The State of the Union- 2 Views

Does it sometimes appear to you that Americans are living in separate bubbles or parallel universes that seldom communicate?

This was never more obvious than when I watched President Biden give his State of the Union (SOTU) address to Congress and the American people. His words were strong, his delivery was forceful, and his style was combative, leaving no doubt that ‘fighting Joe” was ready to take on his predecessor, as he called him, once again. Described by Peter Baker in the New York Times as:

“This was not Old Man Joe. This was Forceful Joe. This was Angry Joe. This was Loud Joe. This was Game-On Joe.

In an in-your-face election-year State of the Union address, President Biden delivered one of the most confrontational speeches that any president has offered from the House rostrum, met by equally fractious heckling from his Republican opponents.”

Although never mentioning his name, Biden stated that allowing a person who would give Russian President Putin free rein was not now, and should never be an option. He spoke of history and the days before America entered World War ll, and even mentioned Ronald Reagan, possibly reaching out to Independents and disaffected Haley voters. He promised if given a Democratic House and Senate majority, he would work to codify abortion rights as the law of the land. Chastising the Supreme Court for some of their recent decisions, he reminded them of the power of women voters. (Many Democratic women legislators wore white both this year and in 2020 to signify fighting for women's rights and reproductive freedom.)

Biden sparred with raucous Republican members who called out about various proposals around tax reform and border security. He ignored the lack of decorum, as some members, such as MTG, wore Maga campaign gear and touted crime by illegal immigrants. Some pundits noted that the once dry-as-a-bone recitation of successful programs and suggestions for new proposals has almost turned into a call-and-response repartee. The president, anticipating such pauses, built into his speech some ad-libs to address these interruptions. Condemned by some as giving more of a campaign speech than a report to the nation, the president’s defenders countered that the room had changed, so the speech needed to meet the new normal.

The President spoke about the problems with the war in Gaza, the Israeli response, Hamas, and the plight of the Palestinians. He inferred a ceasefire was upcoming; many have noted his desire to have this in place before the start of Ramadan this week. I certainly hope this happens.

(Food is being delivered in a modest but inefficient way with airdrops, but so much more needs to happen. US military forces will soon create a landing site on the Mediterranean Sea bordering Gaza to allow food and medical supplies to be delivered by naval vessels since other avenues have been blocked. This will take some time, hopefully, it will be ready before full famine sets in.)

Biden also noted that some are trying to rewrite the story of January 6^th, but indicated that the American people know and will continue to remember what really happened that day when the actions taken were not those of patriots but those who wished to destroy the American system. Democracy is at stake in the upcoming election he claimed and the American people will have a clear choice.

Although there were a few word stumbles and the unfortunate use of the word “illegals”, Biden shut down the right-wing media and Maga storm claiming he was a mumbling, out of touch leader afflicted by stumbling senior moments. On the day of the State of the Union, the Maga campaign aired a doctored campaign ad seeming to show the president could not finish a sentence, when in the actual speech, he had paused to make a point. Sadly, I assume that this will be the first of many such attempts by the right, even as their candidate, now firmly headed to the nomination since Nikki Haley dropped out, is making ever wilder statements on the stump.

Moving forward to the usually lame Republican response, we were instead met with remarks by the youngest Republican Senator, a woman from Alabama. Kaie Britt did not appear at a lectern as is customary, but spoke from her kitchen table as she tried to meet women where she said they and their families discussed important issues, such as meeting their budgets and planning for the future. If she had stopped there, that might have passed as an okay response, but her delivery, in an overly emoting and sometime breathless style, found by many to be cringe-worthy caused some to ask what the point was. The style, described in the New York Times as jarring:

“With a sunny, inviting smile, Senator Katie Britt of Alabama welcomed Americans into her kitchen on Thursday night.

Many soon backed away nervously.

In the Republican Party’s official response to President Biden’s State of the Union address, Ms. Britt delivered a jarring speech that toggled between an increasingly strained cheerfulness and a fierce glare as she gave ominous warnings about illegal immigration.

Ms. Britt, 42, has been seen as a rising Republican star and floated as a possible running mate for former President Donald J. Trump. But in the biggest moment of her fledgling political career, she delivered a tonally uneven speech that was made more unusual by the setting of her own house in Montgomery, Ala., where she sat at her kitchen table and painted a dark picture of an America in decline.

“Our commander-in-chief is not in command,” Ms. Britt said. “The free world deserves better than a dithering and diminished leader.”

 

The selection of the 42-year-old Senator was supposed to contrast age-wise with the president and make up for the male dominance in the Republican Congressional delegations, however, her phrasing and speech patterns, seen by some as “fundie” or following fundamentalist guidelines for women, turned off many as noted below in the Times. Her dramatic recitation of the sex trafficking of migrants (which reprised a twenty-year-old Republican story and talking point) seemed out of context to many.

“But the scene seemed to confuse viewers on social media, where Ms. Britt was mocked by some for using a dramatic, breathy voice to deliver critiques of the president.

“Under his administration, families are worse off — our communities are less safe, and our country is less secure,” she said. “I just wish he understood what real families are facing around kitchen tables just like this one.”

 

Writing in the Atlantic, Elaina Plott Calabro noted the following about the Senator:

 

“It was just five days ago that Newt Gingrich was imagining the possibilities for Britt’s future, framing the freshman senator from Alabama’s coming rebuttal to President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address as her “big audition.” “It will be interesting to see if Britt rises to the occasion,” the former House speaker had mused to a New York talk-radio host. “If she does, it will be a major step up in her potentially being Trump’s vice-presidential candidate.”

(After the speech, Gingrich had no comment.)

 

“You might not have known it from Katie Britt’s State of the Union rebuttal last night—a performance derided by members of her own party as “bizarre” and “confusing”—but up until then, Britt had distinguished herself in the Senate with a reputation for being startlingly, well, normal.

Her own Senate colleague’s clumsy assessment of the speech seemed to reinforce precisely the stereotype of the GOP that Katie Britt, in being tapped to deliver the party’s response to Biden, was theoretically meant to counteract. “She was picked as a housewife, not just a senator, somebody who sees it from a different perspective,” Tuberville told reporters today. (Britt’s office did not respond to an interview request, but in a statement to Business Insider, her spokesperson said: “Joe Biden angrily screamed for an hour and was roundly praised for a ‘fiery’ speech. Katie Britt passionately made the case on the need for a new direction and is being criticized by the liberal media. Color me surprised.”)

Maybe it was bad coaching or poor talking points, but the rebuttal did not fly well. Do we live in such different Americas that some thought her remarks would resonate with insecure suburban women or stay-at-home parents on the prairie? I do not know for certain, but she offered no comfort that a Republican administration would change anything or improve the immigration picture at the border, especially as she voted against the long-awaited compromise worked out in the Senate, but killed by words from DJT. How would Republicans who tout tax cuts for the wealthy bring down food costs or make housing more affordable? Since they wish to destroy Obamacare, what is their alternative suggestion?

Where do we go from here? The campaigns are just starting in earnest now; hang on for a long and bumpy ride to November!

Til next week- Peace!