Tuesday, January 31, 2006

state of the union

guess what time it is kids? that's right! it's time for my third annual state of the union post. (and don't pay those inflated prices for the back issues. just go here for 2005 and here for 2004)

the good part about this post is that it gets easier and easier to write. my dislike of the SOTU speech hasn't receded at all in the past year. soon, on the morning of each speech all you will see here are giant ditto marks. but not yet. as both of my regular readers know, just because something has been said before, doesn't mean i won't say it again here anyway.

hey and this time i actually have a new thought* to add! brace yourself:

my dislike for the SOTU is really just a subset of my general dislike of all big public rigmaroles. i hate them all because they are all fluff and no substance. in fact, they often do more to obscure real substance than anything else. regarding the SOTU specifically, as francis wilkinson says the speech is really not about the state of the union. it's about the state of the president. or the state that that president wants to be in. or the state that the president's advisors think that they want him to be in. see? even the effort of describing what the SOTU speech is pushes you into an endless regress of meta-analysis, with each level becoming further detached from the real issues of the day.

last week at drinking liberally there was some talk about what to do about the SOTU speech since it falls on DL night this year. should we turn it into a drinking game? throw wings at the t.v? the possibilities are, well, maybe not endless, but at least bountiful. but i'm still not inclined to stay and watch. i'll be at drinking liberally tonight (tangier, 18th and lombard, 6 until later), but i'll probably cut out before the preznit hits the screen.

and it's not just because the speech comes on after my train leaves. it's because it's one of those fluffy spectacles that i hate. and because they didn't get jon stewart to host it.

* okay, this really isn't a new thought. i mean, it has occurred to me before. but in rereading my previous two SOTU posts, i realize that i never mentioned it here. so while it may not be totally new, it's at least new to you. who says i'm not looking out for you here?