Latest News

March 11, 2024

Many of you who commented on Biden’s 2024 State of the Union speech didn’t actually sit through it, but you are forgiven for that, as we could hardly get through it ourselves.  Some of you endured part of it before bailing; others had no intention of watching even one minute.  But because we watch the news so you don’t have to, we not only forced ourselves to watch the worst speech ever made (no joke!) but also spent the weekend going through all your comments.  And the assumptions by you non-watchers about what the speech would be turned out to be amazingly accurate.

By now everyone knows that this was not a real State of the Union Address at all but a shockingly partisan campaign speech --- nothing more --- that surely backfired.  It contained lie after lie and even attacked the Supreme Court.  We’ve picked it apart in the past few newsletters and linked to some great analyses, so there’s no point in rehashing all that here.

But by giving the kind of speech he did, President Biden inadvertently told us much more about the sad state of our union than he had intended to.  If anyone still wondered whether or not America is still the Shining City on a Hill of which Reagan spoke, Biden’s speech, sadly, answers that question.  Judging by this horror-show of a speech, our country appears to be in the final act of a Shakespearean tragedy.  And if the people behind his administration remain in power after the next election, they will surely deliver the final blow to it.

But the partisan media appeared to be thrilled with this stinker of a speech, as Jonathan Turley notes in his Saturday column for the NEW YORK POST.  We think much of their exaltation was pretend, could it not be?  Unless they truly are psychotic, they have to be aware of how bad Biden’s performance was.  Privately, reporters must be wondering what cocktail of drugs was given to Biden to get him so (as they put it) “feisty” and “fiery.”

Turley introduces his column as being “about disunion and the need to demonize those with whom we disagree,” and mourned the loss of our traditions surrounding this yearly event.

(Speaking of traditions, we would add that Biden didn’t even allow the customary introduction by the Sergeant-at-Arms: “Mr. [or Madame] Speaker of the House, the President of the United States!”  Maybe Democrats decided the terms “Mister” and/or “Madame” would offend gender activists, but we think it’s more likely that Biden just forgot to wait for his cue and screwed it up.)

The best part of Turley’s column might be the first line: “President Biden gave what could be his final State of the Union address Thursday.”  That’s an applause line if ever there was one.  After all, this is, FINALLY, his fourth year to do this.  And it’s hard to believe there’s any amount of lying, cheating, censoring and lawfare that would keep him in the White House for another four years, if by chance he’s even the nominee.  For the sake of the country, this State of the Union speech had better be his last.

But the media loved the divisive spirit of this speech.  Turley singles out MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace for saying that it “was like a punch in the face to every Republican in the room.”  In case she hadn’t gotten her point across, she also said it “was a punch in the nose.”  These are the same people who for years have been criticizing President Trump’s “tone”?

Turley also likens Biden’s presentation to his earlier speeches in Philadelphia and at Valley Forge, in which he “selected a backdrop of unity [in this case, the floor of Congress] to highlight and play on our divisions.”  Biden likened his opponents to the Nazis or the Confederacy, portraying them as an existential threat to the nation.

“The hellish red backdrop was gone,” Turley writes, “but in some ways it was more chilling, precisely because this was a different setting.”

As he points out, there’s supposed to be a difference between national interest and political interest.  In this speech, only the political mattered.

Of course, the tradition of civility applies to both sides, and I’ve made it clear that heckling is inappropriate, no matter who does it.  (In this case, though, we need compassion on both sides for the Gold Star father who was escorted out and later arrested.  His story is updated elsewhere in the newsletter.) 

Turley knows firsthand what has been lost in these proceedings, because as a young man he worked in the House chamber as an awestruck page.  Back in those days, politicians were every bit as divided and partisan, he says, but they would put their differences aside for the State of the Union.  They “could still transcend politics.”

“It was a moment that reminded the nation that we are still capable of reaching those moments of civility and decorum,” he says.  No more.

Turley senses we turned that corner when Nancy Pelosi childishly ripped up her copy of President Trump’s SOTU at its conclusion.  “...She tore up something far more important than a speech,” he says.  “She shredded decades of tradition of civility and any remaining residue of restraint in our politics.”  And now, the ‘mainstream’ media praise politicians --- the ones on their side --- for behaving this way.

Side note:  Recall that Pelosi did something else unprecedented to create animosity when Trump was President.  From

“In 2019, animosity between President Donald Trump and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi became public when letters between the President’s office and the Speaker’s office showed that she did not intend to proceed with a vote that would allow him to deliver the State of the Union speech – unless he ended the government shutdown that was in effect at the time. This was the first documented time that a sitting president had been ‘disinvited’ from presenting the address. The speech was eventually presented on February 5, 2019.”

It must be noted that Turley criticized Trump’s rhetoric on January 6 as well, for his use of expressions such as “fight like hell,” but in fairness, that phrase is used figuratively all the time, especially in politics.  It’s easy, since there subsequently WAS a fight, to try to blame Trump’s figurative use of the phrase for the literal fight, but given the timing of his words that day, the two events had nothing to do with each other.

Because Biden chose not to “hear the call of history to unify a nation” as he gave his SOTU speech, he gave the public “scripted rage.”  So, is that really what the public wants?  “We can seek candidates who are reaching for something greater than we are at this moment,” Turley says, “or we can all just punch each other in the nose until the whole country is left broken and bloody.”

Of course, judging by his bizarre performance Thursday night, many suspect Biden was loaded up by his staff with so many pharmaceuticals that he was incapable of thinking that deeply about the long-term consequences of what he was going to say.  He just went out there and yelled at clouds.  So blame the people around this elderly placeholder --- the handlers, the advisers, the bureaucrats, the speechwriters, all the ones who will still be there whether Biden or some other member of the Democrat machine wins in November.  Heck, we might even get someone who on the surface is less confrontational and more of a “healer,” but don’t be fooled.  It will still be the same people in power that we’ve had under this Disunifier-In-Chief, just with a younger image and a smoother veneer over the chaos they are out to cause.

Mark Levin, on Sunday’s LIFE, LIBERY & LEVIN, spoke about Biden’s State of the Union address and the disunity being encouraged by his administration.  “It smells to me like the French Revolution,” he said.  Levin’s look at the 19th-century French political observer Frederic Bastiat (a favorite of President Reagan) is not to be missed.  Bastiat could just as easily have been cautioning America about “plundering the law” in 2024.  Genius writing, from Bastiat’s book THE LAW…

Levin follows this with the modern-day genius of Victor Davis Hanson in a quick comment about the SOTU…

Speaking of Levin, he posted some great comments on X/Twitter about Liz Cheney’s attempt to hide VERY important documents generated by the J6 Committee investigation, not to mention evidence of possible witness tampering.  (That story is covered elsewhere in the newsletter.)  In her response, Cheney mentioned the “bozo” who wrote the story Levin was referencing; that “bozo” turned out to be Mollie Hemingway at THE FEDERALIST.  Cheney thoroughly shamed and disgraced herself, or would have if she were capable of shame.

To make it worse, someone called “Bad Kitty Unleashed” posted a copy of the memorandum from the Secretary of Defense that Cheney didn’t want us to see, saying Trump “concurs” about using DCNG (DC National Guard) but that the request was not made.  Cheney was hiding the truth when she said there was no evidence Trump requested troops for that day.

Okay, Liz, this is evidence that you’ve committed a crime, obstruction of justice.  Where’s the FBI with the handcuffs and leg chains?  Levin wrote that you should consider professional help; they probably do have some type of counseling in prison.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

The Overseas Elections

Very Fine People

Raked over the coals

Plan for action after AG Garland’s contempt of Congress

No Comments