From the Editors: Return to the State of the Union of Thomas Jefferson’s ideal
This week, President Donald Trump gave the State of the Union address, a nationally televised spectacle in which presidents fulfill their constitutional duty to “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.”
Addressing Congress in this fashion is not unusual – it happens nearly every year and has for some time. But the substance of the speech has gone from constitutionally prescribed information session to political rally. It is not the fault of either party, but the gradual degradation of the executive office from temporary steward of part of the government to an emperor who requires applause and pageantry.
Everyone likes to complain about the imperial presidency — when it’s not their party’s turn in the White House. But no matter who earned your vote in 2024, or 2020, or any other year, it is worth considering whether that person ought to address the legislature in a speech consciously modelled on the United Kingdom’s Speech from the Throne.
It doesn’t have to be this way. Moreover, it wasn’t always this way. For about half of American history, presidents submitted their State of the Union analysis to Congress by courier, not in person. It is a custom to which our republic should return.
Surely, there is some fun in it when your party’s president is giving the speech. This week, we saw Trump skewer the Democrats on the horns of a dilemma, forcing them to either stand to support his statement that they were all elected to look to the interests of Americans, not illegal aliens, or sit and signal that they disagreed. It was quite the political gotcha — but what does it have to do with the State of the Union?
This is not just a problem with the current occupant of the Oval Office. Consider Joe Biden’s bizarrely amped-up performance in 2024, which even CNN called “a particularly politically tinged yearly address.” Or the pageantry of the special guests in the gallery, a practice initiated by Ronald Reagan and continued by every president since. Again, it is a fine piece of political theater, but has little bearing on the supposed task at hand.
The conflict arises because the chief executive has some duties that are plainly political and others that are ceremonial. And in these increasingly polarized times, the ceremonial acts are taking on a political tinge.
There is no problem with the president giving a political speech. He is, after all, a politician, elected to political office by the people. But not every situation is an occasion for political pageantry. Let the president make his proposals and give his report on paper, as presidents from Jefferson to Herbert Hoover did. Keep the political showmanship out of this clerical function, and spare the country the interminable speech that we have all come to dread.
Democrats created that so-called “dilemma” you reference. They fumbled an obvious opportunity to stand. Trump took a risk because any sane person would have indeed stood. But, instead of standing and making Trump look like a fool, they all sat and signaled: they disagree they were all elected to look to the interests of Americans, not illegal aliens. They all literally and physically showed everyone: they think it is more important to literally disagree with every idea Trump mentions rather than look to the interests of Americans.(Illegals may give them more electoral seats, but they aren’t their actual constituents… yet.) So, it wasn’t a “political gotcha” they just simply exposed themselves for being slow-witted idealogues. Most United States’ voters don’t even know that little drama occurred. Compare that to Biden’s televised speech, which unintentionally or not, brilliantly highlighted his 1984-esque rant with blood red hues. That wouldn’t have come across as well either without a T.V. broadcast.
Life and culture change; they evolve. We are having a cultural civil war which most people are sleep walking thru. President Trump used this specific State of the Union to remind US citizens about pride and service and honor. That’s more important than any wonk policy discussion submitted via written document to a bunch of slow-witted corrupt congress members; congress members that just physically admitted they openly work for elites (that want to create a perfect androgynous slave class. Just read the Epstein files, they literally discuss that idea openly. The things written about in those files are beyond the pale. And people are getting arrested in Great Britain – Prince Andrew, Lord Mandelson – so maybe MI6 wasn’t on the same page as CIA/ Mossad?)
We can only wish Trump had given ironic Congressional metals of honor to some very members of congress… for being so good at day trading. Maybe next year.
Here are several other ideas that utilize modern tech, which have popped up since Herbert Hoover, should we get rid of them, too?
Microwave Oven, 1945
WD-40, 1953
Nylon, 1938
Phillips-Head Screw, 1936
Post it Notes, 1974
Remote Control, 1955
Barcode, 1952
Superglue, 1951
Velcro, 1948
Ball point pen, 1938
1. Was Homeland Security Secretary Noem telling the truth? (A story itself.) “I’ll tell you, Patrick [Bet David], even from the time I came into this office, it was—Elon and his team were extremely helpful to me,” [Noem] said. “They helped me identify that some of my own employees in my department had downloaded software on my phone and my laptop to spy on me, to record our meetings.” What?!?! What ????
a) If her story is true people need to be hung. b) If it is untruthful, she needs to resign and perhaps go to jail. c) News sites, such as Broad + Liberty, need to start reporting/ investigating this stuff.
2. A civil lawsuit in the District Court of Leeuwarden, filed in 2023 by seven plaintiffs (one of whom has since died) alleging they were misled about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, is still ongoing with no verdict reached as of February 2026. In late November 2025, the court ruled that defendants including Bill Gates and Albert Bourla must appear in person to testify at an upcoming hearing scheduled for sometime later in 2026, rejecting requests for remote or written statements. Oral arguments are planned, but specific dates have not yet been announced; the focus remains on procedural matters like jurisdiction and evidence gathering. Arno van Kessel, one of the plaintiffs’ lead attorneys, was arrested in June 2025 on unrelated charges but was released from pre-trial detention on February 26, 2026 (today), after approximately 260 days. Professor Francis Boyle was a prominent international law professor at the University of Illinois College of Law, known for his work on human rights, war crimes, genocide, and biowarfare issues. In the context of COVID-19 controversies—including the Dutch civil lawsuits alleging misleading claims about vaccine safety—Boyle was a vocal critic who publicly argued that the virus originated as an offensive biological weapon from gain-of-function research, potentially linked to labs in the US and China. He also labeled mRNA COVID-19 vaccines as “bioweapons” or “Frankenshots” in interviews and writings, claiming they violated the Biological Weapons Convention and posed severe risks. Yes, Boyle drafted the US Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, which implemented the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention into domestic law and criminalized related activities. It passed unanimously in Congress and was signed by President George H.W. Bush. Boyle died on January 30, 2025, at age 74 in Urbana, Illinois, at Carle Foundation Hospital. Some have speculated that his death was suspicious, linking it to the timing of his alleged agreement to testify in the Dutch case (supposedly just 20 days prior) and drawing parallels to other critics of vaccines or public health figures who died unexpectedly.
a) What “shot” is there Broad + Liberty will start reporting/ investigating this stuff?
3. Interminable indeed.
I watch it for the comedy and tragedy of the democrats’ boorish behavior, like Al Green getting ejected again, many of them nodding off, when all freshman Dem congress birthing persons wore white, or had paddles with messages on them, but this time, it could not have been any clearer their disdain for this country. Between snubbing the men’s gold metal hockey team, the support of illegal alien criminals over Americans, and support of child gender transitioning without parental permission or notification. Pathetic.