By Months: Peeter Ernits

The rhetorical style is highly combative, provocative, and accusatory, employing strong metaphors (e.g., the government’s violent merging with the people) and irony (the cost of Muhammad, Tartu, "the city of good thoughts"). The speaker is emotional, criticizing the waste of time and energy, but backs up their arguments with specific data and references (e.g., 8,500 euros per month, 12,500 men). They use direct addresses aimed at the ministers, casting doubt on their intelligence.

The speaker’s style is extremely combative, emotional, and often ironic, utilizing strong colloquial expressions ("war moloch," "boar in the rye," "scabby badger," "shut your trap"). He balances logical arguments (references to audits and laws) with vivid stories and hyperbole (the deportation of the Endla bear, the "mass murder" of seedlings, swimming in a potato field). The speaker publicly calls for strikes and protests to pressure the government.

The speaker’s style is passionate, often cynical, and sharply critical, employing colorful and memorable metaphors ("spiritual onanism," "a fool gets beaten even in church," "the ham party has been replaced by the cheap sausage party," "the most repulsive bill"). He balances emotional appeals (targeting pensioners, focusing on impoverishment) with concrete facts and figures (fine amounts, percentages). He frequently uses rhetorical questions and irony to underscore the absurdity of the government’s actions.

The speaker's style is often sharp, critical, and direct, employing emotional language and common, sometimes crude, idioms ("even a fool gets beaten in church," "rubber stamp," "mass murder") as well as personal anecdotes. He uses numerous rhetorical questions and analogies (Big Peter and Little Peter, two large ships) to underscore the government's inaction and injustice. The tone is predominantly concerned and accusatory, particularly regarding the government's priorities.

The speaker’s style is highly combative, passionate, and sharply critical, frequently employing emotional and vernacular expressions (e.g., "the economy is in the mud," "stupid decisions," "enemies of the people"). They utilize metaphors ("glass walls," "displacement activity") and pose rhetorical questions to underscore the sheer lack of sense in the government's actions. The tone is predominantly accusatory and urgent, demanding accountability and a full investigation.