1 posted on
01/28/2003 2:11:32 PM PST by
GeneD
To: GeneD
Clinton's SOTUs were the best-received in history. Hogwash. They certainly were not well received by me. Talk about nauseating.
2 posted on
01/28/2003 2:14:42 PM PST by
Wphile
(W's gonna knock it out of the park!)
To: GeneD
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.
To: GeneD
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.
4 posted on
01/28/2003 2:42:40 PM PST by
PaulJ
To: GeneD
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).
To: GeneD
"...a relic of the Constitution...."I smell a RAT.
7 posted on
01/28/2003 5:02:22 PM PST by
onedoug
To: GeneD
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson