I don't get it! Obama is our President. Last night he outlined his vision and his plans for

[hisownpetard]

how the country is to proceed in a joint effort to pull ourselves
out of the economic crisis. His speech was intended to share some
details of these plans with the public and to promote confidence
here (and abroad) in our successful future.

This is not campaign season: Obama is the President of *all* Americans.
We are all in this together, and he was addressing the entire nation, 35 days
after having been inaugurated.

So WHY was it necessary for a Republican to immediately take to the air to follow
President Obama's speech with an *opposition" rebuttal??

Apparently, the word "unity" is just an abstract concept to many Republicans.

And, btw - wasn't our President stellar last night? Alone in my TV room, I applauded
and cheered till my hands were sore and my dogs thought I was nuts!

[Kookaburra]

1. But Bobby Jindal made himself look foolish, so why ask why?

[Skink]

2. There was a speach after Obamas? Must of missed it.

[babylonsister]

3. There's always a response to the SOTU or whatever it's being

called. The real tragedy is that Jindal's response was so canned. To me it seemed like he phoned it in even before President Obama gave his speech. The rethug party is just plum out of original ideas imo.

And yes, I think my President hit a home run!

[hisownpetard]

8. I know it's standard for a SOTU, but this wasn't really a SOTU speech.

:hi:

[babylonsister]

9. It was in everything but name. He outlined his plans for the

state of our union for at least the next 4 years if not longer.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. I get your point (Fairness Doctrine for Fascists), but I think the Repigs missed

a great chance. They shoulda had Sara Pukin do it.

[tavalon]

7. Oh, they did "just fine" with Gov. Jindal

That he could string a sentence together correctly was a plus but it was overshadowed by the fact that he decided to string the Republican party together with Hurricane Katrina. That was an awesome reminder. Nice of him to remind us. That he said it all in a sing song voice that reminded me of a Kindergarten teacher, or, I just have to say it, Mr. Rogers was yet another bonus, for our side, that is.

[tavalon]

5. This wasn't officially a SOTU but after a SOTU,

it's tradition for the opposition party to rebut, or in the case of last night, make asses of their party.

[endarkenment]

6. The opposition party rebuttal is standard practice. nt.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

10. Yeah, the President must not be challenged, ever!

Where have I heard this crap before?

[NavyDavy]

12. nobody said he shouldn't be challenged if thats what you call

what the repukes tried to do...

[alcibiades_mystery]

11. Dumb post...rebuttal is standard

Don't be silly. Unity doesn't mean the complete lack of opposition.

You're just getting carried away here.

[hisownpetard]

22. I agree! That'll l'arn me to not post anything before my brain is in gear...

Don't know what I was thinking, frankly.

[jillan]

13. My dog was literally going crazy with my constant clapping.

[damntexdem]

14. Oh, no! "Unity" is not at all an abstract concept to Republicans.

To them it is a very-concrete policy of crucifying any Republican who tries to take an honest stand that goes against some tenet of RW doublethink.

[brooklynite]

15. Every new President gives a first term speech to Congress...

...and every opposition party is given an opportunity to rebut.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

16. Sorry, I cannot demand loyalty from others I did not extend to Reagan and Bush

Everyone needs to get straight whether asking Republicans, "How can you disrespect the President?" is an ironic jest to point up their hypocrisy or making a serious point.

If it's meant to make a serious point then include me out.

Rallying around the leader has a rather mixed historical track record.

I may not agree with their stance but I cannot in good conscience stigmatize "opposing the president" as a concept, in war, peace, prosperity or poverty.

The particulars of Jindal's response were absurd but the concept of opposition is central to the functioning of any liberal democracy.

There are conceivable counter-statements that would have been good and useful. The pugs are too bat-shit crazy to offer them but if someone had it would have been a legitimate entry in the forum of public consideration.

[rvablue]

17. In fairness to the Repubs, it is tradition. It's not as if the rebuttal afterwards is anything new.

[Beacool]

18. Because we don't live in a dictatorship and the opposition does count.

Besides, it is traditional. The opposition gives their rebuttal after every State of the Union. Nothing new.......

:eyes:

[NoSheep]

19. I was cheering alone myself-and yelling at the rethugs for being slimeballs.

[Still Sensible]

20. The rebuttal is a tradition that started in 1966. n/t

[Ocracoker16]

21. Wow- you didn't know that there is always a response from the opposition after the SOTU

There seem to be a lot of people on DU who think that the members of the GOP were just being asses in having Jindal do a rebuttal. The Republicans are asses indeed, but actually they have nothing to do with Jindal making a response. There is always a response from the opposition after the SOTU.

I think it is easy to forget about this tradition if you don't watch the SOTU. You may not have watched for the last 8 years for good reason. Bush was just so pathetic that I didn't bother to watch him ever. Since, I didn't watch I can't tell you which Democrats gave the response. I do remember that Jim Webb did it once.

[4lbs]

23. Regardless, 47% of the country voted for the opposition.

That's presumably who Jindal was speaking to last night.