconded you down below.

But I added that they should also stand in unison and glare at the SOB.

[LiberalFighter]

77. How about not showing up.

How about having the teleprompter on a telescoping stand and raising it while he talks.

How about changing part of the text for the teleprompter?
Possible text:
If your against us your with us.
We went to war against Saddam to help the people of Iraq and take their oil.
War is peace, peace is war. I want peace so we can have war... no wait a minute.. I mean I want war so we can have peace. When we attack everyone we can prevent peace... no I mean war.

[Philosophy]

81. Remember that video of Saddam Hussein's purge speech?

The one where he reads the names one by one of the people in the audience who are disloyal and then they are hustled out of the room by his goons and later executed?

That's what's going to happen this year to anyone on the Democratic side of the aisle who rolls their eyes.

[Pobeka]

82. NO. Walking out would be symbolic handing over of the govt to repubs!

Geeze, the Repubs would have almost taken complete ownership of the flag because we failed to show the country it is *OUR* flag, not just a single party's flag.

I say don't take one solitary step out of there. If anything, they should stand in unison at a predetermined time, and say nothing at all, but GLARE at the son of a bitch who sits illegitimately in the oval office. Make Bush embarrassed, unable to speak against that unity of opposition.

[styersc]

84. Absolutely not.

.

[Deja Q]

85. haven't the repukes done something similar before...?

:shrug:

[doubleplusgood]

86. don't you mean "State of the Confederacy" ?

n/t

[number6]

87. yes, I would ....

:kick:I like the >not show up< idea too

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

88. Not unless they want to lose in November

If the Dems walked out, the media would kill them for it, and the pundit machine would never let us forget. All we'd hear would be cries of "Democrats not respecting Constitutional duty," or "Democrats playing dirty politics!" Besides, what'll it accomplish? The whole idea seems a bit childish, and it is a 100 percent fatal campaign killer. The Dems will lose if this happens.

[goobergunch]

89. No, but they shouldn't applaud anything he says. (n/t)

[Beaker]

95. exactly.

unless the applause is "for the troops"...otherwise they'd be shredded in the press as unpatriotic.

[arewethereyet]

90. do you have any idea how many people this would tick off ?

How would democrats have reacted had every republican congressman and senator wore a navy blue outfit with a white stain on the shoulder ?

You're suggesting the same thing.

They will register approval and disapproval as they have always done with decorum and dignity and respect.

[Poiuyt]

91. No. Remember Paul Wellstone's memorial service

Some things backfire. Best to take the high road.

[Liberal_Dog]

92. It Would Be A PR Disater

Neither party would ever do something like that.

[peacetalksforall]

93. They should all attend, but never clap or stand when

the enthroned one makes a claim about protecting the nation, improving the economy, improving the environement, improving education, improving relations with the world, making the country safer - there is NOTHING that they can approve of. They must go - but they can't perpetuate lies by clapping and smiling AND they have to figure out a way to do it other than a dry speech after the sotu speech - a post sotu dry speech that cable propaganda producers can cut off.

[jpgray]

94. Worst idea ever

Better to sit there and not applaud than walk out or not even show up.