Selective Outrage: How Obama Fuels the Hate He Condemns

1. 84

   Sharlee01posted 21 hours ago

   
   And then along comes Obama, stepping onto the stage with his usual air of self-importance, warning that hearing the president and his aides describe opponents as “vermin” or “enemies who need to be targeted” is some great moral danger. He has the audacity to call it a “broader problem” we must all grapple with, as if he’s delivering some grand sermon from on high. Let’s be honest, Obama’s so-called whistleblow is nothing more than selective outrage that pours gasoline on the very fire he pretends to put out.
   
   He says both sides have extremists, yet where is his condemnation of his own party and their allies in the media? For years they’ve shamelessly thrown around words like “dictator,” “radical dictator,” “fascist,” “Nazi,” and “Hitler” at Donald Trump and anyone who supports him. Kamala Harris openly admitted, “Yes, I do,” when asked if Trump is a fascist. Joe Biden mocked voters, warning that Trump had “pledged to be a dictator for a day” and sneered, “He’s saying it out loud.” Hillary Clinton compared Trump’s rallies to those of Hitler and claimed she saw frightening parallels. Nancy Pelosi lined herself up with those branding Trump a “fascist to the core.” The Democratic National Committee even projected “TRUMP PRAISED HITLER” in giant letters across Madison Square Garden during a rally. And if that circus wasn’t enough, the left-wing media has taken the smear campaign to grotesque new levels: Joy Reid compared Trump to Hitler, Dr. Jacqui Lewis screeched that Trump was “exactly like Mussolini, exactly like Hitler, he is that guy,” and Donny Deutsch went so far as to claim, “There is no difference from what Donald Trump is preaching, from what Adolf Hitler preached in the early ’30s.” MSNBC even stooped to airing Nazi rally footage alongside Trump coverage, trying to drive their sick narrative home. These aren’t isolated slips of the tongue; they’re coordinated megaphones blaring hate day and night. And then Obama steps up, wagging his finger at only one side? Spare me. His lecture on rhetoric is laughable, his double standard glaring. By refusing to call out his own party’s venom, he isn’t healing division; he’s spreading it. He isn’t condemning hate, he’s legitimizing it. That’s why his words don’t calm the waters; they poison them even further.
   
   Now, my unfiltered view—Obama is the Godfather of this bunch. He’s the man who, in my opinion, hollowed out the Democratic Party and left behind the radical machine we see today. He leached onto it, reshaped it, and planted the root of what has grown into this poisonous tree. In my eyes, he didn’t build the party up—he took it down.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      Kathryn L Hillposted 16 hours agoin reply to this

      Who can argue?

      replyreport
   2. 60

      Willowarborposted 14 hours agoin reply to this

      "For years they’ve shamelessly thrown around words like “dictator,” “radical dictator,” “fascist,”
      
      Do you mean like this?
      
      https://x.com/micah_erfan/status/1966667619148222843
      
      And this??
      
      https://x.com/mattsheffield/status/1566517010011279360
      
      Or this?
      
      https://x.com/keithboykin/status/1853123106740797935

      replyreport
      1. 67

         IslandBitesposted 8 hours agoin reply to this

         Selective Outrage is a perfect tittle, right?

         replyreport
         1. 84

            Sharlee01posted 7 hours agoin reply to this

            I think my piece says more than you gave it credit for. Maybe it was you who  selected to only see what you hoped to.  But thanks for your one-liner.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Willowarborposted 7 hours agoin reply to this

               I think we all see your post stating...
               
               "For years they’ve shamelessly thrown around words like “dictator,” “radical dictator,” “fascist,”
               
               And then we see and hear trump calling people fascist, marxist, communist...

               replyreport
               1. 84

                  Sharlee01posted 7 hours agoin reply to this

                  Please note, my thread isn’t about Trump. My context makes clear where my concerns lie. I don’t engage in “whataboutism”, I’ll leave that to you. Maybe someone else will pick up on your post.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Willowarborposted 6 hours agoin reply to this

                     "Please note, my thread isn’t about Trump."
                     
                     The post is condemning others for using words that you've labeled vile such as fascist, communist and Marxist....
                     
                     YET TRUMP USES THE SAME WORDS

                     replyreport
      2. 84

         Sharlee01posted 7 hours agoin reply to this

         Trump hit the mark, always does. Guess that's why he had such a comeback.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Willowarborposted 7 hours agoin reply to this

            From your previous post under the topic RESPECT...
            
            "Maybe they would like to be called a few of the vile names they labeled President Trump. Hitler, nazi, fascist dictator, racist, and more. 
            
            So it's "vile" if others use the term fascist but it's such a great comeback when Trump uses the word, always it's the mark?

            replyreport
            1. 84

               Sharlee01posted 7 hours agoin reply to this

               Yeah -- whatever

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  Readmikenowposted 7 hours agoin reply to this

                  Shar,
                  
                  Thing are going to change because the have to change.  I agree what JD Vance said.
                  
                  "JD Vance declares there is 'no unity' with people who celebrate Charlie Kirk's assassination
                  
                  The VP filled in for his 'dear friend' on 'The Charlie Kirk Show' following the Wednesday campus shooting
                  
                  There is no unity with people who scream at children over their parents' politics," Vance said. "There is no unity with someone who lies about what Charlie Kirk said in order to excuse his murder. There is no unity with someone who harasses an innocent family the day after the father of that family lost a dear friend. There is no unity with the people who celebrate Charlie Kirk's assassination."
                  
                  Vance added, "And there is no unity with the people who fund these articles, who pay the salaries of these terrorist sympathizers, who argue that Charlie Kirk, a loving husband and father, deserved a shot to the neck because he spoke words with which they disagree."
                  
                  The vice president told viewers to call out and inform employers of people who openly celebrate political assassination to foster a more civil society.
                  
                  "I am desperate for our country to be united in condemnation of the actions and the ideas that killed my friend. I want it so badly that I will tell you a difficult truth. We can only have it with people who acknowledge that political violence is unacceptable and when we work to dismantle the institutions that promote violence and terrorism in our own country," Vance said.
                  
                  https://www.foxnews.com/media/jd-vance- … assination

                  replyreport
                  1. 84

                     Sharlee01posted 7 hours agoin reply to this

                     I agree with this completely, and I think JD Vance showed real strength and loyalty in the way he stood up for his friend Charlie Kirk. What he said wasn’t just political rhetoric, it was a moral stand against something that should unite all of us: the absolute rejection of political violence. Too often, people hide behind “unity” as an empty slogan, but Vance cut right through that. He made it clear that there can be no unity with those who cheer for assassination, who justify murder, or who mock the families left behind.
                     
                     That’s not division, it’s drawing a necessary line between good and evil. I respect that Vance didn’t shy away from calling out not just individuals, but the institutions and media voices that fuel this kind of hatred. He’s right, if America has any chance to move forward, it has to start by refusing to normalize violence against people for their beliefs. What Vance did for his friend was also for the country: he showed courage, loyalty, and moral clarity at a time when far too many are willing to look the other way.

                     replyreport
               2. 60

                  Willowarborposted 6 hours agoin reply to this

                  So we can assume that words like fascist,  communist and Marxist are "vile". In your opinion when used by others but are perfectly acceptable when used by Dear Leader?
                  
                  Got it.  Absolutely hit the nail on the head with "selective outrage"

                  replyreport
            2. 67

               IslandBitesposted 6 hours agoin reply to this

               LOL
               
               They have no arguments. Only "selective outrage".

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Willowarborposted 6 hours agoin reply to this

                  So hypocritical!  They would be better off making a blanket statement that absolutely everything Trump says and does is perfectly acceptable to them rather than trying to make these unseasoned arguments

                  replyreport