State of the Union? What Union?
I know this is a few days late, but given the amount of energy expended in discussing that "speech", it seems appropriate; I get to point out what an incredible waste of time such discussions are.
Has anyone in the mainstream or "alternative" press discussed the blatant lie in the title of the speech? It's called the "State of the Union" address and there's NO "Union"!
Let me point this out again:
1. A so-called "citizen" is a member of a body politic owing a duty of allegiance in return for a duty of protection;
2. government has no duty to protect anyone;
3. with no duty to protect, there is no duty of allegiance;
4. without these two duties there are no "citizens" or "Citizens";
5. without "citizens" there is no body politic and therefore, no "state";
6. without "states" there is no "Union" of "states" or "United States".
The lies start with the title itself. There is no "Union" or "president"; just people pretending.
I'm sure you now understand why I wrote any discussion on the speech is a waste of time, unless of course you're pointing out the fact there's no pretended "Union".
If you refuse to believe this, then what facts do you rely on to prove there are "states"? And keep in mind "states" are not geographic. Here's a hint: it requires evidence (tangible facts) of an obligation (duty) to protect.
Also, regarding the recent comments; I do not know how to delete comments. I want to point out the comments about killing government agents are unsolicited, inconsistent with my beliefs and should be deleted. I do not condone the intiation of physical force and certainly do not support the killing of government agents. I advocate peaceful, non-violent, economic methods of ridding the world of government. Violence makes government look legitimate. Non-violence exposes government for what it is: a gang of killers, thieves and liars.