Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
June 29, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

Senate Leaders Scramble for a Deal on Health Care Bill

What’s Next for the Bill Cosby Sex-Assault Case?

Truthdig Bazaar
The Idea of Justice

The Idea of Justice

By Amartya Sen

Conservation Refugees

Conservation Refugees

Mark Dowie

more items

Ear to the Ground
Email this item Print this item

Dems Upstage the Prez

Posted on Jan 29, 2008

Monday’s key players, pictured at a previous State of the Union speech.

Because he lacks a legacy—at least the good kind—no one expected much from President Bush’s final State of the Union address, which is probably why Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama managed to steal the spotlight. The Internet is buzzing over Monday’s sideshow.

But the extra attention cuts both ways. Clinton boldly marched right up to Ted Kennedy and shook his hand, but she also got caught checking with Obama before applauding the president.

Still, better mixed reviews than none at all. And the president wasn’t the only wallflower at the dance. John McCain and Mike Huckabee, though they weren’t there in person, stood with Bush in spirit, largely agreeing with what he had to say and not offering much to get excited about.

The Hill:

All eyes were on Democratic presidential frontrunners Sens. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) Monday night as spectators and pundits followed their every move during President Bush’s final State of the Union address.

Clinton set observers atwitter when she waded through the crowd before the speech to shake hands with Democratic dean and senior Sen. Edward Kennedy (Mass.), who made headlines Monday by endorsing Obama in the primary.

In one instance Clinton appeared to gauge Obama’s response before showing her own.

When Bush warned the Iranian government that “America will confront those who threaten our troops, we will stand by our allies, and we will defend our vital interests in the Persian Gulf,” Obama jumped up to applaud. Clinton leaned across Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.), seated to her left, to look in Obama’s direction before slowly standing.

Read more

Banner, End of Story, Desktop
Banner, End of Story, Mobile
Watch a selection of Wibbitz videos based on Truthdig stories:

Get a book from one of our contributors in the Truthdig Bazaar.

Related Entries

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every day.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By cyrena, January 29, 2008 at 11:31 pm Link to this comment

From Sharon Ash, Always ideology before common sense. It makes people say stupid things, and always without any sort of backup….tsk, tsk…

•  “Obama will attract much more of that element because, due to his lack of experience, just like George W. Bush, he will have to rely on others to a large extent.”

Actually Sharon, a GOOD leader, moreover, an EXCELLENT leader, WILL request and even demand the consul of good advisors. ANY good leader does this, because that’s what makes a good leader. When we discovered that the American people had been incredibly stupid enough to choose George Bush, (even though he didn’t win, enough stupid Americans did vote for him) the first prayer and/or hope, was that he would at least get some decent advisors, because we ALL knew he was a moron with no experience.

So, he is nothing like Obama, since Obama DOES have political experience, as well as a firm grip on leadership qualities that are required for the job. He will NOT attempt to act in a vacuum, and he DOES know enough to select the best people for the variety of jobs that are needed to run a country.

•  Hillary, on the other hand, is more than capable of making important decisions and will make them based upon the ‘common good’ as that has been her record.  She is far less likely to require the help of Ted Kennedy on any decision than is Obama.  Ted, like most politicians, is looking out for himself, not you and me.

Here again, you have nothing besides an obvious bias based on nothing. What can you point to, that tells us that Hillary is ‘more capable’ of making important decisions, or that she will make them based on the common good? Well, you can’t, because Hillary hasn’t made any decisions based on the common good. It was not for the ‘common good’ for us to send our troops into an aggressive war, and to spend nearly 2 trillion dollars to do it. It has NEVER been for our ‘common good’ to continue the ‘free trade’ practices of NAFTA that her husband put into action, (though he didn’t really start them) and it is those NAFTA practices that have created your ‘illegal immigration’ problems. Without NAFTA, those ‘illegal immigrants’ would still be in their own countries. Why do you suppose the United Farm Workers have supported Hillary? Well, it’s because those are the ONLY jobs still left in this country, and only migrant farm workers do those jobs.

So, tell us again how Hillary will make ‘important’ decisions for the ‘common good’. She isn’t interested in YOU getting any education, or learning how to read and connect common dots, like practices and principles, and their obvious outcomes, and she doesn’t seem to mind if everybody else stays stupid either. So, tell me again, about how she’s gonna take care of the ‘common good”.

It does NOT help the ‘common good’ for stupid people like you to be out and about, and preying upon the rest of society with your ignorance, and…it doesn’t help HER either. She found that out when her egotistical meat-head husband blew it for her.
Now you’re doing the same thing. I think you and Bill should run away on your own rendezvous, at least until after the primaries. If Hill has a shot at all, it’ll only be if somebody can do damage control on her behalf.

Report this

By ProUnionProLabor, January 29, 2008 at 9:49 pm Link to this comment

“Meet the new boss….same as the old boss.”

Sorry, Pete.

Report this

By Louise, January 29, 2008 at 6:04 pm Link to this comment


I thought the emperor was stark raving naked! smile I thought that’s what the whooping and hollering was about!

“In his State of the Union, the President asked Congress for $300 million for poor kids in the inner city. As there are, officially, 15 million children in America living in poverty, how much is that per child? Correct! $20.”

“The President also demanded that Congress extend his tax cuts. The cost: $4.3 trillion over ten years. The big recipients are millionaires. And the number of millionaires happens, not coincidentally, to equal the number of poor kids, roughly 15 million of them. OK class: what is the cost of the tax cut per millionaire? That’s right, Richie, $287,000 apiece.”


“If you can’t buy a book nor pay tuition with a sawbuck, what exactly can a poor kid buy with $20 in urban America? The Palast Investigative Team donned baseball caps and big pants and discovered we could obtain what local citizens call a “rock” of crack cocaine. For $20, we were guaranteed we could fulfill any kid’s dream for at least 15 minutes.”


“In Iraq, General Petraeus tells us we must continue to feed in troops for another ten years. There is no way the military can recruit these freedom fighters unless our lower income youth are high, hooked and desperate. Don’t say, ‘crack vials,’ they’re, ‘Democracy Rocks’!”


“Of course, there’s an effective alternative to Mr. Bush’s plan – which won’t cost a penny more. Simply turn it upside down. Let’s give each millionaire in America a $20 bill, and every poor child $287,000.”

Course that wont happen, cause drugs and money laundering are the repub/american way. Read the whole article. Read the whole web site. Palast is so darn smart. How many others got these numbers right off the bat?

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, January 29, 2008 at 6:03 pm Link to this comment

It would have restored my faith in democracy.

Report this

By totallyclips, January 29, 2008 at 5:26 pm Link to this comment

The applause isn’t for the president it’s for the office, just like the military, you don’t salute the man but the uniform

Report this

By Don Stivers, January 29, 2008 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment

I cannot believe people with ANY intelligence would stand up and applaud a WAR CRIMINAL. Bush waged war on innocent people.  INNOCENT!! 

Good God.  I’ve given up hope.  I don’t write anymore because I’m just a small voice in the wind and our representatives in government do not listen. 

Jump up Obama and show us some more Grandstanding!  Go ahead and applaud the little criminal!  Let him get away with murder.

Report this

By steve, January 29, 2008 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

How exactly did the Democrats upstage the President??  By all sitting together like a bunch of cheerleaders??  The Democrats are a bunch of cowards, Obama and Hillary included, and our sorry excuse for a President is simply a puppet for who is really in charge: the heads of the Multinational Corporations.  Nobody should care about all these side shows, the State of the Union address etc, the real decisions get made in the boardrooms.

Report this

By Louise, January 29, 2008 at 12:25 pm Link to this comment

The eternal fester, serving two masters.

No doubt they are the boil that simply will not drain. But then you have to lance a boil before the puss can run out.

Maybe it’s time we try to educate our elected officials. This, more than any issue demonstrates how truly uninformed they are. Now we can blame Israel and AIPAC for their ignorance, but who do we blame for the fact that nobody seems to want to set the record straight? Sure, I would like to believe they are far to intelligent to not understand what’s going on, but the facts argue otherwise. I think we the people are in the habit of putting the less intelligent at the head of the line. [Why do we do that?]

Because of all their shortcomings, I really believe the isolation of being trapped in the echo chamber is a real threat to their discovering any kind of truth. And that’s where we come in. And lets face it folks, it really is up to us. Nobody else is going to plug the hole leaking truth, justice and the honorable way out of this sinking ship of state.

Here’s a good place to start:

I understand visuals have a greater impact on the candidates since they don’t have time to study.

But lets not forget, inside of Israel, just like inside the USA, there are citizens as outraged and alarmed as we, and trying hard to help their fellow human beings. And here in the USA there are Jews, and Israelis as outraged and alarmed as we. We need to stop waiting for someone else to point out the inequities and start doing it ourselves.

Israel Blocks Aid Convoy From Reaching Gaza

“The Israeli military has prevented an aid convoy organized by Israeli human rights organizations, peace activists, and former military personnel from entering Gaza to distribute five tons of food to needy Palestinians. According to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the activists have been trying to enter Gaza since Saturday. The groups have been calling on Israel to end the siege on Gaza. In the past 10 days Israel had tightened a seven-month blockade of the Gaza strip by halting supplies of food, medical equipment and fuel.”

When I travel abroad, I’m aware people look at me and see me as a part of the current threat to world peace. [AKA all things Bush] Many Jews face the same broad brushstroke even though they don’t deserve it.

While we see current government control in Israel as a threat to us, and world peace. The world sees us as the threat to world peace! And of course with Bush in charge we are. But even if Bush resigned tomorrow, what we have started will not quickly go away. Terror is the new World Order, except it really isn’t new. Which brings me back to the echo chamber. What is the magic key that unlocks the chamber that keeps the candidates from hearing those of us who disdain the echo? Lets find that key and make a difference.

Is Israel responsible for the corruption and duplicity in Washington D.C.? Or are we? Perhaps Israel may be the elephant in the room, but you must agree, they are also a convenient scapegoat.

So back to square one. How do we educate the uninformed we put in office that they’ve got it all wrong?

No man can serve two masters.

Well that’s it!

No man can serve two masters!

That pretty well eliminates all the candidates, huh. smile

Report this

By don knutsen, January 29, 2008 at 11:08 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

As discusting as it was to hear the republican cheerleaders hoot and hollar like at a monster truck rally to such a despicable administration. It was probably more disheartening to see Obama leap to his feet when the chimp-in-chief announced that we would defend ( read: attack whomever we choose ) our vital security interests ( their oil ). Was D. Kucinich shown, undoubtedly not, he could never get the attention from the propoganda machine that is our media, yet he was the best hope of making a 180 degree change in our country’s direction and understood far better then Pelosi or Reid that impeachment of both Cheney & Bush should be the No. 1 priority of the Congress. Why do the democrats still play the role of the dutiful whimps? As if this president deserves the favor of any credibility, on anything ? They all sat there, cheered at the cue cards given while knowing full well that if George Bush’s lips are moving, then he is lying.

Report this

By T Mack, January 29, 2008 at 10:19 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

...but I’m not a Republican either.  Far from that.

How can I feel so alienated from political people I once fervently supported?  Why am I in disagreement with them most of the time?

Why are the dems continuing to fund this war?  No wonder we are going broke.

Why do they insist on encouraging an illegal immigrant population when the resources for citizens are daily maxxed out?  Has adding 50 million illegals to the country’s rolls (since they want families to come here) over the next 5 years had an impact on the degree to which we can get health care coverage and other benefits?

Why didn’t they push for a single-payer universal health care?

Why are they so conservative?

Report this

By Sharon Ash, January 29, 2008 at 9:34 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What we are seeing is those who want to be able to exert their influence, attaching them self to those they hope can win.  Obama will attract much more of that element because, due to his lack of experience, just like George W. Bush, he will have to rely on others to a large extent.  Hillary, on the other hand, is more than capable of making important decisions and will make them based upon the ‘common good’ as that has been her record.  She is far less likely to require the help of Ted Kennedy on any decision than is Obama.  Ted, like most politicians, is looking out for himself, not you and me.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, January 29, 2008 at 8:56 am Link to this comment

they must all be craven cowards - but frightened of what - #By Louise, January 29: “...I think the answer to that is obvious. The press…”

Undoubtedly so,  Louise, but this is a new development…...

The String-Pulling Cabal - AGAIN!!!!

Quote Haaretz - The AIPAC affair: Can the pro-Israel lobby recover?

As the American Israel Public Affairs Committee holds its annual policy conference this month, it can point with satisfaction to one of the closest relationships ever between the U.S. administration and the government of Israel.

This year has also seen the most perplexing development in the powerful pro-Israel lobby’s history: an FBI investigation into allegations that a Pentagon analyst passed classified information to Israel via AIPAC officials.

The closer Israel and Washington have grown on policy issues, the more vociferous the charges of Israel’s critics that the Jewish state and its American Jewish supporters exercise too much influence over U.S. decision-making…..

PS -Note the “Related Links” section on the left!!!

Also check for “Highlights”  - AIPAC Achievements:-

As America’s leading pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC works with both Democratic and Republican political leaders to enact public policy that strengthens the vital U.S.-Israel relationship. With the support of its members nationwide, AIPAC has worked with Congress and the Executive Branch on numerous critical initiatives—from securing vital foreign aid for Israel to stopping Iran’s illicit nuclear program…......

Report this

By Louise, January 29, 2008 at 7:21 am Link to this comment

Douglas Chalmers:

“As such, they must all be craven cowards - but frightened of what, exactly???”


I think the answer to that is obvious. The press!!!
Since nobody that votes agrees one hundred percent on anything, everything a candidate does has to be read as appealing to a myriad of views.

Of course it is impossible to please everybody all the time. But following what the press and pundits say, plus all those experts who advise, gives a candidate a clear path [sorta] to follow at any given moment.

Do any of us really believe these candidates read all their emails? Or closely follow the activity on their web sites? Or keep a running record in their heads sorting out the majority, minority or somewhere in the middle views of the people they meet on the campaign trail?

Not hardly. They after all are people, just like us. And being people wanting badly to appeal to the majority they rely heavily on input from advisors, who in turn rely heavily on input from the press and pundits who presumably are keeping score.

Bottom line. Who jumped up when and why is almost as important as anything Bush said. Because in the final analysis he didn’t say anything new ... or important, except he repeated his lies about Iran. [oh there’s a surprise]

Watch today’s Democracy Now. Far more valuable and informative way to spend an hour than listening to the war criminal in chief.

I didn’t watch the SOTU. I cant afford that pain anymore. [digging out the toenails that have curled back into the feet] But I read the transcript on the White House web-site.

Near as I can see, Bush is pretty proud of his accomplishments. And sorely disappointed that he hasn’t been able to destroy Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, like he has everything else. And he hasn’t been able to start WWIII [yet]

I did not read one single “jump to the feet in ovation” paragraph.

Interesting, because when you take the speech out of the audience it makes it clear, audience reaction highlighted by the press, is for the press. duh ...

There was one thing Bush said I agree with:

“The enemy is still there ...”

The queen sits on his left, reflecting light like a polished piece of jade. The real decider sits on his right, managing to swallow his spittle.

The troops continue dying. The vets continue being ignored. The war rages on. As un-winable as ever. The “leaders” continue play-acting at leading.

The working poor keep getting poorer. The Middle Class keeps getting smaller. Multi-Millionaires sell stock and buy gold.

The sick get sicker. Children go hungry. The homeless numbers reach new highs. Consumer purchasing power reaches new lows.

Foreclosures reach new highs. New housing starts reach new lows. That old standby safest of all safe investments, Real Estate is becoming the dead chicken hanging ‘round the neck.

The push to destroy our Constitutional rights once and for all, like a runaway train gains speed.

And the horse race for the position of NEW VERSION of SAME OLD SHIT continues.

And that my friends is the real state of the union.
So, who jumped up when is about as important as why ...

Report this

By truthdweller, January 29, 2008 at 5:40 am Link to this comment

“...Hillary boldly marched right up to Ted Kennedy and shook his hand….”

Now, THIS was a good move on Hillary’s part. THIS impresses me. So, obviously, she’s thinking for herself, at least for a moment, and it’s a good thing she doesn’t take advice from some of her most ardent blogger fans. They would have had her sticking her tongue out at him, or sticking out a leg to trip or kick him.

Maybe she should dump her loud mouth husband as well.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, January 29, 2008 at 5:38 am Link to this comment

Quote The Hill - Clinton, Obama steal Bush’s final show: “Clinton and Obama’s divergent views on the troop surge in Iraq, however, were plainly visible….....

(1): When Bush proclaimed, “Ladies and gentlemen, some may deny the surge is working, but among terrorists there is no doubt,” Clinton sprang to her feet in applause but Obama remained firmly seated. The president’s line divided most of the Democratic audience, with nearly half standing to applaud and the other half sitting in stony silence…........

(2): When Bush warned the Iranian government that “America will confront those who threaten our troops, we will stand by our allies, and we will defend our vital interests in the Persian Gulf” Obama jumped up to applaud. Clinton leaned across Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.), seated to her left, to look in Obama’s direction before slowly standing…........

(3): There also appeared to be some division among Democrats Monday over whether to continue to pump money into the Iraq war effort. When Bush said he would “ask Congress to meet its responsibilities to these brave men and women by fully funding our troops,” Obama and Clinton remained seated while Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) stood up behind them to applaud….....


Clearly, Obama’s “I don’t oppose all wars” statement is still in effect since 2002 athough he apparently wants to renounce his words from August last year about backing Bush’s (Condi Rice’s) bombing innocent villagers in rural Pakistan over targetting a non-existent Al Qaeda who are actually based in Karachi anyway (ref. Benazir Bhutto, Dec. ‘07).

Too bad that the Democrats still can’t get their act together about sorting Bush on his constant red herring of “fully funding our troops”  in Eye-Rak. That should be the easiest thing to rebuff but they have utterly failed to deal with his aspersions against their loyalty to their country. As such, they must all be craven cowards - but frightened of what, exactly???

Is it the ‘fully-funded’ military-industrial complex which is constantly bleeding money off from properly equipping soldiers to their disadvantage to enrich their own profits??? Or is it the constant barrage of ‘red herrings’ from the covert soldiers of AIPAC pursuing another well-known agenda???

Report this

By truthdweller, January 29, 2008 at 5:30 am Link to this comment

I’m not sure why Obama was so anxious to applaud more threats to Iran, and I’m sick of hearing about “American interests” that are thousands of miles from our own boarders.

And, if the security of our troops he was applauding, he needs to just make it real clear that since our troops don’t belong in the Persian Gulf, he’ll just get them back home, beginning immediately.

In short, he could have done without jumping up to applaud that…or much of anything else from the asshole-in-chief.

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook