Nib #18: Joe Biden’s *Pretty Good* Campus Chaos Speech

The Nib of the Week’s frequent criticism of President Joe Biden’s speeches belies the soft spot I’ll always have for the guy. So it was nice to see Ole Joe give a pretty good speech about the snarling “encampments” besetting America’s college campuses this Spring.


Let’s dive in.


The speech begins poorly, alas, with a muddled riff about “fundamental American principles” and some bush-league partisan preening about “authoritarianism” and “those who rush in to score political points.”


But then the tone shifts.


“Violent protest is not protected [by our Constitution]; peaceful protest is. It’s against the law when violence occurs.”

The language is a bit stilted there, but Biden soon hits his stride. In quick succession, he calls out:


“destroying property … vandalism, trespassing, breaking windows, shutting down campuses, forcing the cancellation of classes and graduations … threatening people, intimidating people, instilling fear.” 


Note the hard, prosecutorial word choices.


Then, Biden goes even further, aligning himself with the students the encampments are harassing. Then, God love him, Biden goes there: 


“There should be no place on any campus, no place in America for antisemitism or threats of violence against Jewish students… There is no place for racism in America. It’s all wrong. It’s un-American.”


Conservative readers may question why anyone should give the president credit for a belated and banal endorsement of basic justice and American political norms. But look more closely at what the president did here: he punched, effectively, to his left. 


Biden’s biggest problems this election year are the public perceptions that (a) he is a bumbling incompetent in mental decline, and (b) he shares the woke extremism of the New Left. 


This speech pushes back on both narratives. Biden energetically indicts the encampments’ criminal tactics and then outright condemns their motivating, anti-Semitic bigotry -- targeting the very voters Biden and Democrats need to win in November.


Theretofore, most elite Democrats had tried to thread various rhetorical needles on the encampments. “Criticizing Israel isn’t anti-Semitic!” “99% of the protesters are peaceful!” “Rioting is the language of the unheard!”


Biden, by contrast, shoves through the bothsidesism like a snowplow. Riots are bad, period. Anti-Semitism is bad, period. Shutting down colleges is bad, period.


No doubt some in the White House wanted more nuance, more “but of course…”, more attacks against Republicans or even — gulp — Israel. But those would have compromised the mission of the speech, which was to re-assert Biden’s membership in the United States of Normal, Everyday Americans.


Good on him — and whoever in the White House speech-approval process kept the text on the rails.


The lesson for young writers — when an issue arises enabling you to triangulate with 97% of the country against a tiny fringe of mouthy, racist criminals, be like Joe and don’t overthink it. Moral clarity still works.


Until next week… keep writing!

April 25, 2025
Five quick tips for polishing your prose.
April 18, 2025
A good poem for Good Friday.
April 11, 2025
James Michael Curley's list of must-haves for public speakers (and speechwriters).
April 4, 2025
Two essays point to a generational opportunity for young writers.
March 28, 2025
Honest Abe was a great writer -- especially the one time he wasn't.
March 21, 2025
Not today, Satan.
March 14, 2025
The official Democratic response to President Donald Trump’s big speech before Congress last week offered the country not only a contrast of political visions, but of rhetorical strategies. Trump’s address was defined by — and indeed, succeeded on — the strength of its concrete details: specific programs cut, specific heroes lauded, specific private-sector investments announced (See Nib #61 ). Democratic Senator Elissa Slotkin’s nationally televised speech immediately following Trump was, too. But not obviously. Most of the specific details of the speech were biographical, in the first 100 words. After that, Slotkin glazed over issues with airbrushed generalities: “We need to bring down the price of things we spend the most money on…” “… change doesn’t need to be chaotic or make us less safe…” “Today’s world is deeply interconnected…” “We are a nation of strivers.” The climax of Slotkin’s speech was almost a parody of homogenized political banalities. The two things we need to overcome today’s challenges, according to Slotkin and her speechwriters: “Engaged citizens and principled leaders.” Woof. On the other hand, Democrats know this poll-tested pap won’t move the needle. So what’s really going on here? The most likely answer is what boxers call the “rope-a-dope.” That is, Slotkin’s — and by extension her party’s — plan here is to put up perfunctory, superficial resistance to bait Trump into overreaching or punching himself out. This is what Muhammed Ali famously did to George Foreman in 1974.
March 7, 2025
Tuesday night's address was a speechwriting masterclass in the power of specific detail.
February 28, 2025
How to use, and not use, intensifiers.
February 21, 2025
Why an old-school writing exercise may be more valuable than ever.
More Posts