I mean, he didn’t mention President Trump by name.
But everyone knows whom Barack Obama is talking about here during a speech he gave Monday in Nevada:
Unlike some, I actually try to state facts, I believe in facts, alright? I believe in a fact-based reality and a fact-based politics. I don’t believe in just making stuff up. I think you should, like actually say to people what’s true.
And then he goes on to some typical Democratic tax cut demagoguery, saying Republicans were trying to help out “billionaires and corporations,” etc.
Of course, like him or hate him, it’s clear Trump is a liar. I think even he’d admit that. You know, if he’s being honest . . .
But the sight of an ex-president attacking his predecessor and his policies in this vicious manner is something pretty new, I think. So let’s drop all this “We go high, they go low” nonsense, okay?
There’s a lot of chatter right now about how former Attorney General Eric Holder, who may be running for president, broke Michelle Obama’s “rule,” that, “When they go low, we go high.”
That’s “our motto,” she proclaimed during her 2012 DNC convention speech. Holder invoked it the other day, riffing, “When they go low, we kick them.”
Of course, in the current context of Democrats physically confronting Republicans and their elected officials, that’s pretty irresponsible.
Michelle kinda, sorta criticized Holder during an appearance Thursday on “Today,” saying she stood by her supposed maxim. “Fear is not a proper motivator,” she said, which sounds more like a dig at President Trump than Holder, but, whatever.
The fact is, Barack Obama frequently went low, repeatedly demonizing the opposition, and Michelle Obama did too, she was just subtle about it. I was frequently disgusted by her other 2012 campaign mantra, “Who are we?” in which she suggested that Republicans were morally contemptible.
From a speech she gave at a fundraiser on September 30, 2011:
Will we be a country that tells folks who’ve done everything right but are still struggling, “tough luck, you’re on your own”? Who are we?
Or will we honor that fundamental American belief that I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper, and if one of us is hurting, then all of us are hurting? Who are we as a nation? (Applause.)
Will we be a country where opportunity is limited to the few at the top? Or will we give every child a chance to succeed, no matter where she’s from, what she looks like, or how much money her parents have? Who do we want to be as a nation?
Will we lose sight of those basic values that made our country great and built our thriving middle class? Or can we rebuild our economy for the long term so that work pays, and responsibility is rewarded, and everyone — everyone — gets a fair shake and does their fair share?
That is the choice we face. Those are the stakes.
Seriously? Conservatives lack “basic values”? They just want opportunity for those at the top? They don’t care about people who are hurting? Please find me a conservative who ever told someone, “Tough luck, you’re on your own”?
It’s never enough for liberals, including Michelle, to disagree with conservatives. Conservatives have to be dumb, evil, or both.
Barack Obama, the Alinskyite, was much worse, of course. Famously there’s this one from 2010:
If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.
Here is Obama in 2015 talking about Republicans who wanted to put a temporary hold on taking Syrian refugees following terror attacks in Europe, sentiments he dismissed as “political posturing”:
Apparently, they are scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America. At first, they were too scared of the press being too tough on them in the debates. Now they are scared of three-year-old orphans.
Obama January 2013 suggesting Republicans don’t care about kids getting enough to eat and have “suspicions” about Social Security:
So they are suspicious about government’s commitments, for example, to make sure that seniors have decent health care as they get older. They have suspicions about Social Security. They have suspicions about whether government should make sure that kids in poverty are getting enough to eat or whether we should be spending money on medical research. So they — they got a particular view of what government should do and — and should be.
Very suspicious characters, those Republicans.
There are many more examples. Obama specifically demonized Republicans in ways George W. Bush never did Democrats. I covered both administrations, and in fact, Bush rarely if ever even used the word “Democrat,” not wanting to sound too divisive and believing the presidency was above such partisanship.
The Obamas didn’t just question Republican policy choices. They questioned their motives and their character. And that’s going pretty low.
Apparently, former presidents get intelligence briefings. Why? Because that’s what you do!
Anyway, according to the New Yorker, Trump considered revoking Obama’s:
As Trump stepped up his public and private attacks on Obama, some of the new President’s advisers thought that he should take the extraordinary step of denying Obama himself access to intelligence briefings that were made available to all of his living predecessors. Trump was told about the importance of keeping former Presidents, who frequently met with foreign leaders, informed. In the end, Trump decided not to exclude Obama, at the urging of McMaster.
Trump Tuesday denied it: “Never discussed or thought of!”
Fake News, of which there is soooo much (this time the very tired New Yorker) falsely reported that I was going to take the extraordinary step of denying Intelligence Briefings to President Obama. Never discussed or thought of!
I do fault Trump for this. WHY DIDN’T HE CONSIDER IT? These president’s don’t need intel briefings. We don’t need people wasting time preparing them. And then, I assume, flying out to deliver them, since ex-presidents don’t come to you, you go to them.
People will argue the presidents need them to “give advice” to current presidents. I don’t think Trump is calling up the Bushes for advice. Not to mention Clinton or Obama. Anyway, if he needs their input, then give them the relevant intel. They’re private citizens now, don’t make the system continue to support them more than it has to.
Let’s face it, the reason ex-presidents want intel briefing is because it’s awesome!
This is a highly produced video by the White House of President Trump’s appearance Thursday at a newly reopened steel plant in Granite City, Illinois.
BTW, what a great name for a place. Can you be a wimp and live in Granite City, Illinois? Wouldn’t make sense.
Anyway, I show you this not to glorify Trump, but because it shows him repeating the phrase “You are the ones,” as in, “You are the ones that are making American great again.” Which seems to me to be a conscious effort to contrast with Barack Obama’s famously self-glorifying, “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.”
Another effort is afoot to get inside a president’s head with a Nobel Peace Prize. It worked out very poorly the last time, when the leftist Norwegians who dole out the award gave it to Barack Obama before he had done a single thing. And the continuing chatter about President Trump winning the prize can only lead to something very, very bad, like a dangerously flawed deal with North Korea. As Trump heads off to Singapore to negotiate with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, it’s time to silence such talk.
Preemptively awarding to Obama the Nobel Prize was not some quirky indulgence. It was a brilliant effort by Norwegian peaceniks to put themselves in charge of U.S. foreign policy. The Nobel Peace Prize committee in Oslo put the medal around Obama’s neck. And then they used it to tie his hands.
Netflix is entering into a multi-year deal with the Obamas to create all kinds of content, effectively making the company a propaganda organ for the Obamas left-wing political agenda.
Netflix described the deal on Twitter, suggesting the alliance will be wide-ranging and deep. From the tweet:
President Barack Obama and Michelle Obama have entered into a multi-year agreement to produce films and series for Netflix, potentially including scripted series, unscripted series, docu-series, documentaries, and features.
Barack Obama released a statement portraying this as just a nice way to promote “inspiring” voices.
One of the simple joys of our time in public service was getting to meet so many fascinating people from all walks of life, and to help them share their experiences with a wider audience. That’s why Michelle and I are so excited to partner with Netflix — we hope to cultivate and curate the talented, inspiring, creative voices who are able to promote greater empathy and understanding between peoples, and help them share their stories with the entire world.
Of course, those “inspiring” voices will range from left to far-left – for liberals, these are these are the only “inspiring” voices possible – and promote the Obamas’ ideology.
Netflix is not just biased, like much of the media. It is now actively promoting a point of view.
The Obama’s are not just some private citizens with a dream. They are a powerful former president and first lady seeking to mold America into a leftist paradise, which of course translates into hell on earth. And now they have a major media outlet at their disposal.
According to CNN: The Obamas said Monday that they want to harness “the power of storytelling” to promote common values. “We hope to cultivate and curate the talented, inspiring, creative voices who are able to promote greater empathy and understanding between peoples, and help them share their stories with the entire world,” Barack Obama said… Continue Reading
Actually, no. Hillary Clinton complained Wednesday that nobody’s going to trust the United States anymore now that President Trump pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal. As Secretary of State, I helped negotiate the crippling international sanctions that brought Iran to the table. It would be much harder a second time, now that our credibility… Continue Reading
That’s right. All the conventional, in-the-box thinking you’re hearing about how President Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel – which, de facto, it already is – and move the embassy there actually increases to prospects for an eventual negotiated settlement between the Israelis and Palestinians. Even supporters of the move who… Continue Reading
President Trump Tuesday rebutted a contention by Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., that Trump’s “reckless” behavior was putting the United States on a path toward World War III. Trump took questions today from reporters during a visit to the Oval Office by Henry Kissinger: Question: Mr. President, is Senator Corker right that you’re… Continue Reading