How Many Speeches Do We Need Anyway?

Well last night was the President's State Of The Union address to congress.It must have been really good because it took two Republicans to give their responses in stead of just one. Yep. The Republican and the Tea Party both had something to say. Of course most everybody else who heard it had something to say and will continue for several days yet. But I wonder if this is the start of a trend. In future years will we have to be punished by speech after speech in response to the SOTU address? I guess all the leaders of both houses of congress, including both parties, Independents and all fringe parties will get their time in front of the camera. Do we really need to have all those second guessers? I mean, the President is required to give this report to Congress. He doesn't have to appear before them. He can just mail it to them. But there's nothing in the constitution that requires everyone else on the planet to respond. The idea of a response comes from anxious political opponents who wanted their time in the sun. How about this? How about just let the President give a report without the opponent bashing. There's plenty of time to have a say in the days following. Besides, how much are they supposed to know about what he's going to say. It takes the President weeks to decide what to say. If these folks don't take as much time or if they only take a couple of minutes, how important is what they say? My guess is that it's not important at all. It's just politics. It's like the filibuster in the Senate or Earmarks. There really is no place for them and no good reason for them to continue. It's just politics as usual. And not very good politics at that. Now I understand the idea of the filibuster. I remember "Mr Smith Goes To Washington" So, OK, if they want to do it, let em do it right. Let em show they really do mean business. Let em stand up there and talk, non stop. We'd have a lot fewer filibusters. Or the Earmarks that get slipped into a bill in the middle of the night. I understand some earmarks are important and useful, but if you're going to allow earmarks, make sure the President has a line item veto. Doncha think?