It’s widely and highly obvious to those that care to stop being monarchy subjects that anytime the government puts a hand in something, it ruins it.
Living in a state where democrats (and most of them far far left democrats at that) have super majority, I can attest to this.
We want safer homes in NY so we’re going to ban gas appliances.. until winter hits and half of NYS freezes to death because there wasn’t enough power to heat every house in the state. Or by 2030 no vehicle sold in the state can get less than 40 mpg. So in a heavy winter state we can’t get trucks and most SUVs?
In my opinion, the government should stay out of our affairs and just let us live. Let us buy what we need, and let the businesses selling that stuff run the competition.
The Constitution calls for information on the “state of the Union” but does not require its formation as a speech. It could be made in the form of a written report - or possibly several report, each dealing with separate facets of the state of our Union. Instead it has turned into a partisan political circus.
Hmm.. aren't presidential candidates supposed to be allotted equal air time for campaigning? As you point out, Biden is just doing a campaign speech. How about we have RFK also deliver a "State of the Union" (and to be fair give Trump some air time for his version of "State of the Union" too).
Politicians generate far too much "hot air"! Dang, I think I've discovered the source of "global warming"!
Generally speaking over the last coupleofdecades, as far as I remember, the opposing party has aired their "reply" to the SOTU. I don't believe this response has been aired by ALL of the networks, but it has been critiqued, especially by those on the left.
Be that as it may, the fact is that the SOTU is intended to be an address to CONGRESS but has become a circus act over the last 2 or 3 decades. This is yet ANOTHER shining example of our elected representatives going AGAINST the Constitution and doing as they please.
I did NOT watch the SOTU last night. I thought I may IF I were able to stay awake long enough, but I did not make it.
I'm not going to beat myself up for not listening. I have zero doubt anything was said that would actually surprise me. The only thing that would have surprised me would have been if creepy uncle joe was able to get through the entire thing without showing how old and demented he is. I have no doubt I will hear all of the gaffe takeaways over the next few days. There will be many memes made to highlight the pathetic nature of the one who is labeled the "leader of the free world" by so many.
Day before yesterday my husband and I had this discussion. We are never given a real “state of the union” address. By far this was the worst I have ever seen in my life time. It was a campaign speech. The SOTU should not be a platform for either party to campaign. I quit watching it after about 40 minutes so actual speech time was prob 30 minute as he was really late getting started with all the hoopla and selfies going on. Isn’t the president supposed to enter down the aisle between the two houses not be over whelmed by a crowd of party sycophant. I felt they were delaying and wasting time to cover for his dementia. The portion of his speech I managed to force myself to watch was all crap he repeats and repeats every time he’s in front of a camera.
Although correct, as to the actual wording, it is now a bell that cannot be unrung. Once a president decides now to do an actual informing of Congress as to the state of the union, without being televised, there will be torches and pitchforks, calls for the “right for the people to know”, of course, without any basis or constitutional fact, but you all know how it goes. I seem to remember when DJT did these, he actually said what was happening the past year and plans going forward. Love him or not, he actually reported on the state of the union. And DJT, regardless if he disagreed with SCOTUS, never wagged his finger at them. Only two presidents I know of have ever done that, this senile jackass and his puppet master. Shameful and deplorable.
Not surprisingly, the first major departure from the intent and content of the Annual Report was initiated by Woodrow Wilson in 1913. The first use of the term "State of the Union" was during the FDR Administration. Johnson was the first to make it a prime time TV event. Is there a pattern here?
The idea that Wilson first co-opted the State of the Union is not at all surprising. The term "State of the Union", however, appears in the constitution. Perhaps "State of the Union *Speech*" (since the constitution does not necessitate a speech - just "information") first appeared under FDR? And the pattern is clear, though again, not surprising.
Lowercase "state of the union" is the directive, FDR used it as a specific name for the speech itself, as you point out. He had a flair for the dramatic.
Not to seem the contrarian, but it is actually capitalized in the Constitution:
"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; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States." - https://archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
Good point, I didn't initially look at the original parchment, I was reading a secondary source. In the original it's clear that "Union" is capitalized but not as apparent with "state." And as you illustrated above, in that period handwriting was often stylized without intent to differentiate common versus proper nouns. [Just did a short search - turns out this may have been a carry-over from German, in which all nouns are capitalized.] And YES, I was simply trying to make the point that the annual report to Congress has become a political tool abused by both parties and suggesting that the first transgression might have been one-sided.
Interesting about the nouns. I never really noticed the pattern, though I often wondered why particular words in our founding documents were capitalized while others were not.
It’s widely and highly obvious to those that care to stop being monarchy subjects that anytime the government puts a hand in something, it ruins it.
Living in a state where democrats (and most of them far far left democrats at that) have super majority, I can attest to this.
We want safer homes in NY so we’re going to ban gas appliances.. until winter hits and half of NYS freezes to death because there wasn’t enough power to heat every house in the state. Or by 2030 no vehicle sold in the state can get less than 40 mpg. So in a heavy winter state we can’t get trucks and most SUVs?
In my opinion, the government should stay out of our affairs and just let us live. Let us buy what we need, and let the businesses selling that stuff run the competition.
The Constitution calls for information on the “state of the Union” but does not require its formation as a speech. It could be made in the form of a written report - or possibly several report, each dealing with separate facets of the state of our Union. Instead it has turned into a partisan political circus.
Bingo. A bunch of grandstanding, self-aggrandizement, and partisan pimpery.
Hmm.. aren't presidential candidates supposed to be allotted equal air time for campaigning? As you point out, Biden is just doing a campaign speech. How about we have RFK also deliver a "State of the Union" (and to be fair give Trump some air time for his version of "State of the Union" too).
Politicians generate far too much "hot air"! Dang, I think I've discovered the source of "global warming"!
Generally speaking over the last coupleofdecades, as far as I remember, the opposing party has aired their "reply" to the SOTU. I don't believe this response has been aired by ALL of the networks, but it has been critiqued, especially by those on the left.
Be that as it may, the fact is that the SOTU is intended to be an address to CONGRESS but has become a circus act over the last 2 or 3 decades. This is yet ANOTHER shining example of our elected representatives going AGAINST the Constitution and doing as they please.
I did NOT watch the SOTU last night. I thought I may IF I were able to stay awake long enough, but I did not make it.
I'm not going to beat myself up for not listening. I have zero doubt anything was said that would actually surprise me. The only thing that would have surprised me would have been if creepy uncle joe was able to get through the entire thing without showing how old and demented he is. I have no doubt I will hear all of the gaffe takeaways over the next few days. There will be many memes made to highlight the pathetic nature of the one who is labeled the "leader of the free world" by so many.
Day before yesterday my husband and I had this discussion. We are never given a real “state of the union” address. By far this was the worst I have ever seen in my life time. It was a campaign speech. The SOTU should not be a platform for either party to campaign. I quit watching it after about 40 minutes so actual speech time was prob 30 minute as he was really late getting started with all the hoopla and selfies going on. Isn’t the president supposed to enter down the aisle between the two houses not be over whelmed by a crowd of party sycophant. I felt they were delaying and wasting time to cover for his dementia. The portion of his speech I managed to force myself to watch was all crap he repeats and repeats every time he’s in front of a camera.
Although correct, as to the actual wording, it is now a bell that cannot be unrung. Once a president decides now to do an actual informing of Congress as to the state of the union, without being televised, there will be torches and pitchforks, calls for the “right for the people to know”, of course, without any basis or constitutional fact, but you all know how it goes. I seem to remember when DJT did these, he actually said what was happening the past year and plans going forward. Love him or not, he actually reported on the state of the union. And DJT, regardless if he disagreed with SCOTUS, never wagged his finger at them. Only two presidents I know of have ever done that, this senile jackass and his puppet master. Shameful and deplorable.
Not surprisingly, the first major departure from the intent and content of the Annual Report was initiated by Woodrow Wilson in 1913. The first use of the term "State of the Union" was during the FDR Administration. Johnson was the first to make it a prime time TV event. Is there a pattern here?
The idea that Wilson first co-opted the State of the Union is not at all surprising. The term "State of the Union", however, appears in the constitution. Perhaps "State of the Union *Speech*" (since the constitution does not necessitate a speech - just "information") first appeared under FDR? And the pattern is clear, though again, not surprising.
Lowercase "state of the union" is the directive, FDR used it as a specific name for the speech itself, as you point out. He had a flair for the dramatic.
A “flail”, I see what you did there, LMAO
Not to seem the contrarian, but it is actually capitalized in the Constitution:
"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; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States." - https://archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
That is the transcript, but the capitalization can be seen in the images of the original parchment here: https://www.archives.gov/files/founding-docs/downloads/Constitution_Pg3of4_AC.jpg?download=true&filename=US-Constitution-p3.jpeg
I think I understand what you're getting at, I just want us to be clear that the founders actually did capitalize those words.
Good point, I didn't initially look at the original parchment, I was reading a secondary source. In the original it's clear that "Union" is capitalized but not as apparent with "state." And as you illustrated above, in that period handwriting was often stylized without intent to differentiate common versus proper nouns. [Just did a short search - turns out this may have been a carry-over from German, in which all nouns are capitalized.] And YES, I was simply trying to make the point that the annual report to Congress has become a political tool abused by both parties and suggesting that the first transgression might have been one-sided.
Interesting about the nouns. I never really noticed the pattern, though I often wondered why particular words in our founding documents were capitalized while others were not.