Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 4:12 AM ET, 01/21/2011

Sixty lawmakers back bipartisan State of the Union seating plan

By Felicia Sonmez

Updated: Jan. 22, 2:50 p.m.

A plan for bipartisan seating at President Obama's State of the Union address is gaining traction among lawmakers, with 60 members of Congress officially declaring their support.

Twenty-two House Democrats, six House Republicans, 25 Senate Democrats, six Senate Republicans and Connecticut Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman have signed on to a letter written by Colorado Democratic Sen. Mark Udall urging members of both parties to sit side-by-side during the Jan. 25 address. That number has grown by 40 since last week, when 19 lawmakers were backing the plan. The idea was originally proposed by the centrist Democratic group Third Way.

Leadership aides in both chambers said that no formal seating plan has been devised and that lawmakers can sit where they like. Many rank-and-file members, as well as several leadership figures, have indicated that they have specific plans to sit next to members of the other party.

House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) plan to sit near each other, as do Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), two outspoken members who are on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum.

Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu says that she'll sit next to Maine Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), her counterpart on the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee. New York Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand is planning to sit next to Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), while Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) is planning to sit together with members of her bipartisan women's softball team.

And Colorado's delegation is one of several bipartisan state delegations planning to sit together in a show of unity. Illinois Sens. Mark Kirk (R) and Dick Durbin (D) and Reps. Dan Lipinski (D) and Bob Dold (R) are also set to sit together, as are Pennsylvania Sens. Pat Toomey (R) and Bob Casey (D).

Asked Friday about the bipartisan seating plan, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) declined to say where she plans to sit but joked that as speaker of the House, "I had been sitting next to Vice President Cheney for a long time."

House Assistant Democratic Leader James Clyburn (S.C.) said Thursday night that he's not opposed to the idea of bipartisan seating, but emphasized that just sitting together "doesn't cut it."

"I don't see anything wrong with it ... but I really think that what shows that we're working in a bipartisan way is to work in a bipartisan way," Clyburn said.

After the jump, a roundup of the 60 lawmakers who have signed on to Udall's proposal.

25 Senate Democrats:
Mark Udall (Colo.)
Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.)
Ron Wyden (Ore.)
Mark Begich (Alaska)
Barbara Boxer (Calif.)
Claire McCaskill (Mo.)
Ben Nelson (Neb.)
Mary Landrieu (La.)
Jack Reed (R.I.)
Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.)
Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.)
Amy Klobuchar (Minn.)
Joe Manchin (W.Va.)
Ben Cardin (Md.)
Jeff Merkley (Ore.)
Charles Schumer (N.Y.)
Michael Bennet (Colo.)
Mark Pryor (Ark.)
Kay Hagan (N.C.)
Mark Warner (Va.)
Bill Nelson (Fla.)
Tom Carper (Del.)
Herb Kohl (Wis.)
Chris Coons (Del.)
Richard Blumenthal (Conn.)

One Senate Independent:
Joe Lieberman (Conn.)

Six Senate Republicans:
Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)
John McCain (Ariz.)
Olympia Snowe (Maine)
Susan Collins (Maine)
Kelly Ayotte (N.H.)
Scott Brown (Mass.)

22 House Democrats:
Mike Michaud (Maine)
Heath Shuler (N.C.)
Mike Ross (Ark.)
Jim Matheson (Utah)
Chellie Pingree (Maine)
Sanford Bishop (Ga.)
John Carney (Del.)
Laura Richardson (Calif.)
Steve Cohen (Tenn.)
Dan Boren (Okla.)
Larry Kissell (N.C.)
Tim Walz (Minn.)
Madeleine Bordallo (Guam)
Dave Loebsack (Iowa)
Grace Napolitano (Calif.)
Mike McIntyre (N.C.)
Jim Cooper (Tenn.)
Niki Tsongas (Mass.)
Dennis Cardoza (Calif.)
Jason Altmire (Pa.)
Mel Watt (N.C.)
Russ Carnahan (Mo.)

Six House Republicans:
Richard Hanna (N.Y.)
Sue Myrick (N.C.)
Phil Gingrey (Ga.)
Paul Gosar (Ariz.)
Charlie Bass (N.H.)
Tom Petri (Wis.)

By Felicia Sonmez  | January 21, 2011; 4:12 AM ET
Categories:  44 The Obama Presidency  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Top House Democrats bullish on 2012 outlook
Next: Houston doctor discusses Giffords's rehabilitation (video)

Comments

Enough of the false unity BS. Be ye either Hot or Cold, luke warm makes me throw up.
No surprise John McCain is among the cheer leading squad for the opposition. John, thank you for your sacrifice and service. Retire now and let another with the fire to defend America take your place.

Posted by: lel2007 | January 22, 2011 11:48 PM | Report abuse

Enough of the false unity BS. Be ye either Hot or Cold, luke warm makes me throw up.
No surprise John McCain is among the cheer leading squad for the opposition. John, thank you for your sacrifice and service. Retire now and let another with the fire to defend America take your place.

Posted by: lel2007 | January 22, 2011 11:47 PM | Report abuse

Enough of the false unity BS. Be ye either Hot or Cold, luke warm makes me throw up.
No surprise John McCain is among the cheer leading squad for the opposition. John, thank you for your sacrifice and service. Retire now.

Posted by: lel2007 | January 22, 2011 11:45 PM | Report abuse

Lib thinking before the AZ shooting - we can do or say what ever we want, Americans are stupid and don't care, so sit down and shut up! Lib thinking after the AZ shooting - Hey let's sit together and talk this out - lets be bi-partisan, or I could get my brains blown out, cuz Americans are getting peeved and some nuts are starting to crack - Evidently actions do speak louder than words!

Posted by: mtceman2003 | January 22, 2011 5:51 PM | Report abuse

60 decided to sit togeather...
00 decided on how to create jobs...
work on jobs...
nobody cares who you hold hands with...

Posted by: DwightCollins | January 22, 2011 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Sixty out of 535. That's 11%. Big friggin' deal. That's about the same percentage as Congress' approval rating.

Posted by: adturnbull | January 22, 2011 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Sixty out of 535. That's 11%. Big friggin' deal. That's about the same percentage as Congress' approval rating.

Posted by: adturnbull | January 22, 2011 12:50 PM | Report abuse

The People understand that Obama wants to make America into a Marxist/Socialist Society. The People REJECTED OBAMA and HIS POLICY. It is a Fact that Obama is determined to make America over into a Marxist/Socialist Society. The People have showed what they want. The don't want a compromise. The People want Obama STOPPED. Do what must be done to STOP Obama and his Marxist/Socialist Desire. Obama the Anti-Christ is seeking the Destruction of America. Deny Obama and you will Destroy Him. The Lie that You Love to Believe.
2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
11And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness

Posted by: makom | January 22, 2011 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Memo to Republicans who sign on to this: start looking for a new job..

Posted by: wewintheylose1 | January 22, 2011 11:31 AM | Report abuse

We have to move to a more civilized country. The idea that everything is either good or bad, black or white, republican or democrat is absurd.

We need to embrace the diversity of the human condition and move forward as a FORCE for true liberty in every sense of the word. We need to humble our individual selves in the face of Liberty. The harm principle as articulated by John Stuart Mill, John Locke, and Wilhelm von Humboldt needs to become the credo of a renewed sense liberty.

Government needs to get out of the business of RELIGION and stop moralizing through legislation.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Posted by: DGJeep | January 22, 2011 10:58 AM | Report abuse

I think this is a great idea and I hope it happens. I know it is completely symbolic but much of politics is nothing more than symbolism.

I've always been disturbed by the way our Congress puts partisanship over the good of the country and the 'tradition' of seperate seating is a very visual symptom of the problem. Our representatives are in power to serve the interests of the Republic, not the interest of their party and the same holds true of the President but the seperate seating makes it seem (as I'm sure many are) that they are concerned more for the good of their side then for the good of the public.

If our representatives sit together, they will be showing respect to themselves, to their position, to the people who put them in power and to the Republic that they serve. The entire world watches this thing and it would be nice if our foreign rivals would see us unite, at least, in support of the basic principles of popular government such as respect for office-holders rather than sitting in sullen silence because they didn't get their way.

My thanks to ALL our representatives, left, right and center, who have concieved of and are planning on participating in this show of national unity and respect for our institutions. I know, again, that it is totally symoblic and that, likely, the back-biting will start the second the President leaves the dias, but, just maybe, it will prove a step on the road to a more civil, rational and united nation!

Posted by: andrew23boyle | January 22, 2011 8:57 AM | Report abuse

It may seem silly to simply sit together, but it actually has a most beneficial impact. I teach a graduate course in information sciences on knowledge management. Some of the projects that the students are given require them to work with different people; not always to their liking. In the process they are exposed to the others through discussion and dependence on each other--that's a big part of their grade. It never ceases to amaze as I watch their changes toward each other and their willingness to assist, even protect each other in certain moments. Don't underestimate the human condition--afterall this is used when we have play time with toddlers too. We don't ever really outgrow that need. Maybe it want change everyone's mind about anything, but it could begin to open minds for everyone if they are listening to each other instead of loudly yelling.
Posted by: boots4 | January 21, 2011 5:48 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
I'd wait until we were in the Minority, again. Then, we'd allow the Dems, to have our guys, sit in with them. They'll be hearing from the Tea Parties.
Dennis
-------------------------------------------
Conspicuously absent are notables such as The Weeper of the House and his shadow, Cantor, and Joe "You lie" Wilson. Others include Kyl and McConnell and DeMint and Graham, and a flock of other strange birds.

Boehner may miss the event altogether because Obama will be there. He has a perfect track record of missing events where the President is speaking or hosting.

Posted by: ronjeske | January 21, 2011 5:59 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
I agree with Boehner.
I'd sit out the speech. I don't watch or listen to O'bama, either. If he says anything that I want to hear, I'll listen to it, filtered through Fox News.
Dennis

Posted by: Shadowsmgc | January 21, 2011 10:11 PM | Report abuse

It may seem silly to simply sit together, but it actually has a most beneficial impact. I teach a graduate course in information sciences on knowledge management. Some of the projects that the students are given require them to work with different people; not always to their liking. In the process they are exposed to the others through discussion and dependence on each other--that's a big part of their grade. It never ceases to amaze as I watch their changes toward each other and their willingness to assist, even protect each other in certain moments. Don't underestimate the human condition--afterall this is used when we have play time with toddlers too. We don't ever really outgrow that need. Maybe it want change everyone's mind about anything, but it could begin to open minds for everyone if they are listening to each other instead of loudly yelling.
Posted by: boots4 | January 21, 2011 5:48 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
I'd wait until we were in the Minority, again. Then, we'd allow the Dems, to have our guys, sit in with them. They'll be hearing from the Tea Parties.
Dennis
-------------------------------------------
Conspicuously absent are notables such as The Weeper of the House and his shadow, Cantor, and Joe "You lie" Wilson. Others include Kyl and McConnell and DeMint and Graham, and a flock of other strange birds.

Boehner may miss the event altogether because Obama will be there. He has a perfect track record of missing events where the President is speaking or hosting.

Posted by: ronjeske | January 21, 2011 5:59 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
I agree with Boehner.
I'd sit out the speech. I don't watch or listen to O'bama, either. If he says anything that I want to hear, I'll listen to it, filtered through Fox News.
Dennis

Posted by: Shadowsmgc | January 21, 2011 10:09 PM | Report abuse


It may seem silly to simply sit together, but it actually has a most beneficial impact. I teach a graduate course in information sciences on knowledge management. Some of the projects that the students are given require them to work with different people; not always to their liking. In the process they are exposed to the others through discussion and dependence on each other--that's a big part of their grade. It never ceases to amaze as I watch their changes toward each other and their willingness to assist, even protect each other in certain moments. Don't underestimate the human condition--afterall this is used when we have play time with toddlers too. We don't ever really outgrow that need. Maybe it want change everyone's mind about anything, but it could begin to open minds for everyone if they are listening to each other instead of loudly yelling.
Posted by: boots4 | January 21, 2011 5:48 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
I'd wait until we were in the Minority, again. Then, we'd allow the Dems, to have our guys, sit in with them. They'll be hearing from the Tea Parties.
Dennis
-------------------------------------------
Conspicuously absent are notables such as The Weeper of the House and his shadow, Cantor, and Joe "You lie" Wilson. Others include Kyl and McConnell and DeMint and Graham, and a flock of other strange birds.

Boehner may miss the event altogether because Obama will be there. He has a perfect track record of missing events where the President is speaking or hosting.

Posted by: ronjeske | January 21, 2011 5:59 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
I agree with Boehner.
I'd sit out the speech. I don't watch or listen to O'bama, either. If he says anything that I want to hear, I'll listen to it, filtered through Fox News.
Dennis

Posted by: Shadowsmgc | January 21, 2011 10:07 PM | Report abuse


It may seem silly to simply sit together, but it actually has a most beneficial impact. I teach a graduate course in information sciences on knowledge management. Some of the projects that the students are given require them to work with different people; not always to their liking. In the process they are exposed to the others through discussion and dependence on each other--that's a big part of their grade. It never ceases to amaze as I watch their changes toward each other and their willingness to assist, even protect each other in certain moments. Don't underestimate the human condition--afterall this is used when we have play time with toddlers too. We don't ever really outgrow that need. Maybe it want change everyone's mind about anything, but it could begin to open minds for everyone if they are listening to each other instead of loudly yelling.
Posted by: boots4 | January 21, 2011 5:48 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
I'd wait until we were in the Minority, again. Then, we'd allow the Dems, to have our guys, sit in with them. They'll be hearing from the Tea Parties.
Dennis
-------------------------------------------
Conspicuously absent are notables such as The Weeper of the House and his shadow, Cantor, and Joe "You lie" Wilson. Others include Kyl and McConnell and DeMint and Graham, and a flock of other strange birds.

Boehner may miss the event altogether because Obama will be there. He has a perfect track record of missing events where the President is speaking or hosting.

Posted by: ronjeske | January 21, 2011 5:59 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
I agree with Boehner.
I'd sit out the speech. I don't watch or listen to O'bama, either. If he says anything that I want to hear, I'll listen to it, filtered through Fox News.
Dennis

Posted by: Shadowsmgc | January 21, 2011 10:06 PM | Report abuse

to EARN
the privilege of sitting next to republicans
dems should have to
say the pledge of allegiance
and read the constitution out loud
that would DESTROY this absurd idea
Posted by: ProCounsel | January 21, 2011 8:04 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
WHAT A BRILLIANT IDEA?? Either the Pledge, the Constitition, or even the Lords Prayer, should send the Dems screaming, and scurrying, in panic. A brilliant Idea.
Dennis

Posted by: Shadowsmgc | January 21, 2011 9:47 PM | Report abuse


to EARN
the privilege of sitting next to republicans
dems should have to
say the pledge of allegiance
and read the constitution out loud
that would DESTROY this absurd idea
Posted by: ProCounsel | January 21, 2011 8:04 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
WHAT A BRILLIANT IDEA?? Either the Pledge, the Constitition, or even the Lords Prayer, should send the Dems screaming, and scurrying, in panic. A brilliant Idea.
Dennis

Posted by: Shadowsmgc | January 21, 2011 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Wow! Even a symbolic sitting together gets some Republicans into a rage as weakness on their side.
Posted by: FoundingMother | January 21, 2011 7:37 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
NOT!! That's what the Dems want to do is to diminish, the effect of the power switch. Let'em sit in the back. It was O'bama's idea.
Dennis

Posted by: Shadowsmgc | January 21, 2011 9:40 PM | Report abuse

in an unrelated

related

story

obama suggested that

the jets and the packers

and the bears and the steelers

all wear the same jerseys sunday

and share their huddles............

Posted by: ProCounsel | January 21, 2011 8:28 PM | Report abuse

failed obama socialism

is a contagious disease

quarantine

infected

dems at the sota

Posted by: ProCounsel | January 21, 2011 8:07 PM | Report abuse


to EARN

the privilege of sitting next to republicans

dems should have to

say the pledge of allegiance

and read the constitution out loud

that would DESTROY this absurd idea

Posted by: ProCounsel | January 21, 2011 8:04 PM | Report abuse

I have e-mailed my congressman to tell him my opinion why he should NOT sit with democrats.

This is a democrat sham to try to and soften public opinion about how THEY have acted the past two years, especially when passing obamakare with one-party votes.

Now they want to act like it was all a bad dream and they weren't really such irresponsible debt-creating liberals?

It's a bad dream alright, and I am afraid it will last another two years. The country is just waking up from the stupor of smoking the hopium and it will be sobering up for the next two years. Taking the House back at least gave conservatives a voice. That voice will not be wasted with applause for a speech meant to improve the Obama image....that is David Axelrod's job, not ours.

Posted by: jimbob3 | January 21, 2011 8:00 PM | Report abuse

obama rules

didn't obama

say the republicans

had to sit

in the back of the car???

seems the rules should apply to dems..............

Posted by: ProCounsel | January 21, 2011 8:00 PM | Report abuse

In ancient Rome, the Senate considered a measure to make all slaves wear a colored tunic.

The measure was rejected by a sage Senator who warned the slaves should not know how numerous they were.

And so now the Dems want to sit next to the Republicans to diffuse Republican strength on tv.

Posted by: ProCounsel | January 21, 2011 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Wow! Even a symbolic sitting together gets some Republicans into a rage as weakness on their side.

Posted by: FoundingMother | January 21, 2011 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Ludicrous. Style over substance. Why does this only occur when Republicans compromise/ cave in? This is the single occasion we have of seeing our congresspersons/ SCOTUS in action and they cave. I will admit Nasty Pelosi adjusting her dentures behind the president is interesting, but a blended congress is not.

Posted by: IQ168 | January 21, 2011 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Interesting that Mark Udall, the leader of the end filibuster movement (aka no use for bi-partisanship), is the instigator of this farce.

Posted by: MarkE3 | January 21, 2011 7:03 PM | Report abuse

This year more then ever before "We the People" need to see what there votes begat in sharp contrast!
The proposal to seat randomly will only feed the radical liberal media's reporting and should not be done! Who the hell in there right mind would want to sit next to Congressman Cohen, Democrat from Tennessee?

Posted by: rteske | January 21, 2011 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Revelation 22:14-15 “Blessed are they that do His Commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. 15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.”

The Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:2-17 NKJV)

1 “I Am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me.

2 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My Commandments.

3 “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.
Also see 1 Timothy 6:1, "Whosoever are servants under the yoke, let them count their masters worthy of all honour; lest the name of the Lord and His doctrine be blasphemed." Do you hear the warning here public servants and your Oath to Him and contract with us regarding that Oath?

4 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

5 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.

6 “You shall not murder.

7 “You shall not commit adultery.

8 “You shall not steal.

9 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

10 “You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.”

This is how sin — and the suffering and death that result from sin — will ultimately one day be remembered no more (Jeremiah 31:34). It simply will no longer exist.


Posted by: AJAX2 | January 21, 2011 6:24 PM | Report abuse

It may be a small step, and largely symbolic, but it is a step toward government for the people, not for narrow ideological groups.

Posted by: sage5 | January 21, 2011 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Those who agreed to mixed seating:

20% Republicans
80% Democrats.

Heck, RNC just purified the party last week. Why would the GOP want to mix, politically, racially or sexually!

Other than outing the Supremacists, the Democrats efforts like this one are worth nothing.

Posted by: kishorgala | January 21, 2011 6:20 PM | Report abuse

It's kind of a reach counting Brown, Collins, and Snowe with the Repubs. I say mix them up. Determine a Dem-Repub seating plan, then let someone draw names out of a hat to determine seating. Hopefully, in a few days, everyone will sign onto it. I think that it is kind of silly to make a big deal out of it, but, I might be wrong, maybe this could be the start of something great.

Posted by: coffic | January 21, 2011 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Conspicuously absent are notables such as The Weeper of the House and his shadow, Cantor, and Joe "You lie" Wilson. Others include Kyl and McConnell and DeMint and Graham, and a flock of other strange birds.

Boehner may miss the event altogether because Obama will be there. He has a perfect track record of missing events where the President is speaking or hosting.

Posted by: ronjeske | January 21, 2011 5:59 PM | Report abuse

It may seem silly to simply sit together, but it actually has a most beneficial impact. I teach a graduate course in information sciences on knowledge management. Some of the projects that the students are given require them to work with different people; not always to their liking. In the process they are exposed to the others through discussion and dependence on each other--that's a big part of their grade. It never ceases to amaze as I watch their changes toward each other and their willingness to assist, even protect each other in certain moments. Don't underestimate the human condition--afterall this is used when we have play time with toddlers too. We don't ever really outgrow that need. Maybe it want change everyone's mind about anything, but it could begin to open minds for everyone if they are listening to each other instead of loudly yelling.

Posted by: boots4 | January 21, 2011 5:48 PM | Report abuse

The State of the Union addresses have become unwatchable due to the ridiculous conduct of the various Congress members making a show of either their support of disapproval of the President. This is not supposed to be a pep rally and neither is it supposed to be an opportunity for high school-level rudeness and heckling. How about they just shut up for 45 minutes to allow the President to speak (he is the duly elected President by the way whether you like it or not) and they can save their views for the post speech spin rooms?

Posted by: greenmountainboy | January 21, 2011 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Who would want to sit next to Steve Cohen, Democrat congressman from TN who compared Republicans to Nazi's....I do not want my representatives sitting next to this piece of puke.

Posted by: Jackets | January 21, 2011 4:55 PM | Report abuse

"If you guys cannot behave then I will seperate you and see how you like that."

In lieu of self-discipline.


Posted by: nanonano1 | January 21, 2011 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Phil Gingrey (Ga.) is falling for this malarkey. He's my Rep! I guess I'll be sending him a few choice words on "elections have consequences", and ask for confirmation of this story before I start blogging the holy bejesus out of it.

It ain't going to be pretty.

For those who would like to find out who their Congressional Representatives are, and their contact number, go to http://nolp.blogspot.com/

ex animo
davidfarrar

Posted by: davidfarrar1 | January 21, 2011 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Symbolism matters but I agree with Clyburn.

Instead of sitting together it would be nice to spend as much time working on bi-partisan legislation and not spending time trying to repeal something that will not be repealed.

Posted by: rlj1 | January 21, 2011 3:57 PM | Report abuse

What a truly stupid idea. We have morons running the country.

Posted by: standard_guy | January 21, 2011 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Enough of the silly-arsed kumbayah moments... I don't care whether they like each other or not... Frankly this is why they are so inept -- they spend way too much time worrying about idiocy like whether they should sit boy-girl than they do about making sure Social Security remains solvent and we find a way to pay down the $14 TRILLION debt.

I don't CARE where they sit. Frankly this is just a giant abortive dog and pony show that could more easily be transmitted in writing at a helluva lot less cost.

At the end of the day it won't matter one tiny little bit. Is anyone actually so mentally retarded as to believe that where these fools sit will suddenly make them change their minds about policy?

Posted by: medic2010 | January 21, 2011 3:26 PM | Report abuse

After these Dems waged all out war against the GOP and the American people now they want to play nice ?Oh will play nice alright.We will undue the incredible damage the Dems have done,all with a smile on are face!!

Posted by: votingrevolution1 | January 21, 2011 3:13 PM | Report abuse

After these Dems waged all out war against the GOP and the American people now they want to play nice ?Oh will play nice alright.We will undue the incredible damage the Dems have done,all with a smile on are face!!

Posted by: votingrevolution1 | January 21, 2011 3:12 PM | Report abuse

This is a great idea and it's about time. All these years, the spectacle of whichever party is not in the White House sitting on their hands when the President speaks has made members of congress look petty.

I'm tired of hyper-partisanship from BOTH sides. We're all Americans, even though Limbaugh, Olbermann, and all the other hacks keep telling us to hate each other. Think about it: these people get PAID to tell us why other Americans are somehow bad.

Everyone's got an opinion, but I'm tired of all the hassling. Bravo to any member of congress who can resist mugging for the cameras back home and agree or respectfully disagree with the President during his speech.

Posted by: sslatten3 | January 21, 2011 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Liberals love meaningless symbolism. They think that serious geopolitical and serious domestic differences can all be solved by a marriage encounter week-end.

Posted by: nvlheum | January 21, 2011 2:44 PM

Perhaps only you find it meaningless. The us vs them attitude has to stop or we are doomed. It has to start somewhere. I will leave your with these words....

"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

Posted by: ModerateVoter | January 21, 2011 3:08 PM | Report abuse

You know, it also takes a lot to sit next to people who you think spent the last two years trying to prevent anyone from accomplishing anything because they thought it would help them win the next election. I'm just glad that some Congressmen are willing to ignore all the reasons they should be mad at each other and extend some basic indication of respect for the other people with whom they share a nation.

Posted by: jeffwacker | January 21, 2011 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Liberals love meaningless symbolism. They think that serious geopolitical and serious domestic differences can all be solved by a marriage encounter week-end.

Posted by: nvlheum | January 21, 2011 2:44 PM | Report abuse

A bipartisan circling of the wagons, so to speak...

Posted by: srb2 | January 21, 2011 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Our CT delegation, all Democrats, will be sitting together. No associating with the others lowly subjects of the Republcans. Bipartisan need not apply to CT.

Posted by: jschmidt2 | January 21, 2011 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Am I the only one who would find it easier if each list in this post was kept in alphabetical order? Then if you were interested in a particular name, you could use the alphabet to find it in the list. I'm explaining this in detail since apparently it has not occurred to anyone at the Post. To keep it sorted alphabetically as names are added, you could use the Sort function available in most word processing packages.

Right now it's sort of possible to eyeball the list, but if more members of Congress sign on, this will be a very silly way of sharing the names--I guess they are in the order that they are signing the letter?

Posted by: fairfaxvoter1 | January 21, 2011 2:38 PM | Report abuse

will republicans pull out their sidearms when they see democrats sitting in their chairs?

Posted by: HookedOnThePost | January 21, 2011 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Congress should be the first to know it takes teamwork to serve our nation.

Mixing seats should have been a regular thing, not just for the state of the union address.

President George Washington will be smiling looking down at your mixed seating. He warned about partisan politics before he retired himself. At the time, there was no term limits for the president.

Posted by: dummy4peace | January 21, 2011 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the Dems want to mix things up so that the 63-seat Repub majority is not quite so obvious...

Posted by: spamsux1 | January 21, 2011 1:01 PM | Report abuse

I'd see it more as: funny what a change a shooting makes. I don't think any buddy seats were being saved a month ago.

Surely, this can only be a good thing. But, it's true -- it's got to be more of a stretch for those who felt like the message to them before Nov. was "sit down and shut up."

Posted by: JefComment | January 21, 2011 12:53 PM | Report abuse

If I was a MOC/SCOTUS/US Military I would want to sit next to Congressman Joe Wilson: that's where the truth will be told.

Posted by: nickthimmeschearthlinknet | January 21, 2011 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Funny, what a change an election makes. Two years ago it was "we won so sit down and shut up" and now it's, "set here buddy we saved a seat for you."

Posted by: sam51 | January 21, 2011 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company