23 thoughts on “I heard it was an angry, divisive speech”

  1. Some loved angry, divisive speeches from Trump. So, this one should give them more of what they loved.

      1. Yes, the word made popular by conservatives when they don’t want to take responsibility for their…”do as I say, not as I do” philosophy.

  2. It’s time for Biden and the Dems to hit Trump and his followers twice as hard. Given the level and duration of the heat that Trump has generated for years now and continues unabated, Biden will never manage to get even close to hitting with that degree of anger and divisiveness.

    1. https://images.app.goo.gl/SEALG3A87EiXkLe76

      Isn’t it interesting that when Trump gave angry, divisive speeches conservatives would say things like…”he’s punching back”, “it was necessary”, “just telling it like it is”…to name a few. They especially loved it when he excoriated the media. Rarely was it described as angry or divisive when he went on a name-calling tirade and blanketly accused Democrats of any number of unpatriotic things. Yet, now that the current president is calling out a segment of the GOP (MAGA-Republicans), it seems they want to cry divisive? If such behavior from Trump wasn’t considered divisive by them then, why is it now? Oh, maybe because it’s their ox that’s being gored? Someone should inform conservatives their hypocrisy is showing…again. It’s not a good look.

      That said, there’s always going to be criticism of a political opponent’s speech. That’s fair game and it comes with the territory. Yet, I can’t take seriously those who didn’t watch Biden’s speech but labeled it divisive (herd mentality). Nor those who didn’t denounce such behavior when it was coming from Trump. In fact, they are only getting more of what they previously lauded or tolerated. Seems they can dish it out, but can’t take it. Remind me again…who is the alleged “snowflake”?

  3. For the record, I thought Biden’s speech was angry and divisive…

    ANGRY: It appeared Biden was angry that MAGA-Republicans constantly deny the outcomes of the 2020 election, attempt to coerce election workers/officials when they don’t win elections, call for violence against law enforcement, support the Jan 6 rioters mob and like behaviors. In fact, didn’t Trump just say this concerning Jan 6 rioters…“if I become president, someday if I decide to do it, I will be looking at them very, very seriously for pardons. Very, very seriously”? IMO, seems like a justifiable reason to be angry…“if” one values democracy and the rule of law.

    DIVISIVE: Biden called for Democrats, Independents and Mainstream Republicans to condemn the aforementioned behavior of MAGA-Republicans. In essence, he was calling Americans to be “true” patriots and denounce the ideology of “fake” patriots…ones that threaten law enforcement and seek to overturn the results of free and fair elections (like Trump called for this week when he said…“…declare the rightful winner, or this would be a minimal solution, declare the 2020 election irreparably compromised and have a new Election immediately.” ). You can’t make this stuff up! I wonder what the reaction would have been from conservatives if Hillary had said such in 2016? But, I digress. Nevertheless, when there is a threat from a group, such as was displayed on Jan. 6 (MAGA-Republicans)…it’s time for the legitimate President to STRONGLY encourage Americans to denounce and separate themselves from that.

  4. I heard Trump delivered an angry, divisive rally speech this weekend. As a former President, isn’t there an “informal agreement” that former presidents don’t publicly criticize a current president? Yet, Trump called the current president an “enemy of the state” . Conservatives got quite wrangled whenever Obama publicly criticized Trump. They were quick to point out the breech of the informal presidential tradition. Will they respond the same with Trump? I’ll wait.

    As well, Trump called the DOJ/FBI “vicious monsters”. The alleged law and order President spoke against law enforcement and the law and order crowd cheered? The icing on the cake, the rally featured a relative of January 6 rioter, decrying how law enforcement treated the now convicted criminal. This convict is an alleged Nazi supporter that had uttered rhetoric so toxic that a Trump-appointed judge felt compelled to hold him in prison until his trial for fear he was a danger to the community. This is the person/story Trump, et. al. wanted featured??? Someone breaks the law, convicted for it, considered a danger to the community but presented as a victim? This is the perspective of “patriots”? Also, the speech was riddle with lies, misstatements and personal defenses (of the indefensible) but that’s standard fare for Trump.

    So, conservatives took great issue with the current President’s angry, divisive speech…will they take issue with the former President making an angry, divisive speech? Will the “law and order” party criticize the way he spoke about law enforcement? We’ll see…but I won’t hold my breath.

    https://nypost.com/2022/09/03/trump-rips-dems-doj-in-stump-speech-for-oz-mastriano-in-pennsylvania/

      1. Big difference: Trump is in principle unleashing violent forces upon the nation, whereas Biden is not.

        1. Why would you say that? There has been more violence from the left over the last couple years than from the right. Have you forgotten the riots after George Floyd? The attempted assassination of a supreme court justice? The attempted assassination of a congressman? The shooting at the baseball game?

          1. Biden is obviously not speaking from a standpoint that could accurately be described as “leftist.” Moreover, the FBI has repeatedly warned us that violence from the extreme right is the main thing to worry about. The Floyd riots (which were exceptional among the Floyd protests) were not driven by any electrifying leftist leader, as the attempted insurrection of Jan. 6 was driven by Trump.

            Plainly Biden’s perfectly legitimate and long overdue repudiation of an extremist and potentially violent assault on America, including governmental and law-enforcement agencies, is not at all equivalent to Trump’s highly malevolent encouragement of that very assault.

            1. I’m not convinced “left” and “right” are all that meaningful anymore.

              You’re certainly right that there’s no one on the Democrat side with any charisma. But there’s a violent mob, ready and waiting to do that person’s bidding, should he arise.

              The FBI doesn’t have any credibility with me on the question of who’s the bigger threat. It’s kinda like, “what are you going to believe, your own lying eyes, or what the FBI tells you?”

              The leadership of the FBI has been taken over by partisans. That is simply unquestionable.

              I agree there is a threat of violence from the extreme right, and we should keep an eye on it. And you’re right that Trump could use his position to encourage violence. He hasn’t done so to date, and I hope he never does. But it is a concern.

              Democrats have incited violence. Directly and clearly. Kamala Harris promoted an organization to get criminal protestors out of jail. Chuck Schumer incited violence on the steps of the Supreme Court. Bus loads of Democrats promoted violence from Antifa and Black Lives Matter. “Dark Brandon” came within an inch of promoting violence in Philly.

              The saving grace is that all these people have the charisma of a clam, so it’s not been as bad as it could be.

              But there’s a lot of dishonesty from Democrats and their supporters, pretending that violence and the threat of violence is all (or mostly) from the right. It simply isn’t so, no matter how often they say it.

          2. QUOTE: There has been more violence from the left over the last couple years than from the right.

            Is that accurate? Albeit the left-wing violence you cite has occurred, it seems the list you cite is woefully absent of manyright-wing violent events and threats.

            For starters, testifying before Congress, Trump-appointed FBI Director indicated: “Unfortunately, January 6 was not an isolated event. The problem of domestic terrorism has been metastasizing across the country for a long time now, and it’s not going away anytime soon.” Wray emphasized the growing threat of domestic extremism, noting that white supremacy was the largest chunk of “racially motivated” violent extremism, which makes up the largest subset of domestic extremism overall.

            By no means comprehensive, but there has been a number of notable right-wing violent events:

            * January 6 riot
            * Buffalo NY shooting
            * Highland Park parade shooting
            * Cincinnati FBI field office attack
            * El Paso shooting
            * Boogaloo killings
            * Louisiana church fires
            * Pittsburgh synagogue shooting
            * Attack on GOP Congressman by conservatives during Republican convention
            * Charlottesville car attack
            * Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting
            * Charleston church shooting
            * Overland Park Jewish Community Center shooting
            * Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting
            * Spokane bombing attempt
            *Kidnapping/murder plot against Michigan Democratic Governor
            * Kansas City, Missouri bombing plot
            *Bombs sent to prominent Dem political leaders and media organization

            *Increased threats to the FBI
            *Threats to a federal judge “legally” approving FBI to search Mara-largo
            *Death threats to GOP Congressman Adam Kinzinger and congressional leaders
            *Death threats to State election officials (relative to 2020 election outcomes)
            * Threats to Idaho library staff
            https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/conservative-activists-want-ban-400-books-library-arent-even-shelves-rcna44026
            *Threats to government employees/witnesses who testified in Congressional hearing investigating Trump
            * Threats/harassment of liberal journalists – one prompted by Tucker Carlson
            * GOP Political ads intimating gun violence – Eric Greitens “RINO-Hunting”
            * Threats to LGBT Oklahoma elected official (Adam Graham)

            1. Much of your list cites violence or threats to violence. But what on EARTH is that Idaho library story doing on it? There were neither violence nor threats of violence cited anywhere in that article. Whatever you think of the opinions or tactics of the people concerned, putting people going to meetings with a list of books they believe should not be placed in the hands of children via taxpayer-supported institutions on the same list as shootings is absolutely ridiculous. The only thing that comes close is the library director’s resignation message in which she claimed there was “threatening behavior”, but the article gives no indication of any threats of violence actually happening. (And not all threats, are threats of violence. Threats of causing someone to lose her job are threats, but not illegal and not violent.) Wonder why that would be left out of an otherwise fairly comprehensive article about the situation?

              1. QUOTE: Much of your list cites violence or threats to violence. But what on EARTH is that Idaho library story doing on it? There were neither violence nor threats of violence cited anywhere in that article.

                Glad you asked…

                EXHIBIT A: The library director resigned because she and her family felt harassed and unsafe because armed conservatives kept showing up at her home.

                EXHIBIT B: the library’s insurance company didn’t renew their policy due to increased risk exposures.

                EXHIBIT C: the library moved board meetings to a space next to the sheriff’s office due many armed patrons consistently showing up at meetings and being disruptive.

                https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2022/09/03/library-idaho-gender-race-books-ban-ebof-watt-pkg-vpx.cnn

      2. I hope conservatives at large will share your insights about Trump. To date, it doesn’t seem they have.

  5. QUOTE: I heard it was angry and divisive statement.

    Trump said the nation would face “problems … the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen” if he is indicted over his handling of classified documents after leaving office.

    Is this a forecast of another January 6 reaction from the mob? Hmm…maybe Dark Brandon was onto something during his Sept 1 address to the nation.

  6. As September comes to a close, it reminds me of some of the notable public addressed made by alleged divisive Democrats during this month. Exhibit A, by former first lady Michelle Obama during a recent White House portrait ceremony…

    “What we’re seeing is that there’s a reminder that there’s a place for everyone in this country…it is so important for every young kid who is doubting themselves to believe that they can too…that’s what this country is about.

    The U.S. is not about blood or pedigree or wealth, it’s a place where everyone should have a fair shot, whether you’re a kid taking two buses and a train just to get to school or a single mother who’s working two jobs to put some food on the table or an immigrant just arriving, getting your first apartment, forging a future for yourself in a place you dreamed of.

    That’s why this day isn’t about me or Barack, it’s not even about these beautiful paintings, it’s about telling that fuller story, a story that includes every single American and every single corner of the country so that our kids and grandkids can see something more for themselves.

    As much as some folks might want us to believe that has lost some of its shine — that division and discrimination and everything else might’ve dimmed its light — I still know, deep in my heart, that what we share, as my husband continues to say, is so much bigger than what we don’t. Our democracy is so much stronger than our differences.”

    1. As I read those words I can feel the hatred welling up from many a Republican soul, as can be expressed in the words: “Black woman bad!”

      1. Sadly, you might be right. Yet, I was inspired by those words because it was such a hopeful departure from the divisive rhetoric we are so frequently served these days.

  7. I heard it was ANOTHER angry and divisive post. Trump’s rhetoric now includes…

    …he (Mitch McConnell) has a DEATH WISH. Must immediately seek help and advise from his China loving wife, Coco Chow!
    https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/109089793652113562

    I might be wrong but I “think” this is the stuff Biden was referencing in his September presidential address. But, he was called “divisive” for doing so. Yet, I wonder what conservatives will say about Trump’s latest “truth”. If Rick Scott is any example, it will be dismissed as mere folly. Yet, more likely will be “cheered on” by the base…the same people that took exception to the statement “basket of deplorables”.

Comments are closed.