Barack Obama Says He Will Criticize Trump If He Thinks It Is “Necessary” … Also Made Excuses Why Democrats Lost in 2016

SO MUCH FOR OBAMA ACTING THE WAY OF PAST PRESIDENTS AND NOT CRITICIZING HIS SUCCESSOR

At a press conference Sunday in Lima, Peru, Barack Obama said he does not believe he will be the last Democratic president, for a while, and also made no promise to not speak up and criticize President-elect Trump’s proposals,  if he feels it to be “helpful” and “necessary” for him to comment. Obama was also asked whether he thought he might be the last Democrat president, playing off the comments that GWB made earlier this year. Obama stated no and then gave some of the most ridiculous reasons for losing the 2016 elections, including geography and that terrible concept that Wyoming gets the same number of Senators as California. What the hell is he talking about? Note to Obama, this same geography occurred when you won two elections. Why wasn’t that an issue then? Make no mistake about it, Obama was is and always will be a community agitator. Many of his policies are about to be wiped away like a bad dream. Who honestly thinks he is going to sit quietly by and watch his 8 years be eliminated for the good of the American people?

And though Obama said he wouldn’t get involved in every fight—including some fights likely to be about Trump and the Republican majorities in Congress ripping out his legacy—he very deliberately refused to say he’d hold to the tradition of presidents avoiding public comment or political attacks on their successors.“I want to be respectful of the office and give the president-elect an opportunity to put forward his platform and his arguments without somebody popping off in every instance …”

RCP – Transcript:

RICH EDSON, FOX NEWS: Thank you, Mr. President. Earlier this year President George W. Bush reportedly said he warned he would be the last Republican president and now Republicans have won the White House, controlled the House and Senate, two-thirds of state legislatures, 34 governorship’s and there are charges of a shallow Democratic bench behind you.

Are you worried you could be the last Democrat president for a while? And secondly, sir, speaking of your predecessor he made sure to offer essentially no public criticism of you during your time in office. Will you equally withhold public criticism for President Trump even if he attempts to dismantle much of what you have accomplished? Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, no, I am not worried about being the last Democratic president. I think — not even for a while. And I say that not being cute, the Democratic nominee won the popular vote [what a joke that Obama still thinks this means anything. You don't win a football game by the number of yards you run and pass for, it's the scoreboard] and obviously this is an extremely competitive race and I would expect that future races will be competitive.

I certainly think it’s true that politics in America right now are a little bit up for grabs. [Up for grabs? Republicans control The presidency, House, Senate, governorship's and State legislatures in the USA] That some of the old alignments in both parties, Democrat and Republican, are being reshaped. And although the results of this election involved some of the specifics of the candidates and aren’t going to be duplicated in every subsequent election, Democrats do have to do some thinking about how do we make sure that the message we have is received effectively and results in winning elections. This is something that I have been wrestling throughout my presidency…

There was a poll this week subsequent to the election that showed that the general public has a more favorable view of Democrats than Republicans. [Obama is going to quote a poll when the ultimate poll of the American people is an election, Seriously?] As I noted, my approval ratings are quite high yet what has been true during the course of my eight years is that does not always translate. In fact, too often it hasn’t translated into working majorities at the state level or the federal level.

Now, some of that is the nature of our system. And geography. As long as Wyoming gets the same number of Senators as California there is going to be some tilt towards Republicans when it comes to Congressional races [WHAT? So states should not have the same number of US Senators?]. The fact that a lot of Democratic voters are bunched up in big cities and a lot of Republican voters are spread out across geography gives them an advantage when it comes to Congressional races. Some of it is just political bad luck.

For example, I came in as the economy was in flow fall and although I took the right steps to save the economy, in my midterm election of 2010 people couldn’t yet see the recovery and not surprisingly the president’s party got punished. We lost control of a lot of not just Congressional seats but also governorships and state legislative seats and that happened to be the year that the census was done and you start doing redistricting. And so those Republicans took advantage of political gerrymandering to lock in majorities even though in a numerous subsequent elections Democrats have actually cast more votes or more votes have been cast for Democratic Congressional candidates than Republicans and yet you end up having large Republican majorities. So there are just structural problems we have to deal with. But, look, you can’t make excuses about the rules. That’s the deal and we have to do better…

One message I do have for Democrats, that a strategy that’s micro-targeting particular discreet groups in a Democratic coalition sometimes wins the election but it does not when you the birthday mandate — the broad map date you need. And the more we can talk about what we have in common as a nation and speak to a broad set of values, a vision that speaks to everybody, and not just one group at a time, the better off we will be. That is part of the reason I was able to get elected twice that I try to make sure not only in the proposals but in message that I was speaking to everybody…

Look, I said before, President Bush could not have been more gracious to me when I came in and my intention is to certainly for the next two months, finish my job and after that to take Michelle on vacation, get some rest, spend time with my girls and do some writing, some thinking.

I want to be respectful of the office and give the president-elect an opportunity to put forward his platform and his arguments without somebody popping off in every instance.

As an American citizen who cares deeply about our country, if there are issues that have less to do with the specifics of some legislative proposal but go to core questions about our values and our ideals, and if I think that it is necessary or helpful for me to defend those ideals [Exactly what ideals is Obama referring to, socialism? Redistribution of wealth?], I’ll examine it when it comes. But what I do know is that I have to take Michelle on vacation.

Donald Trump Will Bring Back Winston Churchill Statue Shamefully Removed from White House by Barack Obama

Just the beginning of the dismantling of the Obama years …

In 2009 Barack Obama removed the Winston Churchill bust from the Oval Office. It would appear that president-elect Donald J. Trump will re-install back to the Oval Office a bust of Winston Churchill, in a clear sign of the friendship the new President wishes to foster with Britain. Imagine that, treating out greatest allies with dignity and respect? This is just the beginning of the dismantling of the last 8 year of Obama.

Winston Churchill

UK Espress:

NIGEL FARAGE has revealed that Donald Trump will re-install a bust of Winston Churchill removed from the Oval Office by Barack Obama – in a clear sign of the friendship the new President wishes to foster with Britain.

The interim Ukip leader said Mr Trump has already pushed Britain to the front of the queue for a favourable trade relationship and added that he is the man to forge stronger ties with the US as he flew to visit the business tycoon in his first days as President Elect.

Mr Farage said: “We talked about the prospect of the United Kingdom being at the front of the queue, all of which was met positively.”

The Ukip leader described Donald Trump as an “anglophile” and said his re-installation of the Churchill statue was a clear sign of his appreciation for the historically warm relationship between the allies.

He said: “At the end of our time with Trump we asked him if the bust of Sir Winston Churchill that Obama had removed from the Oval Office could be put back in its rightful place. He enthusiastically thought that was a good idea. Need I say more?

Barack Obama Has Tense Exchange With CNN’s Jake Tapper Over why he won’t say ‘radical Islamic terrorism’ After Asked By Gold Star Mom

HOW COULD AMERICA EVER ELECT A PRESIDENT TWICE THAT WAS SO WRONG ON TERRORISM …

Watch the video below and listen to Barack Obama’s twisted logic in answering the question as to why he does not use the term, ‘radical Islamic terrorism.’ It sounds more like he cares about not offending Muslims than he does identifying who our enemy is. By some how not saying radical Islamic terrorists that means that not all Muslimes are terrorists. Really? Actually, by stating our enemy is radical Islamic terrorists differentiates radical Islam from the rest of Islam. Then at the 5:50 mark of the video, Jake Tapper confronts Obama and it gets testy. The laugh line has to be when Obama says, I don’t want to interject partisan politics in this.” Are you kidding, that’s all Obama has done since he took office is to play partisan politics and divide this country.

The only thing Obama has unified anyone about was the bi-partisan over-ride of his veto on the 9-11 lawsuit bill.

Business Insider:

President Barack Obama sparred with CNN host Jake Tapper on Wednesday night in a tense exchange over Obama’s refusal to use the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism.”

During a CNN town-hall event focusing on the US military, Gold Star mother Tina Houchins asked Obama why he wouldn’t use the term.

“The truth of the matter is that this is an issue that has been sort of manufactured, because there is no doubt, and I’ve said repeatedly that where we see terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda or ISIL, they have perverted and distorted and tried to claim the mantle of Islam for an excuse, for basically barbarism and death,” Obama said.

“These are people who kill children, kill Muslims, take sex slaves — there’s no religious rationale that would justify in any way any of the things that they do,” he added.

Obama later seemed to allude to Trump as he continued to answer Houchins’ question.

“I’ll just be honest with you: The dangers where we get loose in this language, particularly when a president or people aspiring to become president get loose with this language, you can see in some of the language that we use, in talking about Muslim-Americans here and the notion that somehow we’d start having religious tests in who can come in the country and who’s investigated and whether the Bill of Rights applies to them in the same way,” Obama said.

Trump has often said while campaigning that the US should administer some sort of test to immigrants to determine whether they have terrorist sympathies.

Tapper interjected to point out the allusion to Trump, and the exchange between him and Obama grew tense.

Here’s how it played out:

Tapper: Just to interject …

Obama: Yes?

Tapper: You were clearly talking about the Republican nominee, Donald Trump, just then. You think his …

Obama: No, I wasn’t. But …

Tapper: You weren’t?

Obama: No, I …

Tapper: Well, you just said …

Obama: I would just say this, Jake, because …

Tapper: … aspiring to this office …

Obama: No, but it’s not unique to the Republican nominee. And again, I’m trying to be careful. We’re on a military base. I don’t want to insert partisan politics into this. I think that there have been a number of public figures where you start hearing commentary that is dangerous because what it starts doing is it starts dividing us up as Americans.

9/11 Moment Of Silence at Pentagon Moved Up Because Obama Was Impatient

OBAMA MOVES UP MOMENT OF SILENCE AT PENTAGON ON 9-11, WHATS THE MATTER DID HE HAVE AN EARLY TEE TIME?

UNREAL, the moment of silence was originally slotted to take place at 9:37 AM, the time at which the Pentagon was attacked on September 11, 2001, but ended up taking place a few minutes early. The Daily Caller is reporting that this took place in order to accommodate a restless President Barack Obama. Are you kissing me? Obama, who has never been on time for any event, suddenly is impatient and moves up the moment of silence of a day meant to remember and honor the fallen on 9-11.This is just yet another example in a long line of them during Obama’s presidency where he thinks he is more entitled and important than “We the People.”

Because its all about him

Obama_sad

A moment of silence remembering the September 11 victims at a Pentagon memorial service began early in order to accommodate a restless President Obama, a Department of Defense official told The Daily Caller.

A source close to the situation told TheDC that Obama arrived early to the memorial service — which took place at the Pentagon — and wanted to get things started early.

A Department of Defense official confirmed that the moment of silence was moved up a few minutes and that Obama was the one who made the decision, saying the president “moved early.”

Powerline opines and I could not agree more, In remarks delivered after the moment of silence was over, Obama stated:

The question before us, as always, is: How do we preserve the legacy of those we lost? How do we live up to their example? And how do we keep their spirit alive in our own hearts?

It seems like little to ask that a moment of silence scheduled for the time the Pentagon was hit be observed at that time. If there’s a compelling reason to move the observance up, so be it.

But if, as reported, Obama moved up the moment of silence because he was restless, I say he did not “live up to the example” of “those we lost.”

How Obamacare Rate Increases Could Affect the 2016 Elections for President, Senate and House

AMERICA, WAKE THE HELL UP TO WHAT HAS HAPPENED AROUND YOU FOR THE PAST 8 YEARS … OBAMACARE IS IMPLODING AND RATE FEES GOING UP BIG TIME … DO YOU WANT ANOTHER 4 YEARS OF THIS UNAFFORDABLE CRAP!!!

As reported at The Politico, Obamacare sticker shock hits key Senate races and could affect the outcome of many political races in the Senate and House. However, the dirty little secret is that massive Obamacare rate increases on insureds could also swing the presidential vote. Welcome to the reality of Obamacare and Barack Obama’s “UNAFFORDABLE” healthcare act that was one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated on We the People. The rate increases are escalating out of control and insurance companies are leaving Obamacare as fast as they can.

Obamacare

As insurers push large premium increases for 2017 Obamacare plans, some of the steepest hikes have been requested by insurers in crucial swing states that could determine control of the Senate.

In nine of 11 states with competitive Senate races, at least one insurer seeks to hike rates for Obamacare customers by at least 30 percent next year:Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield in Pennsylvania wants to jack up average premiums by more than 40 percent. In Wisconsin, three insurers have asked for rate hikes of more than 30 percent. In New Hampshire, two of the five carriers want to sell plans with rate increase above 30 percent.

The potential sticker shock — coupled with the likelihood many consumers will have fewer choices next year after major insurers scale back their exchange participation — creates a potential political opening for Republican candidates, especially since the next Obamacare enrollment season starts one week before Election Day.

“People who are feeling it in their pocketbooks are going to be very unhappy about [rate hikes],” said Brian Walsh, a former communications director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “You would expect to see this will be part of the campaign messaging for House and Senate Republicans. … If it hasn’t started, it will be coming.”

Obamacare_fraud

While Donald Trump often cites eye-popping rate hikes as proof the health care law is a “disaster,” rate hikes haven’t yet emerged as a major campaign issue in most Senate races — although several Republicans said they plan to spotlight the issue in the fall.

In Indiana, where Indianapolis-based Insurance giant Anthem wants to raise Obamacare premiums by as much as 36 percent, Rep. Todd Young, the Republican candidate for Indiana’s open seat, is already making the rate hikes an issue against former Sen. Evan Bayh his Democratic challenger. Bayh voted for Obamacare but didn’t run for reelection in 2010.

But it is not just battleground states, its all states that these ridiculous double digit insurance rate increases are coming with is the underlying dirty little secret of the 2016 elections. Americans awake to the real truth of Obamacare, its not affordable and not sustainable. Wow, who was saying that 7 years ago?

 In Vermont, the proposed 2017 premium increase for the average silver plan that covers a 50-year-old, nonsmoking male is a whopping 44 percent, going up to $685 per month, Avalere said.

The proposed price hike for a similar man and plan in Oregon, however, is 22 percent, up to $540 per month, Avalere said.

Other double-digit price hikes for that kind of plan are proposed in Virginia (19 percent), Maine (18 percent) and Maryland (18 percent).

Next Page →

Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

 
 
  • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
  • Red (comments)
  • Dugga (technical issues)
  • Dana (radio show comments)
  • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Close
E-mail It