If you are a regular reader of this column or listener to our daily radio program, you know I took Thursday and Friday off to take care of a couple of personal matters.
However, I was paying close attention to what was happening in the news.
I had decided not to discuss President Biden's State of the Union address but rather move on to discuss today's---Monday's news.
After listening to his speech along with about 32 million other viewers, I concluded it wasn't a State of the Union speech; it was a personal, angry political tirade on all things good in America---especially conservatives and Christians.
Our country is better than Biden and his speech.
Be informed, not misled.
Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) noted, “If everything’s coming up roses, you’d think he’d be in a better mood,” he said after President Biden boasted - by angrily yelling nonstop for more than an hour – in his State of the Union speech.
Johnson told Fox, “Well, it was a speech about an angry old man.”
“If things were all that great, if everything’s coming up roses, you’d think he’d be in a better mood. You’d think he wouldn’t be so angry.”
“But, the problem is, it’s not coming up roses. Our nation’s in deep, deep trouble. And, it’s in deep, deep trouble because of his policies,” Johnson explained:
“He opened the border. He has the authority to close it; he just doesn’t want to.
“He sparked 40-year high inflation, which made a dollar that you held at the start of the Biden Administration worth only 85 cents. People are feeling that pain.
“He’s engaged in the war on fossil fuels."
“He’s the one that directed the embarrassing and dangerous surrender in Afghanistan that has emboldened our enemies and set the world on flames.”
“So, these are all caused by Pres. Biden’s, and his administration’s, actions, by their policies – and he can’t defend them – so, he gets all angry, blames everybody else,” the Senator said.
My sentiments exactly. So much for even trying to appear to be bringing our country together.
Dan McLaughlin, writing in The Federalist, titled his article: "The State of the Union described a world that doesn’t exist."
He noted on Friday, "Attention to last night’s State of the Union address focused on Joe Biden’s delivery. As I predicted yesterday, Biden did the minimum: He got through the speech with no debilitating senior moments. He did so in good part by shouting most of the speech. Whenever he would tail off into mumbling at the end of a sentence, or inject a slightly awkward pause, he’d start up the shouting again. Republicans mostly avoided taking the bait of hooting back at Biden, at least until fairly late in the evening, but Democrats engaged energetically in order to keep the visual spectacle lively."
Does the ability to yell at the country for an hour equate to a person who is capable of leading the greatest, most prosperous, most free, most powerful nation on Earth?
Parrish Alford wrote in American Family News, "President Biden has governed with little or no compromise on border security and social issues such as abortion and transgender rights. Yet the content and tone of his roughly 73-minute address surprised even critics."
"Attacking his opponent directly in the first minutes of his speech is unprecedented and perhaps the most partisan start to a State of the Union address in modern memory," he said, quoting Fox News contributor Marc Thiessen.
Thiessen isn't alone in his critical assessment. Appearing on American Family Radio Friday morning, Dinesh D'Souza described the SOTU as "a very bitter, angry partisan" speech.
"The State of the Union isn't supposed to be that; it's not a campaign speech. Yet Biden was raging against the Right," the author and filmmaker told show host Jenna Ellis. "Even if you look at the media coverage of the speech, they were kind of focusing on the applause of the Democratic side. But if you panned over to the Republican side, the reaction was completely different. Biden, while claiming to try and heal polarization and bring the country together, is obviously doing the exact opposite."
This is true. Even some Democrats pointed out Biden avoided the realities of the border crisis he has created with his open border policies.
The Republican response missed the mark.
"I'm sure Katie Britt is a sweet mom and person, but this speech is not what we need," TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk wrote on X. "Joe Biden just declared war on the American Right, and Katie Britt is talking like she's hosting a cooking show whispering about how Democrats 'don't get it.'
I'm sure Katie Britt is a sweet mom and person, but this speech is not what we need. Joe Biden just declared war on the American right and Katie Britt is talking like she's hosting a cooking show whispering about how Democrats "dont get it."
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) March 8, 2024
"I think Katie Britt, in her response to Biden, took a very homey kind of a homespun type of approach, which was endearing in a way but not appropriate to the extreme belligerence and partisanship of the Biden address," D'Souza said.
The Federalist claimed that President Biden "lied 30 times" during his speech. You can check it out.
Overall it was a "mourning" speech, not a "Morning" one.
What did Tucker Carlson think about the speech?
In an immediate response to Biden’s State of the Union address, the former prime-time host charged the president with delivering a speech “entirely lacking in decency or generosity to his fellow Americans.”
“In fact, it wasn’t a speech,” Carlson said, “it was a rant.”
Carlson also called Biden a “doddering old man” who “can’t remember when his son died or when he served as vice president," reflecting on the recent report in February from former Special Counsel Robert Hur, who declined to pursue felony charges against the president after the prosecutor concluded Biden was too senile for a jury to convict.
In his live monologue Thursday night, Carlson also claimed Biden is unable to win a fair election.
“We know they’re going to steal the election because they’re now saying so out loud,” Carlson said.
Carlson aired footage of Attorney General Merrick Garland declaring war on voter ID laws, then said this: “The chief law enforcement officer of the United States government is telling you that it’s immoral, in fact racist, in fact, illegal to ask people for their IDs when they vote to verify they are who they say they are.”
Then sarcastically, he added, “Somehow people of color, black people, don’t have state-issued IDs."
Carlson's first show after being fired from Fox News was about 120 million viewers. It has now leveled out at about 6-10 million viewers per show--the envy of any network.
"That was possibly the darkest and most un-American speech ever given by an American president."
— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) March 8, 2024
Tucker Carlson has a classic response to Biden's angry #SOTU speech.pic.twitter.com/WSv4LOqiUM
Takeaway
There are at least 3 big differences between "Progressives" and "Conservatives."
No. 1: Conservatives and progressives have different views about individuals and communities.
- Conservatives ask: “What can I do for myself, my family, my community, and my fellow citizens?”
- Progressives ask: “What is unfair?” “What am I owed?” “What has offended me today?” “What must my country do for me?”
The traditional American ethic of achievement gives way to the progressive ethic of aggrievement.
As opposed to a variety of individuals making up one American community, progressives seek to place individuals in a variety of competing communities. The first creates unity. The second is identity politics.
No 2.: Conservatives and progressives have different views about diversity and choice.
For progressives, different ethnicities and gender identities are welcomed, but a variety of opinions and ideas are not.
Just look at two areas of public life dominated by the left. On college campuses, free speech is under attack. If you’re a conservative working at a social media company or using one of their platforms to share your views, you may find your job eliminated or your account deleted.
When it comes to choice, progressives love the word, but they don’t want it to apply to our decisions on education, health care, and even how and where we live out our religious faith.
Conservatives take a different approach.
Parents, not the zip code they live in, should choose the school that is best for their child.
We all need health care, but we don’t all need the same kind or amount. While people should be free to live as they choose, no one should be forced to endorse or celebrate those choices if they violate their religious beliefs.
Conservatives say people should have choices. Progressives say one political solution fits all.
No. 3: Conservatives and progressives have a different view of “We the People.”
Whether it’s the Second Amendment, immigration, or putting limits on abortion, if we, the people, don’t pass laws progressives approve, they turn to judges, executive orders, and government bureaucrats behind closed doors to overturn the will of voters.
Whatever one may think about the wisdom of hiking the minimum wage, banning plastic straws, or removing controversial historical monuments, conservatives believe voters closest to the issues should be the ones making such decisions for their communities—not lawmakers in Washington or a panel of judges fives states away.
To sum up, conservatives believe in individual rights, not special rights. They believe in allowing Texas to be Texas and Vermont to be Vermont. And they believe we, the people, can vote with our feet about where we want to live and what laws we want to live under.
Conservative Christians believe God is in control.
Secular Progressives believe they are God.
Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Engaged. Be Bold. Be Prayerful.