This may make for an even more interesting State of the Union - bipartisan seating:
A plan that would have Republicans and Democrats sit side-by-side during this month's State of the Union address has picked up support from nearly one-fifth of the Senate as well as a handful of House members, including a top House Republican.
Symbolically, this probably makes as much sense as anything else we are likely to get out of Congress in the next two years - if Congress is urging the rest of us to unite and be civil, they might want to lead by example.
That said, some thoughts. First, do not attempt this at your high school cafeteria.
Second, just how do opponents plan to frame their objections?
And third, on balance I supect the President would prefer this new arrangment - rather than cheering from one side of the chamber and stony silence from the other, the cheering will be scattered. Viewers will be left to guess by the volume wheter it is bipartisan and by quick camera scans (or their common sense) which side is cheering. (A tip from the Psychic Help Hotline - when Obama announces his commitment to Afghanistan, it will be Republicans making whatever noise we hear; if he re-affirms his commitment to surrender pre-emptively begin troop withdrawals, the cheers will be from the Dems.)
Obama will get the benefit of looking like the whole chamber loves him, with only the volume of adulation varying.
Well - if this is a zero-sum exercise in which Obama benefits, one might guess that Republicans ought to object. Tricky - pretending to be bi-partisan might help Republican Congressional leaders, and maybe the zero-sum losers are the Republican Presidential candidates.
Since you ask, the idea was put forward by a Democratic group:
The bipartisan seating plan was originally proposed by the centrist Democratic group Third Way [link]in a letter to congressional leaders this week.
Uh huh - a bunch of moderate House Dems want to hide among the Republicans, and who can blame them?
I Boldly Predict this will come to pass.
Much ado about nothing. Maybe they can all hold hands during the speech.
Posted by: Boatbuilder | January 15, 2011 at 01:52 PM
Er, let's see... "I was elected to fight everything that Obama and his Dem Congress have done, not sit with them singing Kumbaya while O gives his latest re-election performance."
Posted by: Kevin B | January 15, 2011 at 01:56 PM
Please, Republicans, don't cave into this.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 15, 2011 at 01:58 PM
Especially after Obama's partisan BS during the last SOTU - he doesn't deserve the boost.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 15, 2011 at 01:59 PM
In the military history , this is known as "Holding the enemy by his belt". By staying as close as possible to enemy forces, it keeps them from using their advantage in artillery and air assets. If effect it equalizes the battlefield.
When you are using a strategy of attrition, this is a proven method to wear down your enemy.
This was the preferred strategy of Vietnamese General Giap.
Posted by: frank martin | January 15, 2011 at 01:59 PM
How juvenile. Only the devious cowardly Dems could come up with an Arizona stadium repeat.
First run of the hoped for Republican "steely resolve" test, if you ask me.
Posted by: OldTimer | January 15, 2011 at 02:02 PM
If the Dems are so squeamish about staying on their own side, the Republicans could warmly invite them to come to the Rep side and sit safely next to them. Dems could be allowed to bring their pacifiers and blankies, too.
Posted by: OldTimer | January 15, 2011 at 02:07 PM
You said it, OT. This kumbaya seating arrangement is designed to nullify the intent and results of last November's election and to showcase Obama in the best light possible as if to say, "See, we had an election, but we're all still unified in support of our great leader." Nonsense! It's so Scott Brown.
If the Republicans fall for this latest democrat strategy, they will show themselves to be the same gullible fools that they've always been. What they do beyond that will not matter very much.
Posted by: Barbara | January 15, 2011 at 02:15 PM
Can they hold hands?
Progresives are children. They believe in leaders with supernatural powers. They confuse facts with fiction. They pout and blame everything on someone else. They enjoy games, like musical congressional chairs.
Posted by: MarkO | January 15, 2011 at 02:21 PM
If the Republicans fall for this latest democrat strategy, they will show themselves to be the same gullible fools that they've always been.
Hear, hear, (the Real) Barbara! In addition to all the other disadvantages to Republicans, it will also dilute the visual impact of how many "We's" there are present, vs. "They's." (If they do this I will no longer be a "we" though.) Republicans simply could not be that foolish, could they?
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | January 15, 2011 at 02:24 PM
When they get their ass kicked in an election, they decide it's time to make nice. Fuck 'em.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 15, 2011 at 02:30 PM
"When they get their ass kicked in an election, they decide it's time to make nice. Fuck 'em."
Have to agree.
Posted by: boris | January 15, 2011 at 02:37 PM
"That said, some thoughts. First, do not attempt this at your high school cafeteria. Or the U.S. SOTU address.
Tongs and canes! Tongs and canes!
Surely the GOP will not fall for this.
Posted by: Frau Krawall | January 15, 2011 at 02:40 PM
Well, the Senate Republicans will--at least some of them. Hopefully, the House will remain strong. We shall see.
Posted by: bolitha | January 15, 2011 at 02:44 PM
Our problem is not that the permanent political class doesn't get along. Our problem is that they go along.
Posted by: Ibid | January 15, 2011 at 02:45 PM
Congress's kumbayeh moment will be succeeded by an ice cream social and a bake sale to raise money for our deficit-diminishment volunteers.
Posted by: daveinboca | January 15, 2011 at 03:05 PM
Do you suppose we can find something even sillier to get exercised about than mixed seating in the State of the Union?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 15, 2011 at 03:18 PM
Well, the Senate Republicans will--at least some of them.
McCain, Graham, Collins, Snowe, Cornyn, Brown; hey Mike Castle could be part of it too except that RINO is a squish unable presently to do any harm.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2011 at 03:23 PM
I think it's a great idea. The Republicans should all seat first, and then place a tack on the seat next to them.
Posted by: West | January 15, 2011 at 03:29 PM
I've formulated a response for the speaker to answer this absurd idea:
"We'll keep the partisan divide seating; however, if any democrats want to come sit with us, we'll try to accommodate them, if necessary, we'll kick out some Republican squish and make him go sit with the democrats."
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | January 15, 2011 at 03:48 PM
"Second, just how do opponents plan to frame their objections?"
How about like this:
"Since The One has publicly spoken against the notion that the AZ shootings had anything to do with political partisanship, why would I want to sign on to something that makes it looks like the AZ shooting had anything to do with political partisanship?"
This is Theater on the part of the Dems, intended to move focus from their post-shooting attacks on everyone on the Right - Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, if the Righties won't sit with us after our smear campaign, then everything we said about them is actually TRUE!
If this happened on an individual level, I'd be honor-bound to spit on the ground between us at the very suggestion.
I guess now we see what Congessional R's think of their unfairly-impunged honor.
- MD
Posted by: MuscleDaddy | January 15, 2011 at 04:08 PM
I understand McCain has already signaled that he's hot for the idea. But of course.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 15, 2011 at 04:22 PM
This is a very bad idea. At least they can show passive displeasure by being silent with the current method. Sitting together would force them to actively show displeasure by booing, hissing, etc. Of course this would be turned against them as spoiling the Kumbaya setting.
Posted by: sammy small | January 15, 2011 at 04:32 PM
--Tricky - pretending to be bi-partisan might help Republican Congressional leaders...--
Considering they were sent there by a tidal wave of outrage at what the Dems have done the last two years and precisely NOT to be bipartisan but to roll it back, I consider it unlikely it will help them with anyone other than David Brooks and Peggy Noonan.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 15, 2011 at 04:35 PM
he Republicans should all seat first, and then place a tack on the seat next to them.
Love it.
Posted by: Jane says obamasucks | January 15, 2011 at 04:41 PM
Just stupid. Boehner opened the session with a reading of the Constitution. He's not going to dispense with tradition for some high school prank like this. Especially after this last week.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 15, 2011 at 04:50 PM
I regard this as an IQ test for Republicans. McCain's approval just underscores that he really is Megan's daddy.
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2011 at 04:52 PM
Will there be Court ordered bussing?
Posted by: MarkO | January 15, 2011 at 04:56 PM
Yes. I meant it.
Posted by: MarkO | January 15, 2011 at 04:58 PM
McCain will be on the Sunday shows a lot this year.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 15, 2011 at 04:58 PM
McCain will be on the Sunday shows a lot this year. . . .
. . . because you can't have on someone who will challenge the meme.
Posted by: sbw | January 15, 2011 at 05:08 PM
That Fuller guy (victim from Tucson) who blamed Rush et al has made a death threat while participating on "This Week" townhall set to air tomorrow.
His threat was aimed the Tea Party guest on the same show.
Posted by: centralcal | January 15, 2011 at 05:17 PM
Yeah, let's all set together at the SOTU and sing kumbaya.
None of the House Republicans have signed on to this yet. Only the usual Senate RINO's so far.
Posted by: centralcal | January 15, 2011 at 05:19 PM
I think it sounds like a very nice idea, and I think it would be nice if the Republicans invited the President to come sit among them after his speech so he and Congress could listen to the Republican response together.
Posted by: bgates | January 15, 2011 at 05:21 PM
Another way for the dems to signal business as usual and hide their loss. Lucy is getting ready to pull the football. Can you imagine Pelosi and Reid suggesting this last year when dems were in complete control? A move like this only works if the pub's gullibility is completely off the charts. And it is guaranteed to piss off the base.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | January 15, 2011 at 05:22 PM
From Gateway Pundit:
Fox News has identified the screamer as Fuller.
Posted by: centralcal | January 15, 2011 at 05:26 PM
Didn't Michelle Malkin write a book about the "left unhinged"? This guy Fuller, whether he is a gunshot victim or not, is just as unhinged as Louchner. And he is being uncivil, vitriolic and much more inciteful than anything the Tea Party, Rush, Beck, Palin or even Boehner has ever been. But he has to have sympathy because he got shot while being partisan. That is what he is, a partisan democrat who got shot while visiting his congressperson. But it doesn't change the fact that he was probably angry and mad and vitriolic toward the Tea Party even before he got shot.
If you don't think so, ask him if he would sit with the Republicans if he was a Congressperson.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 15, 2011 at 05:36 PM
Ok let's see if ABC shows this tomorrow. It was stated at Gateway Pundit The ABC producer said he was not sure if they will show (the) incident tomorrow, or not.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2011 at 05:40 PM
Ok let's see if ABC shows this tomorrow. It was stated at Gateway Pundit The ABC producer said he was not sure if they will show (the) incident tomorrow, or not.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2011 at 05:40 PM
Again this lovely software posted two comments for one click
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2011 at 05:41 PM
What a stupid idea. Supported by Udall, Murkowski the sickening, Schumer,...
What a stupid idea.
Posted by: Janet | January 15, 2011 at 05:42 PM
Whoa, the MSM will be all over this Fuller guy.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 15, 2011 at 05:42 PM
OT--We have to remember that there are other, better things in life than Fuller and Krugman and the Obami:
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/01/15/tender-mercies/
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2011 at 05:43 PM
Well Obama may be hoping for more applause at the SOTU than last year. He will try to get that from Democrats. But it seems that there are not quite as many of those in Congress as there was a while ago.......(humming "The Battle of New Orleans"..)
Posted by: Theo | January 15, 2011 at 05:48 PM
I love this part - Fuller is being held involuntarily for an "evaluation."
Really good idea. Wonder what made them think of it? /snark
Posted by: centralcal | January 15, 2011 at 05:49 PM
It was clearly right wing radio that caused Fuller to snap......
Posted by: Theo | January 15, 2011 at 05:50 PM
Wonderful story, Clarice! And, sad, too.
Posted by: centralcal | January 15, 2011 at 05:53 PM
I wonder if they will have Peter, Paul and Mary sing Lord, Kumbaya before the SOTU?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 15, 2011 at 05:55 PM
I think it sounds like a very nice idea, and I think it would be nice if the Republicans invited the President to come sit among them after his speech so he and Congress could listen to the Republican response together.
That would be so beautiful. I had a vision of him sitting on camera with the person giving it.
Posted by: MayBee | January 15, 2011 at 06:01 PM
It is sad, but if you could only see how happy finally getting those diplomas made him, cc!
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2011 at 06:02 PM
They wre real united giving away all that cash tripling foreign aid cash,gee could that be O and B P and VP.How stupid do they think anericans are?
Posted by: Comebackfrom | January 15, 2011 at 06:03 PM
Will the House repeal vote happen before the SOTU?
Posted by: Extraneus | January 15, 2011 at 06:05 PM
I had a vision of him sitting on camera with the person giving it.
Hey, so long as we're breaking with tradition to usher in a new age of bipartisanship, I say give the response from the same podium the President uses. And ask the networks to cover the whole response rather than cutting away for analysis.
Wouldn't it be a stirring bipartisan moment for the President to finish his little speech, then step down to take a seat in the front row next to Renee Elmers to listen to and politely applaud Sarah Palin for an hour?
Posted by: bgates | January 15, 2011 at 06:07 PM
I wonder if they will have Peter, Paul and Mary sing Lord, Kumbaya before the SOTU?
That would be difficult
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2011 at 06:10 PM
Wow, that would unite the country for sure, bg.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 15, 2011 at 06:10 PM
I wonder if they will have Peter, Paul and Mary sing Lord, Kumbaya
Too Jesus-y. Also, Mary passed away in 2009.
Posted by: bgates | January 15, 2011 at 06:11 PM
Will the House repeal vote happen before the SOTU?
I think it would be a nice bipartisan gesture if it happened immediately before. The Republicans could offer the President the historical, unprecedented opportunity to preside over a House vote live and in prime time, and then they could ask the Democrats to join them in a display of the civil bipartisan unity that was the major goal of the electorate and vote to defund the job-killing wealth-destroying abomination of Obamacare.
Then the Democrats could show everybody how committed to bipartisanship they are, and then the President could give his little speech.
Posted by: bgates | January 15, 2011 at 06:15 PM
((I wonder if they will have Peter, Paul and Mary sing Lord, Kumbaya before the SOTU?))
That would be quite interesting being as Mary Travers has passed on.
Posted by: Chubby | January 15, 2011 at 06:19 PM
Jack now has the memo.
Posted by: Chubby | January 15, 2011 at 06:23 PM
Oh no. They said "cross-hairs" in the Ravens-Steelers game.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 15, 2011 at 06:24 PM
bgates, Have I ever told you you are my favorite?
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2011 at 06:25 PM
I am extremely eager to see how the media cover the Fuller incident. It will be hard for the MSM to gnore it, but what can they say? Climate of hate? Lone lunatic? Ultimate moral authority of the victim?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 15, 2011 at 06:30 PM
Apparently, Tucson shoot-out survivor J. Eric Fuller has been arrested for “threats” at a townhall meeting in Tucson for ABC.
Posted by: Neo | January 15, 2011 at 06:30 PM
Geez, what a tough crowd here. Okay, it was a metaphorical snark but since you have history on your side, is the guy sitting next to Lynda Randle, Biil Moyers or that Fuller guy? LUN
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 15, 2011 at 06:31 PM
You are such a cynic , DoT.
Neo, not only arrested but turned over for psychiatric evaluation.
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2011 at 06:34 PM
I am extremely eager to see how the media cover the Fuller incident.
I predict ... PSTD
Posted by: Neo | January 15, 2011 at 06:37 PM
Opps PTSD
Posted by: Neo | January 15, 2011 at 06:38 PM
Sherif assman is slow but is learning. (Dupnik is serbian for assman)
Posted by: PaulV | January 15, 2011 at 06:41 PM
Why hasn't W been introduced into this argument? After all he was a POTUS who was stalked (Cindy Sheehan) and the MFM regaled the simplicity of derangement without a quibble. They are so corrupted that even when they admit it pubically they do it with a smile on their face giving us the finger.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 15, 2011 at 06:44 PM
Not for the great Healer-In-Chief.
Posted by: Barbara | January 15, 2011 at 06:45 PM
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/01/15/lets-make-the-state-of-the-union-address-really-bipartisan/>bipartisan bgates
I suppose the claim on Fuller is that Palin drove him to it by showing all her critics are really insane.
Posted by: clarice | January 15, 2011 at 06:46 PM
Hey, DoT - over at Ace's they are calling it "Absolute Immoral Authority." heh.
Posted by: centralcal | January 15, 2011 at 06:47 PM
--Not for the great Healer-In-Chief.--
No kidding. Maybe if he walked by the old marxist linebacker's crypt she'd open her eyes for the first time in a couple of years.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 15, 2011 at 06:49 PM
Well my defeastist psychology is working on the Steelers. Sorry, Cap'n Hate but it looks like home cooking could pull them through.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 15, 2011 at 06:52 PM
Have the Ravens imploded? Looks like it. Talking about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Incredible.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 15, 2011 at 07:01 PM
Yeah JiB...and what about Code Pink attacking Condi Rice?
on ABC news tonight giving a preview on the discussion panel with Christine Amanpour...they did an 'oh by the way' at the end...that someone (no name)in the audience took offense & said something (they didn't say what) to a panelist & the person was taken away by police. That was all.
Posted by: Janet | January 15, 2011 at 07:02 PM
Janet: ABC is just another propaganda arm. How will Tapper spin this on his Twitter?
Yesterday, he was swatting away anyone who had questions about the memorial t-shirts as "shirthers." I kid you not.
They are all b*st*rds.
Posted by: centralcal | January 15, 2011 at 07:04 PM
"Why hasn't W been introduced into this argument?"
Perhaps it has ...
Posted by: boris | January 15, 2011 at 07:07 PM
That Code Pink woman looks a lot like the nutball SF lawyer who defended the dog owners in that mauling case.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 15, 2011 at 07:09 PM
Good for Ann Althouse!!! At the Memorial Pep Rally, Obama's hair was predominantly gray. Today for his video taped radio announcement he has no gray at all in his hair.
Posted by: centralcal | January 15, 2011 at 07:10 PM
That code pink woman looks like she needs to try the ones with wings.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 15, 2011 at 07:12 PM
Bear in mind the Ravens' pattern of running out of gas in the fouth quarter. And the Steelers are coming off a bye week, while Balto played six days ago.
At 24-21 with 12 minutes left, this one is l'histoire.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 15, 2011 at 07:13 PM
I was appalled that they gave out the tee shirts at a Memorial, but today I think having applause signs might even be worse.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | January 15, 2011 at 07:13 PM
I am torn on the Steeler-Raven game. I can hear my son downstairs cheering and then getting quiet as the Steelers took the lead, but the Steelers were my childhood team. All my extended family still live in the Pgh. area and many are texting me like crazy. My Dad, of course, was a died-in-the-wool Steeler fan and I keep getting the sense that if I even thought about rooting for the Ravens, he'd rise from his grave and Zombie me for the rest of my life. So GO STEELERS! but don't tell my son.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | January 15, 2011 at 07:18 PM
Sara, I think that is closed captioning.
I'm just surprised he didn't get caught up admiring himself in the pictures on the jumbotron cube and had TOTUS get too far ahead of him. "Uhhhh. can you back it up boys?"
THAT would have been priceless.
Posted by: Stephanie | January 15, 2011 at 07:20 PM
After Obama's little show with the Supremes last year he needs a kumbaya moment. Plus, it will show how Obama is a uniter. And republicans are buying this bs?
Posted by: Sue | January 15, 2011 at 07:22 PM
Stephanie: Thank you, that makes me feel slightly better.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | January 15, 2011 at 07:23 PM
c-cal-
If Ibama's been using Just For Men, and has an old stash somewheres, it explains a lot.
The old formula involved lead.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 15, 2011 at 07:25 PM
In case it hasn't already been linked on another thread, here's Markos Krugman's Climate of Hate.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | January 15, 2011 at 07:29 PM
Supremes are there cause O s dad was a cia informant and got favors for himself and family harvard and b certificates no problem.Classidied have to stay shut,like Plame.
Posted by: goldengoveawards | January 15, 2011 at 07:33 PM
The old formula involved lead.
Maybe that's how Moochelle's garden had all that lead in it; Stinky was dumping the rinse water.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 15, 2011 at 07:34 PM
Did the Ravens like give up or are they really only lucky with an dubios legend in Ray Lewis? Harbaugh needs to think about another team because this one is so fake even he is having the heebie=jeebies.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 15, 2011 at 08:00 PM
Interesting article at AsiaTimes on surging food and energy prices overseas (and here) due to the fed and other central banks' loose money and the oblivious response of the fed to critics.
Go lumber!
Posted by: Ignatz | January 15, 2011 at 08:01 PM
Ig-
I has more to do with the ongoing Chinese stimulus program than anything else. The Fed's actions are staying largely local.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | January 15, 2011 at 08:06 PM
As the late WF Buckley used to say, "who says A must say B."
It seems to me that Krugman, Geraldo, et al must now say that Fuller was motivated by a climate of hatred against the Tea Party, by the oft-repeated angry denunciations of the right, and on and on. Does Fuller instruct the left that it must tone down its rhetoric? If not, why not?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 15, 2011 at 08:07 PM
I love poker especialy 5 card draw where i can be stoic and bluff. Most people fall for bluffs and fall with lots of money on the table I think Boehner (forget the Senate, they are basically a ladies bridge group with lots of power) says no way Jose. We are partisan for a reason. We represent people in this country who want less partinship and more guts and balls to stand up and take back this great country (or something like that). But I just don't think it wiill happen that way:)
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 15, 2011 at 08:10 PM
One of the reports on Fuller says that the Tea Party member who was the subject of the death threat told the reporter he will not press charges.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | January 15, 2011 at 08:12 PM
Posted by: Neo | January 15, 2011 at 08:17 PM
--The Fed's actions are staying largely local.--
How does the world's most important central bank go on a binge and keep it local, Mel?
Posted by: Ignatz | January 15, 2011 at 08:22 PM
If not, why not?
"Because," as Andrew Klavan reminds us they like to say, "shut up."
Have I ever told you you are my favorite?
Sure, but I never get tired of hearing it.
Posted by: bgates | January 15, 2011 at 08:24 PM