President Trump delivered a speech that was more showmanship than a serious discussion of the state of the nation and of his proposals to solve the problems that confront us. News outlets almost universally analyzed the speech from a political perspective. Commentators pondered the effect on the president’s base, women and other demographic groups. Much time was spent analyzing what drew applause and from whom.
The current president and his recent predecessors have turned the State of the Union into a campaign rally featuring a laundry list of hot-button issues, repeating well-worn talking points. They introduce too many guests chosen to illustrate these talking points and to draw mandatory applause. They fail to use it for serious consideration of issues and for making realistic legislative proposals. And the length of these speeches taxes attention spans.
If the presidents do not change the tenor of these speeches to make them more inspiring and meaningful, we should consider Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s suggestion that the State of the Union report be delivered in writing.
William F. Werwaiss
New York
To the Editor:
President Trump’s call for $500 million to fight childhood cancer was greeted with deservedly loud applause. Does it not occur to anyone that he wants more than 10 times that amount for his wall? Here’s a deal we can all live with: $5.7 billion to fight childhood cancer, and $500 million for the wall. That way Mr. Trump can say he got money for the wall, and we can get our priorities straight in this country.
John M. Imperiale
Harvey Cedars, N.J.
To the Editor:
I cannot be the only person who found President Trump’s State of the Union address simply rehashed rhetoric. How many times do we have to hear his horror story version of what goes on at our southern border? Not surprisingly, the president’s speech lacked any mention of voting rights, sensible gun control or climate change. Perhaps an hour and 22 minutes wasn’t enough time.
Stacey Abrams, however, in giving the Democratic response, addressed those missed issues and a lot more, and did it in under 15 minutes. As a bonus, she was passionate, wholly engaged and inspiring.
Ms. Abrams, who lost a contentious battle for governor of Georgia and is not a member of Congress, was well chosen to give the Democratic response. She did an extraordinary job. Her belief in an America shaped by all of us together was in sharp contrast to the president’s self-glory-filled rhetoric.
Patricia Weller
Emmitsburg, Md.
To the Editor:
Speaker Nancy Pelosi showed her disrespectful attitude for all Americans to see Tuesday night. Could you imagine what the media would have done if a Republican had sat up there behind President Barack Obama making scowl faces and looking at papers all night?
Wayne Taralson
Sioux Falls, S.D.
To the Editor:
Re “Where’s the Unity, Mr. Trump?” (editorial, Feb. 6):
The lofty goals put forth in President Trump’s State of the Union speech, even surrounded by anodyne patriotic themes and military reminiscences, will be going nowhere fast in terms of legislation and action under a president who has no idea how to work with Congress, especially a divided one.
We must continue to express our disapproval of this administration but also need to forge ahead ourselves to achieve change. As your editorial said, “the wisest course for citizens interested in a stronger union is to focus on building it themselves.”
Speak up! Speak out! And vote! D.I.Y., America!
Nancy Sellar
New York