Folks, this is why I’m frequently depressed with the ol’ US and A. Want to know what the state of the union is? It’s a country where more people watch American Idol than the president’s address.

Each of the Big Four networks covered the State of the Union address Tuesday night, but it was “American Idol” that led FOX to a ratings win.

FOX averaged a 9.4 rating/15 share for the night (numbers for everyone but The CW are affected by live coverage of the presidential speech). CBS took second with a 6.2/10. NBC, 4.8/7, came in third, followed by ABC at 3.9/6. The CW earned a 2.2/3.

That’s right. More people watched American Idol on FOX than the sum of the people watching the SOTU on the Big Four. Adding the cable stations finally lets the address pull ahead, but that’s not really encouraging.

The SOTU address was on the Big Four and an additional five cable stations. It had to be on instead of House, The Unit, Big Day, and Law & Order: Criminal Intent (plus Veronica Mars on The CW, but who cares about that razz?) as well as five more channels in order to usurp the one-channel Idol. Not to mention be on afterwards, grabbing all of the FOX viewers who were expecting House to show up.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m happy that many people watched. I just think that it doesn’t show quite so much a swelling of political interest so much as a “well, there’s not much else on” situation.

I see the stormclouds a-brewin’ overhead. Right out of the cannon, we’ve got the Senate Foreign Relations Committee soundly rejecting Bush’s little “surge” plan. It’s a nice gesture, and certainly a start in the right direction.

The Foreign Relations Committee approved the resolution by a vote of 12 to 9, with a Republican senator, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, joining 11 Democrats in supporting it. But even Republicans who opposed the resolution, including Senator Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, expressed deep doubt about whether the troop increase could succeed and suggested it was time for a new direction.

…

Some Republicans expressed reluctance to support the legislation because they feared it could be seen as a political attack on Mr. Bush, but left themselves open to backing a similar plan offered by Senator John W. Warner, a Virginia Republican.

What baffles me is that, at this stage in the game, Republicans are afraid to say what they really thing about the Iraq situation for political reasons (think about all of those times Democrats have been blasted for going only by polls). These people disagree with the surge, and they actually do support the legislation, but they won’t vote for it for fear of… attacking the president?

I think this is a good time to throw out there the video of Chuck Hagel.

[youtube]xaqec2tSd68[/youtube]

Now, I think it would be foolish not to take a look at the other side. Specifically, let’s ask the veep what he thinks about all of this.

In a television interview that turned increasingly contentious as it wore on, Cheney rejected the gloomy portrayal of Iraq that has become commonly accepted even among Bush supporters. “There’s problems” in Iraq, he said, but it is not a “terrible situation.” And congressional opposition “won’t stop us” from sending 21,500 more troops, he said, it will only “validate the terrorists’ strategy.”

…riiiiight. I love that defense. If you oppose ANYTHING concerning this mess, you’re validating the terrorists. Want the troops to come home? That’s just what the terrorists want. Disagree with a surge? You must love Al Qaeda. Think we should fight Al Qaeda instead of policing Iraq? I can’t believe how much you want to have sex with bin Laden.

Cheney said the administration would disregard the nonbinding resolution opposing the troop increase and suggested it undermines soldiers in a war zone. “It won’t stop us,” he said. “And it would be, I think, detrimental from the standpoint of the troops.”

I really do think that Cheney could save a lot of time by walking around with one hand on his crotch and the other flipping the bird. That seems to be the gist of every interview he gives.

So let’s review: bipartisan opposition to the surge, Republicans are too cowardly to vote their conscience, and Cheney proves that he doesn’t give a good god damn what anyone thinks.

I’ve been incredibly busy lately folks. Sorry. In the meantime, here’s ThinkProgress with an amazing detailed discussion on the State of the Union address, in video form!

Or you can take a look at the Washington Post, who comes up with a great discussion on the flawed definition of “enemy”. More from me later, but at this point any in-depth discussion on the SOTU is… gratuitous. You all know what I thought, and those two guys got it deeper than I could have gone.