For the love of God, can we just abolish the State of the Union Address already?

00bama2

Last week, if you tuned into the Grammys, you were treated to a gaudy spectacle of pretentious elitists, wealthy drug addicts and godless Satanists patting each other on the back and congratulating themselves for another year spent dumping toxic waste directly into America’s soul.

If you watched the State of the Union address tonight, you saw the exact same sort of thing all over again. Except with less dancing. And more clothing (thank God).

America, I know you are bored by the State of the Union Address. It’s long, pointless, bland, and utterly hollow. The rhetoric is stale and the pageantry overwrought. Yes, you ought to be bored. But do you realize how insulted you should be?

It wasn’t always this way. George Washington delivered the first SOTU Address, and it was all of about 1,000 words. He offered a basic outline of his administration’s plans for the year, and wrapped it up by pledging to maintain an “equal” and “efficient” government.

(Hint for current government officials: spending 3.5 trillion dollars a year does not qualify as “efficient.”)

It was purposeful and to the point. Of course, it wouldn’t have gone over well in modern America, especially with sentences like this:

“It would be superfluous to specify inducements to a measure in which the character and interests of the United States are so obviously so deeply concerned, and which has received so explicit a sanction from your declaration.”

Twitter analysis:

@NumbaOneHustla: wat is prez talkin bout?? loll use normal words bro #confusing #keepitsimplestupid

After Washington and Adams, Jefferson decided to deliver his address in written form to Congress. Jefferson thought an oral speech had “kingly” undertones, and too closely resembled a monarch dictating from his throne. For the next century, every other president followed suit.

It’s only in recent times that the State of the Union has become this sickening pageant of Washingtonian self-worship.

If you aren’t offended by it, you aren’t paying attention.

I’ve felt this way for a while, but never have my feelings been more pronounced than tonight. President Obama — after a year chock full o’ scandals, corruption, ineptitude, and failure — made his WWE-style entrance into the House chamber. He shook hands with the sycophants crowding the aisle, and soaked in the glow of a thunderous, fantastically undeserved applause.

Then he stood before them and lied, and they applauded. And he cited dozens of clichéd and fabricated anecdotes, and they applauded. And he repeated promises he’s already broken 5 times (example: “this needs to be the year we… close Guantanamo Bay!”), and they applauded. And he made plainly absurd statements about imaginary “gender wage gaps,” and they applauded. And he constructed fallacious straw men, and they applauded.

The State of the Union Address was indistinguishable from something you’d hear at a DNC convention. It was a political pep rally, which is all it’s been for many years. Only at this pep rally he has uniformed military on hand as stage props, and the entire body of Congress sitting by with their tongues wagging, ready to jump and bark like trained dogs.

It’s all really quite disgusting.

There’s nothing worthwhile  about any of it. At best, it’s an irrelevant and superficial exercise in talking point recitation. At worst, it’s a monarchical demonstration of arrogance and elitism.

Then, once the speech has mercifully come to a close, the Republicans trot out their consistently underwhelming “response,” and the talking heads from both parties take to the cable news circuit to regurgitate the “analysis” fed to them by their party bosses.

It’s the same story every year. Nothing is gained, nothing is learned, nothing is accomplished. It would be more edifying to spend that hour watching some TLC reality show about polygamist midgets, or whatever stellar programming they’re offering this evening.

The Constitution only stipulates that the president “from time to time” must offer to Congress “information about the State of the Union.”

He could fulfill that obligation with an occasional email.

Everything beyond that — the applause, the campaigning, the spectacle — is all done selfishly for the benefit of those in power.

But then, that describes pretty much everything else they do.

I’m done with the State of the Union. Aren’t we all?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

278 Responses to For the love of God, can we just abolish the State of the Union Address already?

  1. John says:

    Matt,
    I thought that the Oompa Loompa sitting next to Biden was supposed to stand up to Obama and fix everything?

  2. melleemak says:

    I don’t know about the rest of SOTU but gender wage inequality does exist. I have seen it.

    • Well when guys dont have to spend thousands on a ring,pay for a woman, and strress out,and not to mention get months off a work and get payed because a female is pregnant. Men should be paid more.

      • Melleemak says:

        Thank you for your comment- Evidence that sexism still exists.

        • Donna says:

          Amen Sister! What a stupid statement from ihiuhuihiygyg! Women are being paid better but sexism definitely still exists as shown by the ignoramus’ statement above.

      • john norvell says:

        come on you didn’t miss your chance because of the Government,you give them way to much credit I don’t care who is making more money then me ,age race sexual orientation, it has no bearing on my happiness at all,you just do your very best at the job your in,and if you want more money then start your own business and work 7 days a week,my job is simply a means to an end,that is i work hard but when i get home i don’t worry about who got upped at the job,or spend hrs talking about work, i enjoy the money to provide a comfortable home, my family, and a few really great hobbies thats why i enjoy the work,but don’t get wrapped up in all that drama ,enjoy the life you have inspite of the Governments foolishness,they will only let you down every time,don’t let them kill your joy ,its not worth it.

      • Joy Felix says:

        “Because the female is pregnant” and she got that way all by herself and therefore the kid is only hers? I guess we don’t need Dads after all. How about this – you take the higher pay , since it is oh so important to you, and you seem to think by being male you should have it, and we will just be happy if all the dads will go away – that way you can keep your entitlement mentality but at least it dies with you?

        That not sound good? I didn’t think so. Unless you can magically start having children by yourselves how about not being sexist and complaining about pay? Would it be so horrible to treat women as if they were you know human?

    • Curtis says:

      I think Matt did a blog post a while ago specifically about that. Are you basing your idea of the wage gap on the same exact job for two different people of equal qualifications and different gender, or is your wage gap calculated by running an average salary of all women vs all men? Because certain career fields are dominated by one gender or another, and those career fields DO pay differently.

    • Don says:

      Work that gender studies degree! We are not listening, we are officially bored with you folks.

      • Scott Fenner says:

        Excellent response!

        Boy, am I glad I’ve never taken one of those pathetic, liberal, pansy-ass courses.

  3. Pingback: State of the Beltway | True Conservatism

  4. Eric Thomas says:

    Polygamist midgets!??? Still laughing about this one. Coming from a lifetime Mormon, I thank you heartily for the guffaw!

  5. Steveiepoo says:

    Please explain how all of the services provided by the Federal government for the low cost of a few thousand dollars each is inefficient.

    • Kansas says:

      How about that those few thousand dollars each doesn’t even come close to covering the cost of what they are actually spending?

    • Sharan says:

      The Federal Government would be more efficient if the few services they provide to the truly needy cost me a few HUNDRED dollars instead of “a few thousand dollars”. They TAKE my hard earned “few thousand dollars” to provide amazing services to criminals, wastrels, drug addicts, illegal aliens and women who CHOOSE to have lots of babies out of wedlock, thereby CHOOSING to live in poverty. I didn’t watch the SOTU address because I knew it would be filled with the same old rhetoric…..yawn….

    • Dawn Perry says:

      How about the fact that many of those services are more than a few thousand dollars and shouldn’t be provided by the federal government. Let’s start with education, get the federal government out of it and you will find it costs less and is done more efficiently.

    • jstfishinman says:

      To spend the few dollars that actually get to the public, the government creates a big bureaucracy to go through with all of the employees being paid more than the private sector and numerous management people being paid six figure incomes, with bonuses!

  6. Rae Hoepf says:

    Dena, have I sent anything from Matt Walsh to you? Rae Lyn

    Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 04:27:32 +0000 To: snackerfratzilpenguin@hotmail.com

  7. Mike Reaves says:

    Equating the Grammys with the SOTU address is pretty disingenuous even for you. So you dislike Obama, you think he is a liar (more so than most politicians), you tow the Fox News party line, and you are unhappy. Must be tough to be you. And you ignore the lies coming from the other side of the aisle because it doesn’t fit your world view. So be honest, your problem isn’t with the SOTU; your problem is with Obama and those who identify as progressives.

    • suttonb4422 says:

      Funny, you must have missed the part where he dissed the last century of SOTUs, and slammed both the GOP and the “progressives” for ticking off the talking points of their political bosses! You must read these things with an already made up mind about their intended meaning/motive! Pay attention before vomiting proof that you hate anyone that doesn’t think your way!

    • James says:

      I thought it was right on…..

      Guess it all depends on how you look it.

      .

    • El Guapo says:

      To be fair he did say that it has been like that for quite some time. It doesn’t really matter who is president. They aren’t really talking about the true “state of the union,” they just use it as a political tool to try to get people interested in them. It isn’t really informative is his point. He also said that the “other side of the aisle” comes out with their “underwhelming response.” Politics has become dictated, passionless, and just full of lies. This is why he is “done with the SOTU” not because of any one political leader, but because quite frankly they are all the same.

    • Don says:

      Hey I will admit it. I have a big problem with Obama and progressives. They suck. About as pithy as I can get.

  8. El Jake says:

    It would be interesting if the next president delivered the SOTU as an e-mail to congress, or at least some written one page summary on official letter-head. It would be Earth-shattering in its simplicity. Let the talking heads squirm over analysis of that.

  9. Wes Powell says:

    I concur that State of the Unions are hooey, whoever is delivering them. But after all it is just one per year. If we use the following criteria for discontinuing things—A performer letting loose a bunch of hot gas and servile, puerile, and pathetic sycophants in the audience applauding, cheering even louder the more ridiculous the hot gas is—-If this calls for termination, then I would submit that blogs should be going to the guillotine first.

    They can be damn near every day too.

  10. Stephannie says:

    Here, here.

  11. saratorvik says:

    Matt, three things:

    1) If you ever actually read the constitution that I’m sure you claim to love so much, you’d know that nothing short of a constitutional amendment could abolish the State of the Union address. It is actually in the body of the Constitution. The president has to do it. Sorry that you don’t like it, but it’s not going away. Giving a State of the Union address through a letter or email would be bad communication. And, you know, you always have the option of not watching it. Nobody is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to watch it. At least I hope not.

    2) I’m not surprised you think the gender wage gap is imaginary, since you don’t seem to think us apparently unambitious wimmins should be getting a pay-check in the first place. Our place is in the home, amirite?

    3) I really don’t know what Grammy awards you were watching, but I wish I’d tuned into your version of it instead of mine, because the version that I saw was so boring I almost fell asleep in front of my TV. A few Satanists probably could have livened it up. And just like I said above about the State of the Union, nobody is forcing you to watch it. If it offends you or isn’t “edifying” enough for you then turn it off and watch the 700 Club instead.

    • Nedgar Allen Poe says:

      Article II Section 3 to be exact.

    • Matt says:

      Matt is not saying to abolish the state of the union address, if you would actually take the time to read what he wrote here, he is going back to what for about a century was the norm. There is no need to have this elaborate pageantry pat someone one the back for doing nothing farce. All that is required is that Congress receive something about the state of the union. It can be a letter, a conference call, an e-mail, or in this age, a text message chain. Matt’s entire point is that this has gotten to be a ridiculous let’s congratulate ourselves for being such wonderful people thing while the country is suffering.

      • Scott Fenner says:

        Don’t ya just get sick and tired of the lack of reading comprehension in this country?

        I can’t take it anymore. I know just how old Ebeneezer felt; I am insulted that I have to live in such a world of fools.

        (Go ahead … I’m waiting for one of you twits to point out that Scrooge lived, like, you know … a thousand years ago, and it’s not the same now.)

    • James says:

      Yes your are right, however I agree is doesn’t have to the pump and circumstance it is.. It’s costly and in today’s world it’s dangerous to have all the top government in one place.

      As for the gender gap… I am getting so tired of hearing wooo me,,, women have made great strides in the past 30 years, from holding high key offices to being CEO’s of some of the top companies. Yes you have to work at it…. but to complain and think that the government needs to step in and take care of the problem is ludistcrest at best. I am not where I want to be because of informative action, couldn’t get a scholarship out of school because I was the wrong race at the time. Then went in the military to get an education and while I was in the military I was past up promotions and key jobs to ensure that certain races got a head, and then later it was to ensure that the military could increase their % of numbers of women in all aspect of the Air Force….Many of these groups were given these promotions and jobs not because they were qualified but because they were or a certain race or gender. So excuse me if I don’t feel sorry and feel this is an issue that needs to be taken up by our government. I have no problem if who ever they are, what ever race, gender if they earned it…. So what do you want….. Life isn’t fair…. I may sound like I am wining, but actually I am not I worked hard and move to other areas….. However I have missed my chance to be where I wanted to be because the government was trying to fix inequality.

    • Kimberly says:

      You also don’t have to read Matt’s blog. Perhaps you missed the part about going a century with a SOTU? By your response it is obvious you are a liberal troll. If you don’t like what up you find here read something else. The rest of us with brains and common sense will continue to enjoy his blog.

  12. Wendy Solomon says:

    Sorry, but I must agree.

  13. Diana says:

    Ugggg…yes. I didn’t (couldn’t) watch the whole thing because it was painful to sit through.

  14. Joel Eads says:

    I’m from Mt. Sterling, outside Lexington, Ky. I enjoyed u being on the radio but your blogs are so much better. I noticed a article in the lex herald(liberal) that I thought u might be interested in, it was about a college professor that was holding a silent protest about something since Christmas. The school had dismissed him because of complaints in class that he wasn’t teaching, he sued on the grounds of racism and was reinstated.

  15. Curtis says:

    I caught about 20 minutes of the address, and observed about 8 minutes of applause and 12 minutes of repeated promises and self-glorification.

  16. James Beadle says:

    I don’t know if anyone here has ever seen footage of Stalin addressing the Kremlin after he attained power. Just like congress, they gave the appearance and hung on his every phrase. Of course he would have them imprisoned and worked to death if they didn’t, but the similarity of the venues was striking.

  17. Pingback: News and Commentary for January 30 | Palo Verde Republican Women

  18. funandcooky says:

    I just love reading your political blogs you make better sense than the president if you got 5 minutes to talk to the president face to face what would you say to him? I would tell him stop trying to leave a legacy you already have as the first black president of the United States

    • Tony says:

      I’d ask him how many years he thinks it’s going to take for the public to figure out everything he’s done.

  19. Trent says:

    “Can’t accept me at my best…”

    Perfectly written and unfortunately saturated with truth. I am very happy to have read that and even more happy to have learned of this platform you created where I could send my feedback. I’d say scratch out the little baseball participation etching and tape over “one damn nice story” and put it somewhere more deserving.

  20. Hi there! Quick question that’s entirely off topic.
    Do you know how to make your site mobile friendly? My site looks weird when viewing
    from my iphone4. I’m trying to find a template or plugin that might be able to
    correct this issue. If you have any recommendations, please share.
    Many thanks!

Comments are closed.