pegkerr | (no subject)

No, but I will read the transcript the next day.

Exactly. Even if I didn't have a schedule conflict, I'm much more likely to read the transcript than watch the speech.

I too will read the transcript. Unfortunately, by this time I probably hear him saying it in the background of my head. But at least I can choose my moment.

P.

Same here. The sound of his voice is like nails on a chalkboard to me, but I really should know what he's saying. Plus, I won't have to hear him say "nukyular."

I don't have a TV, but will likely listen on the radio.

"No, I don't have a television set"; but I'll be watching for transcripts and analysis tomorrow, for sure.

While I have a TV I don't get cable. So I'll be listening tonight, keeping track of the lies...

What about you?

My answer would be Yes. I can't stand listening to that man.

Yes, I'm curious to see what he's got to say and I'll more than likely have to heckle him some along the way too.

Actually, I don't watch the State of the Union or any Presidential debates. I read them the next day. That way I see it in black and white and don't get the emotions of the crowd and such behind it.

Technically I have a TV. But since my husband didn't pay the cable, we don't have broadcast TV. Therefore, I plan to watch Dr. Who tonight and ignore Emperor Bush as much as possible.

I plan to at least START listening. I can't promise I'll stick the whole thing out; if my blood starts boiling too much, or he starts just spouting the usual nothing-new rot, I'll turn it off. I missed last year's SotU for the first time in my adult life only because we'd JUST come home with Two and sleep was more important than Civic Duty.

As far as the Drinking Game - I think "nukular" is the one that really sets my teeth, even though there are far worse things he says. But that's just a fingernail-on-chalkboard issue for me. Erk. Even my husband slips up still, sometimes, although I've tried hard to correct this.

I can't stand listening to it, but T will probably want to watch so he can shout at the television set. I find reading the transcripts next day online much less enraging and more edifying.

His voice grates on my nerves - kind of like fingernails on chalkboard. OK, worse than fingernails on chalkboard - that never bothered much.

For me the voice takes a back seat to the smirk. Augh.

It's the smirk of the rich kid who has the playground bullies on his side while he torments the social outcasts and other designated victims.

I do _have_ a scheduling conflict, but I would probably not listen even if I didn't, because I'd rather read what he had to say, and avoid the teeth clenching anger that comes from listening to his actual speeches.

Okay, the fact that I'm in England, five hours ahead of DC, and will be in bed in sleep also keeps me from even tuning in occasionally. (If I were in the correct time zones to watch it live, I'd probably look it at occasionally, rant and scream, and change the channel. Then I'd change the channel back because I'm a glutton for punishment.)

But I know the news programmes here will replay the lowlights. :(

I have too many classes tomorrow/too many things to do tonight to get drunk and the only reason I would watch would be to play the drinking game.

I'll read a transcript the next day.

B

I'll be watching with my dormmates, as this is my last year to do so. There will be some around who can favor us with decent analysis, some booing, and perhaps some cheering, if the few hardy neo-conservatives dare to show their faces. The drinking game will not be played, as we are good little students who follow college policy and do not consume alcohol in front of minors. And I really don't think we could stomach it with, say, cranberry juice. Who wants to eat while listening to that?

I anticipate that I'll be the only one in the room cheering when he advocates a larger emphasis on nuclear power, though.

I've even gone so far as to plan a date night with my husband. It's 50 cent Tuesdays at the dollar theatre. I'd much rather see a Ralph Finnes thriller than Bushie and his irritating mannerisms.

I don't want to hear it. I'm going so far as to set my alarm from "radio" to "buzzer" for tomorrow morning, because I know the replay will be all over NPR.

I checked "no, I don't have a television set," and then realized that one of the reasons I don't have a television set is that it makes it easier for me to avoid certain broadcasts that I am much happier not seeing or hearing. (This is secondary to realizing that I was also managing to miss almost anything I actually would enjoy seeing or hearing: I gave up the television because of that, but if I'm not seeing the shows my friends praise, some of which I probably would enjoy, modulo my brain injury, at least I'm spared the hateful stuff.)

I will read, or at least skim, the news articles tomorrow, and probably try to avoid NPR, which

cattitude tends to listen to in the mornings.

I'd like to add this to the option I chose: "I'd rather poke my eyes out with a rusty spork or listen to 1,000 cats scratching their claws down a chalkboard than listen to or look at That Man."

I've never been able to sit through a SOT* address in my life, and a few years ago I forgave myself and stopped trying. It's just an annoying clapfest with introducing all sorts of arbitrary guests of honor just to show How Sensitive We Are To Real People.

And I already know that I'm going to vomit when I hear President Bush laud praise on Coretta Scott King, a woman who he probably has been surveiling instead of admiring, but at least I'll wait until the recap on NPR tomorrow morning.

I was at work and meant to tape it, but I forgot and will have to read the transcript tomorrow instead. At least it's better than actually listening to Bush speak.

I had no idea so many people don't own a tv set. I thought I was the only one!

I watched -- kind of. I always try to (or at least to have it on in the background) because it's my responsibility as a citizen. But I kind of got distracted with all the writing/reading/petting my cat/other things that are more interesting than listening to a politician go blah blah blah.

I will read about it in various blogs.

My blood pressure doesn't need to hear this man speak. I mean, I cannot find a single thing about him that inspires trust. For me, I'll be quaking for the next ten months--or two years, eight months...

I suppose I count as "no, I have a scheduling conflict", because I'm on the other side of the world and at work when it happens. But I've already read the version that was on the Washingtonpost.com website (well, I skimmed) and some of the liveblogging. Actually, I don't even know if it was broadcast out here. I know they showed Clinton's one year, live, because I watched it and cried when they showed Rosa Parks sitting in the gallery.