The Obamas Despise Free Speech, and Show It
When warning Americans that freedom is in danger if political views that do not agree with theirs are not silenced, both Barack and Michelle Obama love to throw around the term "democracy." The Obama belief that opposing free speech somehow protects "democracy" proves that neither one understands the basic tenet of what they profess needs protecting.
In Obama circles, rebuke, rejection, or refutation does not sit well. These two hypersensitive narcissists thrive on things like public adoration and unswerving agreement. The Obama brand of egotistical self-importance is so great that deviation from the Obama gospel is oftentimes met with vindictive attempts at public humiliation.
During his eight years in office, Obama overtly scolded detractors. The former president fought his battles with a teleprompter and a weaponized federal government at his side. A short list of some of the opponents Obama publicly targeted included the American Constitution — i.e., the Second Amendment — the U.S. military, pro-lifers, Christians, and right-leaning Supreme Court judges. Obama made a sport of reprimanding Tea Party activists as well as conservative news stations and anchors. Take, for example, his administration's April 2009 opening salvo issued by the DHS, entitled, "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," or his malicious act of siccing IRS agents on those he deemed political adversaries.
Then, in 2016, the worst happened: voters overwhelmingly chose a different kind of president. Most assuredly, the MAGA path was interpreted by the Obamas as a slap in the face. After all, love him or hate him, Trump embodies everything anathema to the Obama brand.
Recently, Michelle admitted that Trump's win "still hurts." Of course it does: America delivered a stinging rebuke to everything Obama. For the sin of speaking truth to power at the ballot box, the left, led by the Obamas, swung into high gear with the goal of orchestrating a comeback that would censure Trump and chasten those who elected him.
As a result, both Michelle and Barry embrace any opportunity to deliver stealthy implicit comments that mislead those enamored of the couple's smooth-talking attempts to vindicate the offense they received in 2016. Delivered as if there's political unanimity, the ongoing attempt at personal exoneration reeks of desperation.
And so, with a vendetta against a man out of office for two years and hostility toward those who elected him, the recent unveiling of the Obama White House portraits devolved into another opportunity to bash Trump and define democracy the Obama way.
Short of donning a blonde, hair-sprayed combover wig, Michelle Obama warned America that a certain unnamed former president, who is questioning the results of the 2020 election, threatens her definition of democracy. Michelle and Barack pretend they support a peaceful transfer of power and the democratic tradition of "moving on," when in fact it's the opposite. Barack has never "moved on" and is likely a "third-term" puppeteer, pulling Joe "Marionette" Biden's strings from the bunker of his $8.1-million Kalorama mansion.
That's why, at the portrait début, Michelle exploited the occasion to vilify Trump while pretending she believes that "our democracy is so much stronger than our differences." Does Michelle need to be reminded that both she and her husband have spent their entire political careers discrediting views different from their own and punishing rather than celebrating opposing points of view? Michelle and Barack Obama have never respected the differing views of the American people. The couple showed no respect for difference during Obama's presidency, and since Trump's election, they show even less.
And, despite her belief that diversity strengthens democracy, Michelle works hard behind the scenes to undermine what she claims to believe.
Just two months after Mrs. Obama's lofty White House portrait speech, lauding the glories of democracy, the truth comes to light that the former first lady used political clout to silence the democratic right of constitutional free speech belonging to an American citizen named Donald Trump. Sorry, Michelle, but claiming that democracy is in danger if free speech remains free indicates a warped view of what you purport to want to preserve.
Let's rewind the tape. One day after the January 6 Capitol riots, in a statement posted to Twitter, Michelle wrote this:
Now is the time for Silicon Valley companies to stop enabling this monstrous behavior — and go even further than they have already by permanently banning this man from their platforms and putting in place policies to prevent their technologies from being used by the nation's leaders to fuel insurrection.
At the time, Michelle also said:
All I know is that now is a time for true patriotism. Now is the time for those who voted for this president to see the reality of what they've supported — and publicly and forcefully rebuke him and the actions of that mob.
"True patriotism ... publicly and forcefully rebuke"? Sound familiar?
Notwithstanding being a Harvard-educated lawyer and placing blame before any of the evidence was in, did Mrs. Obama forget the BLM riots, where she insisted, "Protesters aren't criminals or troublemakers"?
At that time, Michelle maintained that the race-based riots, where innocent people lost their lives, were "overwhelmingly peaceful." Seething with animosity and defending BLM, Michelle exercised her democratic right to free speech by accusing then-president Trump of being a "racist." Maybe, for Michelle Obama, just as free speech applies to a chosen few, the "overwhelmingly peaceful" description of a riot applies only to uprisings that support a specific agenda.
Nevertheless, almost two years after the incident at the Capitol, Twitter revelations indicate that there was a "public-interest exceptions" policy in place when Trump was serving a temporary suspension in January 2021. The policy stated that even if Twitter guidelines (like exercising the "democratic" right to express a differing opinion) were violated, high-ranking elected officials were excluded from permanent banning due to the great public interest in their comments.
Yet for some reason, the public-interest exemption was ignored in Trump's case.
Now, just a few months after Michelle's impassioned White House portrait defense-of-democracy speech, America learns that the former president was permanently silenced one day after the proponent of "democratic strength via difference," Michelle Obama, convinced Twitter executives to place virtual duct tape over Donald Trump's right to express his opinion.
For those of us still "participating in and watching our democracy," as Michelle suggests we all should, we must remain diligent and aware that the democratic ideal the Obamas continually warn is in danger and hinges largely on the free speech the couple works diligently to suppress. Therefore, if a former first lady with a vendetta manages to successfully thwart the free speech of a political adversary, the enduring threat to democracy has nothing to do with Donald Trump.
Jeannie hosts a blog at www.jeannieology.us.