The State of the Union is Wide-Ranging

Topics Discussed

Get tickets to our live show in Waco, Texas on April 30th with Clint Harp!

Thank you for being a part of our community! We couldn't do it we do without you. To become a financial supporter of the show, please visit our Patreon page, subscribe to our Premium content on Apple Podcasts Subscriptions, purchase a copy of our book, I Think You're Wrong (But I'm Listening), or share the word about our work in your own circles.

Sign up for our newsletter to keep up with all our news. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook for our real time reactions to breaking news, GIF news threads, and personal content. To purchase Pantsuit Politics merchandise, check out our store or visit our merchandise partners: TeePublic, Stealth Steel Designs, and Desert Studio Jewelry. Gift a personalized message from Sarah and Beth through Cameo. You can find information and links for all our sponsors on our website.

Episode Resources

STATE OF THE UNION

Transcript

President Biden [00:00:00] Tonight we meet as Democrats, Republicans, independents, but most importantly, as Americans with the duty to one another, to America, to the American people, to the Constitution. So on this night, on 245th year as a nation, I've come to report on the State of the Union. And my report is this, the state of the Union is strong because you, the American people, are strong. This is our moment to meet and overcome the challenges of our time, and we will as one people, one America, the United States of America. 

Sarah [00:00:42] This is Sarah Stewart Holland. 

Beth [00:00:44] And as Beth Silvers. 

Sarah [00:00:45] Thank you for joining us for Pantsuit Politics. 

Beth [00:01:01] Hello, and thank you for joining us here at Pantsuit Politics, where we try to take a different approach to the news. Today, we are going to check in on the situation in Ukraine briefly and talk about a January six committee filing in court that has created quite a stir. Then we will share our thoughts on President Joe Biden's first official State of the Union address. And outside of politics, as you're listening, it's my birthday. So we're just going to have a little birthday celebration. 

Sarah [00:01:28] Why are you being so low key like, well, it's my birthday. I'd been like, it's my birthday! 

Beth [00:01:33] We're just different in that way. It's part of us being complimentary, I think. 

Sarah [00:01:38] Okay. Remember after Delta ruined all our plans in the fall, we had to delay our big live show in Waco. But it is back on. We are excited. We're headed to Waco, Texas, for a live show with Clint Harp, who you may know from Fixer Upper on HGTV and his own show Restoration Road on the Magnolia Network. It's going to be super fun. Night back together in person will also be celebrating the launch of our new book, Now What? It's going to be a party, and you can get your tickets now through the link in the show notes. 

Beth [00:02:15] We want to get started today just by acknowledging the tragedy that continues to unfold as a result of Vladimir Putin's unjustifiable war on Ukraine. A brief update again, the situation remains extremely fluid. What we know today, as we are recording on Thursday, the United Nations estimates more than a million people have fled Ukraine. There are reports of refugees encountering racist violence and discrimination as they try to leave Ukraine. Thousands of people, both Ukrainians and Russians, have died really hard to get a handle on the exact numbers. But we know it's a lot of people and it will be even worse as Putin has escalated the indiscriminate violence that Russian troops are bringing to Ukraine. Governments, corporations, international organizations are using every economic tool at their disposal to isolate and punish Russia, and the costs of that isolation are starting to be felt throughout the world. 

[00:03:07] Russian citizens are protesting the war, risking arrest and violence from the Russian government. Many Russians are leaving the country. We have a real humanitarian crisis as medical supplies are running short. Aid is needed throughout Ukraine and on every side of Ukraine, at the borders. Soldiers are starting to go from other countries into Ukraine to assist Ukrainian fighters. The International Criminal Court is launching a war crime investigation. Disinformation abounds. There are fake and misleading videos flooding TikTok. It is really not hyperbolic to say that in one week, the history of the world has changed, and as we are recording right now, we do not have an end in sight. 

Sarah [00:03:46] Yeah, it feels like we've switched from a, you know, unjustified invasion to just a war of terror on the citizens of Ukraine. And there was a daily episode from the New York Times. They interviewed a military reporter and they said that military experts in the United States expect Russia to ultimately prevail and that then you would have this long term insurgency. And I know it sounds like I am switching gears here because when I first said, I don't think this invasion is going to go the way I think it does, I think that's ahistorical and that people that have something to fight for put up quite the resistance. 

[00:04:19] And now I'm going to say, looking back at the history, while I think understandable to say, "Oh, well, this is what we've seen in the past. You see this insurgency that stretches ou," I get that. I also think that that is ignoring the very new reality of these economic sanctions and the economic reality of Russia. Because you know what fighting long term insurgencies take? Money and stability. Which they have neither of right now. And so I don't know. I feel like the likelihood of sort of this long term protracted situation, especially at the rate at which he is accelerating, it does not seem as likely to me as I feel like some of the analysis is concluding, what do you think? 

Beth [00:05:06] I don't know how this ends, but I do know as a U.S. citizen that the political will to do a long term occupation of a country that is resisting is important for that effort to be sustainable and successful. 

Sarah [00:05:24] Even in an authoritarian country, 

Beth [00:05:26] Even in an authoritarian country, especially in an authoritarian country where people are not getting enough to eat and struggling to get access to their own cash and unable to buy the things that they need to buy for everyday life. 

Sarah [00:05:40] And your rich people are unhappy, which also seems like a real liability. 

Beth [00:05:43] And the other thing that strikes me that I cannot understand as an American citizen, in the depth that I think is in play here is that there is a connection between the Ukrainian people and the Russian people. And that connection both motivates Putin to do this and I think creates this tremendous conflict for Russian soldiers who are being asked to go into Ukraine. And so how sustainable it is when your soldiers don't understand or are extremely conflicted about the cause? I think this is tough. Again, I don't know how it ends, and I try to keep a lot of humility around this whole topic. I have found myself mystified by other people's reactions to what's going on in Ukraine. 

[00:06:32] I have found myself extremely sensitive and extremely frustrated in discussions about this topic. And so I am trying to just be open minded about my own reactions and everyone elses as to what's going on here and certainly to what's going to happen next. But I do think that your point that there are a lot of new factors at work here is important to us not adopting like a sense of resignation about any potential outcome, including the idea that because we've gotten all this information, that Ukraine is putting up a fight, that means that it's going great. It's a wide open field of possibility, I think, as to what happens next. 

Sarah [00:07:11] Now, I just think that's the balance you always have to do when you're looking at the lessons of history. You cannot ignore them. We've seen that over and over and over again, right, that's the march of folly, is that we don't understand. We don't take the lessons of history. We don't take in conflicting information. We don't, with open eyes, assess what's before us. But at the same time, the lesson of history is that things change. And, yeah, there are lessons, but they don't always equally apply, in particular, the at the economic. Just war. 

[00:07:43] I don't really know what else to call it. I mean, I feel like this is an economic aggression towards Russia that I support, like I'm not mad about it. Like it's different. You can't compare this in any way, shape or form to the Russian conflict in Afghanistan, the United States conflict in Afghanistan, Russia in Syria, Russia in Georgia, Crimea, US and Vietnam. Like, there's just no historical equivalency to this level of like just pushing them out of the global economy. 

Beth [00:08:18] Yeah, we talked about having this conversation with your kids, and Jane was asking me some questions about it this morning because she continues to hear kids kind of referring to World War three. And I told her there is no comparison to World War Two here, really, it's different. Weapons, different. Interests, it's different. Germany, it's a different. I mean, everything is different from from that time period. So while the whole world is involved today, I don't think we need to sit around thinking that it's going to play out that way because the entire landscape is different. But the other thing I wanted to share with you about Jane is that so she's 11, she's a fifth grader. She is very upset that they're not discussing this in her classes at school. She's very upset about it. 

[00:09:03] And I don't just bring this up all the time at home, but she knows, she's aware that it's happening. She knows that I work on it. And this morning I was getting ready and she came in my bathroom and said, "Mom, can you believe they're not talking to us about this at school?" And I said, "Jane, what do you think is the most important question that you want addressed at school?" And she said, "Why is this happening?" And she said, "I know what you've told me that Putin lives in the past and that he believes Ukraine belongs to Russia. But I still don't understand why he's allowed to just do this." So we had to talk about authoritarianism and why we value American democracy and all of the checks on power that we have here. 

[00:09:49] And I said, "Well, what do you think your teachers ought to do in this situation?" She goes, "I don't know." You know, she's 11, so everything is delivered with a healthy side of exasperation. She said, "I don't know. But maybe like take five minutes and acknowledge that it's going on and let us talk about it a little bit." And I said, "Well, why do you think they're not doing that? Because they don't want to scare anybody." And she goes, "I just think that's ridiculous because something is always going to be scary and we need to figure out how to deal with it." And I was like in my head thinking, I'm so glad this is how she is managing this because that's honest, right? That's honest and and pretty mature. And it's a perspective that I'm going to keep with me as I continue to take in all this information. 

Sarah [00:10:37] I had a similarly encouraging conversation with Griffin. He had a conversation about this conflict with a student he has had ongoing political conflict with for years, like they come from very different perspectives because their parents come from very different perspectives in part. And he said, "Well, we had a really good conversation about Russia, and we agreed that America cannot engage with Russia because that would lead to us dropping even worse weapons and probably nuclear weapons. And we thought we just need to support the Ukrainian people as best we can." And I thought, "Well, there we go. Out of the mouths of babes." These two have agreed. They have found a point of agreement with each other on this issue. And that is something. 

Beth [00:11:20] That is something. Well, let's talk about how we have checks on power in the United States, as manifested through the January six select committee of the House of Representatives. So you might have seen headlines about a pretty significant statement that committee made an illegal filing on Wednesday. And I wanted to give a little bit of context. This document was filed in federal court in California, and it is in a case about John Eastman, who said that he was Trump's lawyer. Just hang on to that idea pretty loosely. 

Sarah [00:11:54] He have the memo fame. 

Beth [00:11:55] He have the memo fame. He wrote a memo about how former Vice President Pence might refuse to count certified electoral votes on January six. And he spoke at the rally on January six. And as the violence at the Capitol was in progress, he was just sending some emails. He emailed the lawyer for Pence, saying that the siege is because you and your boss did not do what was necessary to allow this to be aired in a public way. So he seems nice. The January six committee has had lots of questions for him, but he has refused to answer. He's invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. He has turned over about 8000 pages of emails. That's a lot of email that John Eastman was sending to all of this using his employer's email server, which his former employer is really unhappy about. 

Sarah [00:12:43] I think what we've established about John Eastman is he likes to put things in writing. 

Beth [00:12:46] He does like to put things in writing. And he has refused to produce about 11,000 documents, and that's why we are in court in California. He is in court saying, "Please do not allow my former employer, Chapman University, to produce documents to this committee." Now, Chapman is quite clear on where they stand here. Chapman says President Trump was not a client of our legal clinic. Eastman, representing Trump while he was one of our law professors was improper and unauthorized. And Eastman using his work account in connection with that representation was like having contraband on our system. So the document that got everyone's attention is a brief from the January six committee opposing Eastman's claims that these documents are protected from disclosure. Eastman says the attorney client privilege protects these documents. The work product protection applies. That's where a lawyer can say, I made this in the course of representing a client, and so it shouldn't be subject to the normal rules. 

[00:13:46] And the January six committee says, no, those things do not apply for lots of reasons, including I don't know, that Eastman doesn't have a signed engagement letter about who he was representing. And the fact that he sent emails to all kinds of people. And he spoke publicly about all of his theories, and he went on podcast to talk about them, whatever. But the committee says even if those protections did apply, the court should still at least privately have a look at these documents under what is called the crime fraud exception. And that is where the committee tells us that they have good faith reasons to believe that former President Trump was engaged. In criminal and or fraudulent activity with respect to January six. So this not a charging document, but it gives us a window into what the committee is thinking in a new way. 

Sarah [00:14:34] Well, I mean, they're basically saying, "You're not his lawyer, but if you were, you were helping him commit a crime and here's why, so you don't get the protection of privilege." You know, it's interesting to me. It feels exhilarating to have them put on paper like, "Oh, yeah, we definitely think some crimes are committed here." But, again, what they're putting in paper is a lot of what we already knew, right? They they were doing it pretty much, if not in public, definitely in emails. And we know that they were trying to do that. We know that they were trying to subvert the election. This is not a secret, but it still still makes me feel real nice to see it all spelled out plainly in this legal document and know that that's where they're heading. 

Beth [00:15:16] So they even tell us what they think the crimes might have been. They cite two statutes. One is about corruptly obstructing, influencing, impeding or attempting to do any of those things. Official proceedings. So that you are trying to you corruptly disrupt an official act. And we know from pending cases in other courts that courts are very clear on the fact that Congress meeting to count electoral votes is an official proceeding that can be criminally disrupted. The committee says everybody who has ever gone to law school knows the vice president did not have legal authority to reject certified electoral certificates, and even if he had that authority, there was no lawful basis to do it here. 

[00:16:03] There weren't conflicting state certifications in front of Congress. And so there is no genuine question that Trump and Eastman attempted to accomplish an illegal result by at least delaying the counting of electoral votes. They also tell us that the president might have engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States. I do not know that this was a crime, that defrauding the United States probably is a crime, and it is a very broad statute. I'm interested in doing some more research and learning where this has been used before because it's really broad. But you cannot interfere with or obstruct a lawful governmental function, it turns out, by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest. 

Sarah [00:16:50] Oh, well, I think that would capture our boy pretty well there, especially the word trickery, I feel like. 

Beth [00:16:56] And then common law fraud, they say, is also on the table. I felt that was the weaker section of the brief. 

Sarah [00:17:01]  I was like, common law? You guys, you think the Supreme Court's going to hold up any sort of common law situation with the former president president? That's fine. But guys... 

Beth [00:17:10] No. This is the thing. So I hopped on Twitter this morning and I see Merrick Garland trending and my eyes start to roll back in my head because I know what it's going to be. People read a New York Times article and they've decided exactly what the attorney general of the United States ought to do next. And that's silly and reckless. 

Sarah [00:17:28] Oh, so you are not smarter than Merrick Garland. 

Beth [00:17:30] No, we are setting a precedent here about the scope of executive communications, what it means to represent the president of the United States, what it would mean to criminally charge a former president of the United States. We all need to take a breath and let this committee do its work, which it is clearly pursuing with vigilance and haste. 

Sarah [00:17:52] Well, I just feel like when Liz Cheney gets mad at Merrick Garland because she feels like he's dragging his feet, then we'll talk. But I don't care what Twitter thinks. 

Beth [00:18:00] Well and what needs to happen, I think, for the good of the Republic, is that this committee needs to finish its work, have public hearings, put out a thorough report and then if the evidence leads them there,  make a referral to the Department of Justice. We do not want Merrick Garland reading The New York Times or this brief and saying, you know, I think we should go ahead with this.

Sarah [00:18:23] We should jump on in. Yeah, no. We want it done well. 

Beth [00:18:27] We need this done very carefully, very carefully. It's so serious. Even though it is so obvious in many ways, it is going to set off so many precedents for future administrations and future members of Congress and future courts. But we need to proceed delicately here. 

Sarah [00:18:43] We don't want to throw away our shot. We don't want to waste this obvious crime by doing it too quickly.

Beth [00:18:51] I like a Hamilton reference before we switch to talking about the State of the Union. 

Sarah [00:18:55] That's what I was trying to do there. 

Beth [00:18:57] I liked your segue. So next up, we're going to talk about President Biden's first official State of the Union address. Sarah, we were among 38.2 Million people who tuned in for the State of the Union. 

Sarah [00:19:21] It's a solid number. Like, we are a country of 300 million. It's not a lot of people, but it was a little bit higher than I thought it would be. 

Beth [00:19:27] It's a big ask of people. I mean, he spoke for an hour, a minute and 50 seconds is a long time to listen. 

Sarah [00:19:36] It did go fast, though, because we were speaking through so many things, I thought. 

Beth [00:19:40] It was a little bit of a roller coaster. We'll get to that. So just a review. The State of the Union address is based in a constitutional requirement. Article 2, Section 3 Clause one says the president shall, from time to time, give to the Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient. I really like that phrase, recommend to their consideration. 

[00:20:02] Presidents throughout our history have fulfilled this obligation in different ways. Some people have written to Congress, some people kind of boldly at their time delivered live speeches like they marched into the chamber as though they were equals. Some of the historical writers will say. But since the mid 1960s, we have had the current televised primetime spectacle, complete with a response from the opposition party and now apparently responses from the president's own party. 

Sarah [00:20:26] I don't want to talk about that. 

Beth [00:20:28] I think we should talk about that in a minute. But first, just in case everyone listening did not join 38.2 million people in tuning in for the entirety of the speech. Sarah, what do you think are the highlights that people need to be aware of? 

Sarah [00:20:40] It was everything. We talked about everything. That's the highlight. Yesterday, I went to a therapy appointment, my therapy appointment literally was like, and then this happened and then this happened. I was stressed about this and then this happened and then this fell apart and I fainted from my Botox, and then this kid got in trouble at school. And then this... It was just a laundry list through the last several difficult weeks of my life. And I thought, man, that felt a lot like the State of the Union. Like, the State of the Union was just, okay we have this hard thing in Ukraine. And also we are still dealing with a pandemic, which is very hard. And we have this economic situation exacerbated by inflation. And we also have concerns about the police and the border. And also with this unity agenda where we're going to talk about cancer and also the drug epidemic and the mental health crisis with our children. 

[00:21:29] And it just was a lot. There was a lot going on. We talked about prescription drugs in there as well. Cost of prescription drugs. So we just went through a lot of things. And, look, at the end of the day, would I like it to be President Obama up there giving that speech rallying us around this moment for global democracy. Of course, I would. He is an excellent public speaker. This is not Joe Biden's get friendly reminder one more time that the man has a lifelong stutter. But there is a part of me that was also like, at this particular historical moment, maybe we just did need a therapy session where we're just like, can we just get it out of here? Like, can I lay it out for you what we're up against, what we're all dealing with right now? Just everybody feel hard. We're going to get it all out there. There's a lot going on in America right now. That's the state of our union. It's a lot. 

Beth [00:22:17] I completely agree with your recitation of how this went down. Because if your mind wandered for a second, you would come back and be like, "Wait, what? How did we get from that to this? What is happening". 

Sarah [00:22:30] Why are we talking to the diabetes advocate? I thought we were on immigration. What happened? 

Beth [00:22:34] So many guests. So many topics. It was a sprint. Sprint through every issue where someone puts pressure on Democrats. I mean, that's really what it was. If you are an activist of some sort, you got your 45 second clip to put in your email campaign. Did you see the president address this thing? If you are a Democrat in a vulnerable congressional district, you got your clip of the president saying, "We don't say defund the police. We say defund the police." If you are a progressive Democrat running somewhere else, you got your 45 seconds of the president saying, "Child care costs are killing our parents. We must provide affordable child care." I mean, everybody got their little clip for the email campaign or for social media of the president saying what they needed him to say. And I'm glad I felt like therapy to you, Sarah. Here's here's the therapy session for my end. 

[00:23:27] I watch this and just felt so cynical about it, and I and I'm trying to interrogate that reaction. I'm very clear on the fact that the president does not influence my feelings as much as my life influences my feelings. And that my reaction to all this has a lot more to do with me than with him. At the same time, I did just think, like, why do we do this?  And so I wanted to ask you, like putting aside my wish that we could go back in time to when the president just like wrote a letter to Congress that was an actual report on how things are going. Accepting that we do the State of the Union thing, it's a spectacle, that members of the President's Party act like fans at a rock concert, that members of the Opposition Party act like sulky ex-boyfriends who were dragged in here and have decided to heckle the person and make it as miserable as possible. Just accepting where we are, what do you think are the goals? What do you think the Biden team wanted to accomplish with this address? 

Sarah [00:24:30] I don't really think it was about Democratic pressure in midterm as much as you do. Like, I think that that was definitely informing their choices 100 percent. But those pressures are based on real realities. There is a violent crime problem right there. We are trying to transition into a new stage of COVID. Like, we are dealing with inflation and rising prices. And it's just a dang lot. And there's a part of me that doesn't blame them for taking this moment where, yes, lots of people don't watch it. Lots and lots of people don't watch the full hour, but the speech itself gets a lot of media coverage. 

[00:25:05] And so if you can take that moment and say, like, we're up against a lot, guys, we're dealing with a lot. We're doing our best. We're trying to get to everybody's concerns, but the list is long. And we have Russia invading Ukraine. You take that moment, right? You take that moment to like, get it all in. But I do think, you know, again, rhetorically this is not his strength. And I'm okay with that. Like, I don't need everybody to speak as eloquently as Barack Obama did. 

Beth [00:25:31] Yeah. Let me be clear, I do not have rhetorical criticisms. I have substantive criticisms and judgment criticisms. He's not the greatest speaker in the world. He's fine. He's fine. 

Sarah [00:25:41] But that's the thing, though, like if he was the greatest speaker in the world, would your substantive criticisms be the same?  

Beth [00:25:48] I think a gifted orator would have struggled with that address. Oh, I don't know how much it ticked off. 

Sarah [00:25:53] I can see Barack Obama tying all that together at the end, and you're being like, "Yes, he understands how much we're up against, but we are ready to face it." Now, I think the best would have gotten through that list and it wouldn't have felt the same way. Because the speechwriters, I think, missed him like real opportunities too. It wasn't just him. But all that to say, yeah. Do I think it's kind of dumb how we do it? Yes. The standing up and clapping would wear me out. Like, I'm a questioner. I don't do anything unless it makes sense. And the rolling standing ovations wear me out at a concert, much less of the State of the Union. And so when you were thinking about the written, I thought, like, how could we do this and convey it to America? It's almost like he needs like a TED talk. Like we need some visuals. We need an info graph. We need a time limit. 

[00:26:37] But because I do think you want to get to so many of the concerns, and watching that I thought I have to remember because the most disappointing part was how quickly we moved on from Ukraine and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. For me. But watching it and like being out in the world and talking to people, I realized other people are not consumed with this conflict in the way I am. That's just the reality. The reality is a lot of Americans are out there dealing with a lot of stuff as they always are. And so that's why they're not concerned with domestic politics, much less foreign policy. And for most Americans, this is still foreign policy at this moment, right? And I just have to remember that. I came across this Facebook post the other day from a girl I met through a political organization and she just spilled her heart out about all these conflicts that she was having with her ex-husband and how it was affecting the custody of her son and just all this drama and also trauma. 

[00:27:32] And I thought, man, there's just so many people out there dealing with this level of stress. Taking it just not even the pandemic. Just like family stress, chronic illnesses, cancer diagnosis and, like, you name it. Job losses. That they're not wrapped up in this in the way they are. And that what they really want to hear is, what are you going to do about prescription drug costs? Or are you really aware of how expensive things have gotten or I'm tired of wearing this mask. I'm tired of making my kid wear the mask every day. And so I just try to keep that in mind. Like, I am not reflective of where the majority of Americans are on the State of the Union or a lot of other things. And so I really tried to remember that. But I do think of a more... gives it order. Because I wonder if what happened is he had the speech memorized as they were going to give it. Because it felt even just like if you'd read it, like they just copy and pasted the Ukraine part on. 

[00:28:30] Because he's not Barack Obama and he can't go back -- or like Bill Clinton.  Remember that one year in the State of the Union, he did it from memory because the teleprompter went out. I mean, that's just not who Joe Biden is, and I'm not mad at him about that. And I'm okay with that. And I'm happy he is president right now. And I think he's doing an exceptional job, particularly when it comes to Russia and Ukraine. But I think it you cannot underestimate how much impact that has. You can't just read it and think they missed an opportunity because he's oratory skills aren't there, and that is going to affect something. Like the State of the Union that we since the 60s have built around oratory. 

Beth [00:29:09] I agree with some of that. But mostly I think that I watched this thinking, when are we going to understand that the president cannot be everything? And the reason that it feels right to me for him to talk about Ukraine -- even though I totally agree with you, there are fewer people who are interested in Ukraine than people who are disinterested in the United States. I think that's true. But I also think that people generally get that it's important. People generally get that the president is the commander in chief. He is in charge of our response to this. He cannot make Congress pass the 65 priorities that he would like to have Congress passed. But he is in charge of this 

Sarah [00:29:57] And he can't do a lot around inflation. But he is. He can do a lot around the military. Yeah. 

Beth [00:30:00] He can. And so I think focusing on that would make a lot of sense. I would even say focusing on COVID makes a lot of sense. Although he can't do a lot around that, it is important for him to speak into it. I just think, generally, a leader has to also decide what's not important or what is not rising to the priority list right now. In this particular moment, what are we focused on? And I did not get a sense of that from the laundry list. And I hate to use laundry list because everybody's talking about it that way. But I don't know another way to describe what happened. He didn't build a case for build it back better. He described its priorities without naming it because we don't want to trigger a set of stories about how Democrats don't agree internally about those priorities. But that's still happened, right? 

[00:30:49] Then the story became, well, he didn't say build back better, but he described build back better, which is not going to happen. So now what? And now we are returning two days later to what does Joe Manchin think? What would Joe Manchin be willing to do right now? That's a bad set of headlines for the president. So like politically, I think it would have been smarter to really focus on Ukraine, really focus on COVID, and maybe one more thing, climate. Or some big priority that's going to drive his agenda. Inflation, fine, whatever. Supply chain. But focus on a couple of things. Those issues are all so complex that he could easily fill 45 minutes to an hour explaining to the American people where he is on that stuff.  I just kept thinking, who's this for besides the people who are going to pull a clip for their pet issue and run with it? 

Sarah [00:31:44] I wonder if Joe Biden his strength is not being the explainer in chief. His strength is being like they empathizer in chief, right? When I watch at the end, I thought, what was the conversation like with the -- I was like trying to put myself in the room with the speechwriters and Ron Klain and Joe Biden. And I felt like this feels like Joe Biden was steering the ship. This feels like a very Joe Biden thing for him to do is to just say, no, we're going to speak to everybody's concerns. And whether that was the right call or not, I just think that's who he is. He's not a prosecutor. He's not a professor. He is very much a politician. And that sort of constituent concern of just speaking to everybody in the room. When you and I saw him live, he did that. He spent the first 10 minutes thanking all the people in the room. 

Beth [00:32:32] All the local party people. Yeah, that's right.

Sarah [00:32:33] It felt very Joe Biden to me. And I think like he's 78 years old. He is who he is. He's not going to, you know, just totally transform himself. He's done a lot more than I ever expected him to do, and I'm happy of where he's done it. And, again, at this moment in history, I would choose someone with a massive amount of experience who's just going to like doing the work we might never see and preventing disasters we'll never know about, than somebody who can sort of go out there and and transform the State of the Union. Like, I would like somebody to do that eventually. He's not the guy. He's never going to be the guy and that's okay with me. Y. 

Beth [00:33:08] Yeah, I'm not saying, Sarah, I wouldn't vote for him again. You know what I mean? 

Sarah [00:33:11] No, no, no. But I just think it's fully reflective of him. Who he is. 

Beth [00:33:14] But part of what I am struggling with under the leadership of his administration, is this sense that we are the people who are here to do the laundry list of things when they have encountered two profound crises. Global crises. And I think that there does need to be an adjustment of the message. And, listen, I think it's very important at this moment in history for Democrats to retain control of the House of Representatives and the Senate. And so when you look at the midterms and you look at the fact that I think president and his administration and this Congress have done some really good things. The polling doesn't reflect that they get credit for that. Continuing to tick through a complex list that is so long of priorities isn't going to move that polling. 

[00:34:10] So I just feel like where can we tighten it up? Rein it in. Use these opportunities, even though he's not great at speaking. Use the opportunities where he has everyone's attention to come out of the party politics, that he does so well a little bit, and explain something to people that they can get excited about or something that they can feel that empathy. Because I didn't even feel a lot of empathy from him during this speech, it just moved too fast. The moment that I thought was the best where he talked about people who've lost loved ones to COVID is a moment I've heard from him at least four times in high profile speeches. So it's just not -- I don't know. I just am rooting for him to kind of rally everybody. And it made my heart sink a little bit that this was a very business as usual address. 

Sarah [00:35:02] See, I think it was the opposite to me. Like, to me, the criticism of him and his administration's political approach has been you were too hyper focused on one single COVID strategy that bit you in the ass. And like you were just too hyper focused on COVID generally. And then Afghanistan bubbled up and you thought it was going to go some way and it didn't. And so, to me, it felt like a shift from them. It felt like, okay, we're not going to be accused of being too focused on COVID anymore. We're going to tell you all the other things. 

[00:35:31] Or being too focused on the legislative agenda. Like, to me, the criticism has been less that they're spread too thin and that they are focused on things to the detriment of the complexity of what the job requires. Like, that sort of legislative focus as opposed to being an executive that has to manage all this these moving parts at one time. And so to me, I felt like, oh man. I feel like this was them saying, like, no, really guys, we're paying attention to everybody. So it's funny that we read that into distinct ways. 

Beth [00:35:56] It is funny that we reacted to it differently. I think that underscores my point that this is a dumb exercise. But I wanted to ask, so if we think of the State of the Union itself is not like the most worthwhile thing, begs the question that the responses are also... 

Sarah [00:36:14]  I told you at the start of this segment, I didn't want to talk about the responses. 

Beth [00:36:19] Did you watch the responses? This is the question that I have. 

Sarah [00:36:21] Of course, I didn't. 

Beth [00:36:23] I watched all of them. Are you proud of me? I did some homework here. I watched all of them. 

Sarah [00:36:28] I want to be proud of you. I'm also worried about you now. 

Beth [00:36:30] Okay, let me give you the highlights. Lowlights? The lights. 

Sarah [00:36:36] The lights. 

Beth [00:36:38] So the Republican response came from Governor Kim Reynolds of Iowa, and it was very much the Glenn Youngkin Path. Let me package what seems to work about the Trumpian message in a different style that is not so harsh and offensive. 

Sarah [00:36:54] It feels like Mitch McConnell and Rick Scott had an arm wrestling match and Mitch McConnell won. 

Beth [00:36:58] I think that's right. 

Sarah [00:36:59] He gets to pick the person. 

Beth [00:36:59] I think that's right. Listen, she took a lot of shots that were easy to take that even Democrats have said too much about the radical Biden agenda that inflation is such a problem for families. 

Sarah [00:37:11] I can tell you that the media really love that 70s show reference. They loved it. I've heard it 16 different times. 

Beth [00:37:18] What I found hopeful and encouraging is that it was a more -- not that I find Mitch McConnell hopeful and encouraging, but it was more influenced by that wing of the party, I thought, than by the Trumpian. She didn't say Trump's name. You know what I mean? Like, this could have been a real Joe Biden's, not the legitimate president circus and instead it was -- 

Sarah [00:37:45] I mean I selfishly don't want them to learn this lesson until after the midterms. But I do think it's an important lesson to learn. 

Beth [00:37:49] I mean, I think it's better for American democracy ultimately that we have a party that totally disagrees with the current president, is trying to sabotage the current president, than having a party who says he's actually not the president. Neither of these are great options. But, you know, if you're choosing, I thought that part was encouraging. And,, I mean, she made some points that I think reasonable people could listen to and say, Yeah, I agree with that. It wasn't horrible. It wasn't great. OK. And then Representative Talib spoke on behalf of the Working Families Party, and she tried to chart a very narrow path of saying, Yay, here are the good things that the president has accomplished. And also, here are all the things that he could be accomplishing were it not for corporations and certain Democrats. And I thought that what rang true about it was that progressives have worked really hard to advance the president's agenda that he laid out during his campaign. 

Sarah [00:38:47] The part about her responding to all that, I don't begrudge her responding just because of how build back better went down, that they said, If you support us with the bipartisan infrastructure bill, we got you and they left them out to dry. And so I can't really begrudge the instinct to have a response right now, I'll be honest. 

Beth [00:39:01] The thing that fell flat for me and this was a problem for me with President Biden's remarks, too, is that. There are a number of corporations that are doing a lot of good in the world, especially right now. Their use of their power right now is critically important to the war in Ukraine, to the COVID response to the climate response. And so just beating up on corporations seems to me to be a bad move. And I don't think President Biden did that. I mean, he had the Intel CEO there to talk about building the semiconductor factory. So it was this like swerve, right? 

Sarah [00:39:40] He did a little bit of an even when he did it. And I can't say this, who am I? Have I live in Kentucky too long? Have I been in this podcast too long? Have you influenced me? I don't know, but even for me, I was like, Oh, this doesn't this feel so dated and irrelevant when we like do the the corporations are evil speech right now like it? Just it's not that I think, you know, you know, my stance on corporations as legal persons, for example, is very clear, very clear. I think it's dumb. And it's not that I don't think like corporations are problematic in that they're, you know, their purpose to make profit has led people all kinds of straight. But it's just in this moment where you see such worker power, you see unionization left, right and center. You see the like you said, like the global economy, particularly corporations coming together to basically force Russia out it. It just it feels it's not that I necessarily think it's all wrong. All of a sudden, it just feels dated. It doesn't feel like that argument is adapting to the current situation. It feels stuck. 

Beth [00:40:41] The opportunity that President Biden has, and when I think he is at his very best, it is at saying nothing is all good or all bad. We're all just here together and we've got to work together and we've got to bring the best out in each other. And I think he does that really well. Sometimes I thought he was doing that really well in the speech when he was talking about Ukraine. And then my heart kind of sank when he took the jab at the tax cut, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Even though I agree that was a terrible piece of legislation, it to me, just like was not the tone that I like best from him. And so anyway, I think he mostly feels about corporations the way I do that they're important. Parts of our society may need to be regulated more than they have been for a couple of decades. And also, yeah, they do some tremendous good and we need them on the team. We need everybody on the team. 

Sarah [00:41:30] Microsoft's out there doing the Lord's work right now. So. 

Beth [00:41:33] So I thought Representative Talib did not find that balance that it was it was that kind of dated corporations of the worst and the enemy kind of thing. But I also heard some things from her that I think needed to be said. So I don't think it was totally dumb that she gave a response. I mean, she's a member of Congress. Any of them can say what they want about all this. The Congressional Black Caucus had a response from Representative Colin Allred. He talked a lot about the good that the Biden team has done. 

[00:42:02] If I worked for President Biden, I'd be very pleased with what Representative Allred did. That's good. I thought he said, You know, I know that this administration has our backs. He talked about the appointment of a more representative cabinet, the appointment of Judge Katon G. Brown Jackson. So I thought I thought it was all he pushed on policing. You know, he pushed on some of those issues that the Biden team would expect the Congressional Black Caucus to push on. 

Sarah [00:42:28] This seems particularly relevant since he didn't bring up voting rights in the state of the union. 

Beth [00:42:31] He talked about voting rights as well. I thought it was a nice compliment too. The president's speech. And then the Problem Solvers Caucus had an event. It is being called a response I think only because one of the representatives who spoke, Josh Gottheimer, took a real dig at representative to league for giving a response. He said that it was terrible idea for her to do this, like killing your own car. And I think because he slammed her, then it kind of became like, well, you're doing a response to. But he and Brian Fitzpatrick, co-chairs of the Problem Solvers Caucus in Congress, did a Facebook Live unscripted, the two of them chatting as members of Congress about lots of things. 

[00:43:13] That the vibe in the room was different because people got to take their masks off and they felt like everyone was more relaxed, and that might help people work together. And here's kind of where we are in Ukraine, and it was so good to see that. Everybody had a Ukrainian flag on the way and and that's encouraging. So it was really more about their organization than the speech itself. But I watched it to be complete in my review of the responses. 

Sarah [00:43:36] I love it. I think that that is really good work you did and helpful. And I'm glad you did it because there was no way I was going to watch Kim Reynolds or Charlie, for that matter, because, you know, again, I don't begrudge her, but it was frustrating. 

Beth [00:43:48] I think that's enough about the State of the Union because everyone has moved on now, and it's probably time for us to move on to. But it is an important exercise for what it's worth. And I think we've done it justice now. Do you agree? Agree. OK. Well, lastly, Sarah, we just had put in the notes that it's my birthday, you want to talk about it? It's my 

Beth [00:44:17] Lastly, Sarah, we had put in the notes that it's my birthday. 

Sarah [00:44:17] Why? Why is that the energy you're bringing to this? I see here on the page, it's my birthday. Yes, Beth, it is your birthday. 

Beth [00:44:25] It's my birthday. 

Sarah [00:44:26] It's very exciting. I'm so happy you were born 41 years ago. 

Beth [00:44:30] Thank you. 

Sarah [00:44:30] I think it is definitely worth something celebrating, bringing a little bit higher energy too. Now, well, I will ask this. Forty is exciting, how do you feel about 41? 

Beth [00:44:40] It's not 40, but also I feel good about it. Listen, I am enjoying the aging process. I'm enjoying the aging process. I'm enjoying how relaxed I feel in my body and my life, even at a time when I feel stressed overall. I don't have any of that, like, what am I doing stress. 

Beth [00:44:57] Yes, I know it's the worst. Oh, gosh, I'm so glad that's gone. 

Beth [00:45:00] I'm so glad that's gone. I do not feel an ounce of what am I doing? And that's a beautiful thing. So I feel a little bit about this birthday like I would feel about a new fiscal year when I worked in a different company. It's kind of like some stock taking, some closing out of the books on some things. What am I going to get into now? And it's good. It all feels very healthy, but it also feels like, I don't know. It's just Friday. I'm going to spend the weekend reading questions for an academic team competition. Like, it's not sort of an event this time. 

Sarah [00:45:35] Oh, I make every birthday an event. 

Beth [00:45:38] I love that about you. 

Sarah [00:45:39] And if it's not sufficiently an event, I require a redo. One year, my husband had the nerve to take the bar on my birthday, rude. So we did it again because I was not happy with the energy level or the the event-like status. And so I just did  a do over. I've been meaning to have a 40th birthday party once I got back. I still haven't done that. I really need to get on and do that before I turn 41? Because all my friends were like -- you know, they know the energy I bring to in there . And they're like, I just feel like we have not properly celebrated your 40th birthday. And I'm like, well, I'm glad I've trained you sufficiently to recognize that. 

Sarah [00:46:12] I know. I thought there was going to be a whole karaoke situation, and I was going to get to come to Paducah for it. 

Sarah [00:46:16] There was but them Omicron kept ruining that. I was going to do it on January 28, which is like a good time to do something because there's not a lot of going on, and it's my half birthday, my 40 and a half birthday. I thought that'd be fun. Omicron ruined all my plans. All my plans. 

Beth [00:46:28] Well, I'm going to have my favorite fried rice for dinner tomorrow night. I'm excited about that. I'm going to go work out. I am going to do a very, very long, restful yoga practice. No one's going to be in my house all day tomorrow and we don't have any meetings planned. So I'm going read a book. I'm going to sit in the hot tub. I'm just going to try to be in my body. My friend, Anna, sent me a Marco Polo the other day. She had just listen to us talk about Ukraine, and she said, "I just want you to know that I can tell you're really in your body about this." And I said, that is the best compliment you could possibly give me. And, also, I am tired of being in my body about Ukraine, and I would like to be in my body about some happier things. And so that's my goal for the day. 

Sarah [00:47:09] Yes, good. I love it. Well, happy birthday. I love it. 

Beth [00:47:12] Thank you. 

Sarah [00:47:13] You're welcome. 

Beth [00:47:13] And thank you all for joining us. Thank you for being here. Thank you for sticking through the hard stuff through, and including multiple responses to the State of the Union. We will be back here with you next week. Until then, have the best weekend available to you. 

[00:47:38] Pantsuit Politics is produced by Studio D Podcast Production. Alise Napp is our managing director. 

Sarah [00:47:43] Maggie Penton is our community engagement manager. Dante Lima is the composer and performer of our theme music. 

Beth [00:47:49] Our show is listener-supported. Special thanks to our executive producers 

Executive Producers (Read their own names) [00:47:53] Martha Bronitsky, Ali Edwards, Janice Elliot, Sarah Greenup, Julie Heller, Helen Handley, Tiffany Hassler, Emily Holladay, Katie Johnson, Katina Zugenalis Kasling, Barry Kaufman, Molly Kohrs. 

[00:48:11] The Kriebs, Laurie LaDow, Lily McClure, Emily Neesley, The Pentons, Tawni Peterson, Tracy Puthoff, Sara Ralph, Jeremy Sequoia, Katie Stiggers Karin, True, Onica Uveling, Nick and Alysa Valelli, Katherine Vollmer, Amy Whited. 

Beth [00:48:28] Jeff Davis, Melinda Johnston, Ashley Thompson, Michelle Wood, Joshua Allen, Morgan McHugh, Nichole Berklas, Paula Bremer and Tim Miller. 

Alise NappComment