Abolish the State of the Union Speech

Bloomberg.com ^ | 01/28/2003 | Andrew Ferguson

[GeneD]

Washington, Jan. 28 (Bloomberg) -- ``Big themes'' was the ominous phrase White House spokesman Ari Fleischer used last week to describe this year's State of the Union speech.

Charlie Black, a Republican consultant, sounded even more ominous: ``It will all go underneath a big umbrella theme,'' he told the Washington Post.

[Wphile]

Clinton's SOTUs were the best-received in history.

Hogwash. They certainly were not well received by me. Talk about nauseating.

[Commander8]

We as taxpayers and citizens are entitled to hear that speech. Of course President Bush doesn't have to show up in person to deliver the speech. He can do it on close circuit tv from the Oval Office or any other location he choses or he can do what most presidents until Woodrow Wilson did, write the address and have someone else read it on the floor of congress.

[PaulJ]

I wouldn't be too upset if they did away with it. It's really just a political vehicle, used in the hopes of bolstering the President's popularity. If the President needs to speak to Congress and/or the people,he can do it easy enough as W did, post 9-11.

[upchuck]

The SOTU and our contemporary celebration of Christmas have a lot in common. Both sarted off small and well-intentioned. Unfortunately, both have gotten completely out of hand.

How many man hours, supported by our involuntarily paid tax dollars, do you suppose the gvt has wasted on the SOTU this year?

I sincerely hope he avoids the Clintonian laundry list approach. BARF!!

[Lurking Libertarian]

No president saw any reason to elevate this annual communication into a full-dress congressional speech until Woodrow Wilson, a former college professor who could never pass up the chance to harangue a captive audience. Other presidents followed his lead.

I seem to recall reading that Washington and Adams delivered the SOTU speech personally to Congress; that Jefferson sent his in a letter; and that later presidents switched back and forth between the two styles. Wilson, I believe, was the first to have his speech broadcast (radio, in those days, kids).

[onedoug]

"...a relic of the Constitution...."

I smell a RAT.

[jammer]

Why would anyone want to watch them? If the purpose is for us to be informed, then, if any one doesn't know the state of the Union, he is too stupid to be allowed to vote anyway. Every SOTU since 1998 (starting 1999's), I have posted on FR the same thing. It's ridiculous, for either party.

[Anti-Bolshevik]

Section 3: "He 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..."


Let's keep it.

[buffyt]

I don't know ANYONE who liked Clinton or enjoyed his speeches!

[buffyt]

Can you say President Hillary?

I didn't think so!