In which I highlight tweets from around the area and analyze why they’re important.

Tonight’s the night. The President will stand in front of Congress and other distinguished guests, and tell everyone that the State of the Union is strong, which we all know is a lie. That aside, what is the deal with SOTU responses? They NEVER go well. The whole concept seems lame. And yes, they need to end altogether.

Sidebar: there will be three, count ’em, three responses to tonight’s address. First, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington plans to speak. Then, Utah’s Sen. Mike Lee will give the tea party reply. Then, Sen. Rand Paul is going to chime in, because, well, he wants to.

We all remember Marco Rubio’s epic botch from last year. Best water bottle grab ever. And then there was Michele Bachmann’s awkward attempt, which featured her staring off at an unidentified subject, making everything extra weird. There was also Bob McDonnell, now somewhat disgraced former Governor of Virginia who came in with much pomp and circumstance. All of the speeches ended up being nothing other than an opportunity for people to later ridicule those who delivered them.

I have no idea why anybody continues with this trite tradition. Delivering the State of the Union response has become the new height of mediocrity. If the SOTU response is the pinnacle of your political career, you’re probably doing it wrong. I love Farhad’s idea, though. Why not go a different route?

Make it funny. Make it anything other than just another person in a suit talking. After watching a room full of people like that for an hour, the last thing the country needs is another person doing the same thing. But in the end, the history of opposition responses and its current situation is telling to what the actual state of our union is: fractured.