The Right Resistance: Democrats peak over Obama speeches; plus, letting Trump be Trump

Democrats turn up the heat on socialism, racism and fringe issues

As if you thought it wasn’t possible for Democrats to engineer a Tuesday night line-up that

would be more gut-churning and nausea-inducing than the night before, you were wrong.

In this sense, give Democrats credit for the way they’ve set up this year’s convention. Demoting president senile Joe Biden and forcing him into a take it or leave it situation – A Monday night speaking slot while being introduced by daughter Ashley “I didn’t really leave my diary” Biden, and before her, Dr. Jill – the party’s organizers created just the right amount of room in the program for the Obamas to swoop in and add a little star power to their hometown appearances.

Michelle n’ Barack didn’t disappoint, either. Thanks to the magic of makeup and a healthy host of good plain leisure living, the former political power couple had no trouble conjuring up all sorts of applause lines, enough so to convince the throng of thousands of liberals that happy days are indeed here again with the Obamas being back in town again. The undercard of speakers clearly couldn’t compete with the anticipation of the party’s two biggest stars taking the stage later that evening.

It literally sucked all the oxygen out of the room and probably helped them forget that Wednesday night’s show will be concluded with Vice President nominee “Tampon Tim” Walz’s virtual introduction to the national audience. Beyond that mediocre occurrence, there’s cackling Kamala Harris herself, which will be the downer of all downers when Democrats re-realize that the air-brain from California is the Kamala they remember before her being given the nomination, not the one they hoped would show up after the schmalzy media makeover since senile Joe was kicked out.

Such was the backdrop for the appearance of Barack Hussein Obama, who, except for him becoming noticeably grayer, hasn’t seemed to age a day since the day he left office. The “One” has since turned 63 years old, has purchased a home at Martha’s Vineyard and definitely spends a good amount of time living the life, unburdened by nosy news reporters searching for the latest bit of gossip involving Democrat royalty.

And whereas Monday night’s card was filled with washed up dinosaurs – namely late 70’s Crooked Hillary Clinton and 81-year-old senile Joe Biden (and wife Dr. Jill, who definitely looks like she could use a trip to the spa in order to put a fresh coat of shine on her aging and annoying mug) – Tuesday night’s program put the Obamas as the centerpiece.

And though it’d only been about 24 hours since the entire convention audience was so enthralled with the decrepit old goat that everybody had worked so hard to remove, senile Joe Biden was all but forgotten as the focus turned to honoring the Democrat party’s most popular former president.

Less obvious to the viewers at home were the hundreds if not thousands of Democrats watching the festivities who looked to be back in power, the Obama loyalists who witnessed the remarkable Coup d'état that Nancy Pelosi and the Obamas pulled off to coerce senile Joe into stepping aside without firing a shot, the old man having won the Democrat nomination fair and square and, on balance, not deserving of being shown the door (to the care facility) without fanfare or even a “thank you for your service”.

Neither Barack nor Michelle appeared to harbor guilt for what happened to poor senile Joe, who, by Tuesday evening, was already safely in California enjoying a vacation on the west coast, far away from the tumultuous convention hall.

Michelle Obama gives a good speech, but there’s no “there” there

In the years that hubby Barack was president, it was often speculated by political observers that wife Michelle was the secret behind his success. Even those who don’t like the Obamas would concede that Michelle possessed the “it” factor in political talent. The Chicago arena was riveted as Lady O assumed the speaker’s podium alone and proceeded to make the case for imposing the Obama agenda, once again, on the unreceptive country.

Michelle molded the speech around her recently passed mother, as though Americans need to elect Kamala Harris to “do it for our mothers.”

In the process, there probably wasn’t a Democrat in attendance who didn’t secretly wish it was Michelle rather than Kamala who was accepting the nomination this year. “Wouldn’t that have been something? She’d be leading Trump by double digits! She’s much better than Hillary Clinton! Look at the way she changes her tone and inflection when she speaks! She’s awesome!”

Michelle’s problem is she says a lot of words but none of them mean anything. Whereas Barack still has his distinctive rhythm to his delivery, Michelle’s is more conversational. It’s almost as though you’re seated at the kitchen table with her and she’s talking with you about the kids’ art projects, or how there’s a child in there who’s transitioning and needs assistance. Or that there’s a leftist rally forming down the street that needs your attendance.

Both Obamas value relatability in their speeches. Unlike senile Joe, who always substitutes anger for passion, the former first couple relies on imagery and persuasive tone to get their message across. Michelle pretends to be apart from politics – heck, she’s friends with George W. Bush for gosh sakes! – but hers is sneaky underhanded dealing.

Michelle will lull you to sleep before sticking the dagger in your back. “America. Hope is making a comeback.”

At the same time, Kamala Harris fans are insanely jealous of Michelle Obama, the one who is seen as the “authentic” black woman, not the phony political appointee mistress who slept her way to the top like Harris did, using powerful men to get ahead and constantly relying on race and gender as a crutch to make up for her lack of talent and smarts.

Will little girls wish to grow up to be like Michelle Obama or Kamala Harris? Hope is back!

Senile Joe absent for Obama’s speech; the schism in the Democrat party festers

In contrast to senile Joe Biden, Barack doesn’t look like he would shout even if his hair was on fire.

Obama assumed his preacher tone on Tuesday night, where he spoke as though he was standing at a pulpit in front of a mega church. The only thing that was missing was gospel music and rhythmic clapping as he whipped the crowd into a frenzy time and time again.

Clearly in his element, Obama savors the moment as he’s obviously in his comfort zone, soaking in the adoration in a tone much different than senile Joe’s. Rather than straight anger, Obama maintains steady movement throughout his speeches. It’s been eight years since he left the presidency, but he must’ve given enough sermons to ingrain his natural political talents.

People forget that he wasn’t all that popular when he left office in early 2017, heading immediately to California to vacation. Just like senile Joe! The Obamas have always been good at taking time off, and now they own several homes from which to pass leisure time.

Like most speakers, Obama uses his hands to emphasize points. Barack used the bulk of his address by cutting down Donald Trump while promoting his own ideas, woven seamlessly throughout his minutes. What a contrast between him and the bumbling loser from last evening.

What can I say? It was a very effective speech. It’s almost like he’s not lying. Food for suckers! Divide and conquer, decrying against polarization while dividing us into camps. And if you’re not with Kamala and Tampon Tim, you’re against him!

What a load of crap.

Others… boring and substance-less

Kamala’s husband, Doug Emhoff spoke, offering the typical tributes and accolades to his wife. “She’s showing us what we already know. She’s ready to lead.”

The speech was mostly biographical, telling about how his family moved from Brooklyn to California, where he worked at McDonald’s. Emhoff said he loves being a lawyer.

Doug relayed how the two met on a blind date. How sweet!

Senile Joe was forgotten. Gone were the chants of “Thank you, Joe!” from the night before, as Biden left the convention and took his importance with him.

Democrats would never allow Trump to be Trump, so that’s why we must do it

As they did on Tuesday night, they’ve been haranguing him for over eight years now, so it shouldn’t come as a shock or surprise that Democrats are devoting a huge percentage of their primetime Democrat National Convention minutes towards criticizing, insulting or savaging former president and current Republican nominee Donald Trump.

If rhetorical blows were actual physical punches, Trump – and running mate Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio – would be bloodied and bruised, though it could be argued that both Trump and Vance are tough and resilient enough to withstand the best the Democrats have to throw at them. Why? Because one, they’re already absorbing the full extent of the sleaze and lies that Democrats dug up since Vance was named to be Trump’s veep a month ago; two, at least in Trump’s case, all of the most damaging stuff has come out in roughly nine years of vetting, and three, the Democrats smear-fest is all based on lies.

The last factor being the most relevant and important.

When the Secret Service failed miserably in preventing the assassination attempt on Trump’s life over five weeks ago, there was a brief period where both parties vowed to tone down the verbal excesses and quit making it personal in order to “lower the temperature” and make the public discourse more civil. The détente didn’t last, apparently, and Democrats are going full bore at Trump and Vance again.

Not to be hypocritical, the Republicans are doing the same thing to the Democrats, and Trump especially has received more than his share of rebuke from foes and (supposed) friends alike, observers who wish he’d stop with the relentless personal assaults on his competitors – especially cackling Kamala Harris who could conceivably be the recipient of sympathy if the older and more seasoned New Yorker doesn’t go gentle with the “new” Democrat nominee.

For his part, Trump shows no signs of easing off the proverbial gas pedal and spends a good portion of his interviews or speaking time touching on how liberal and awful Harris is. Is this wise?

As Jeb Bush said, “politics ain’t beanbag,” and a certain amount of contempt is only to be expected. But some (supposedly) more respectable and believable Republicans are saying many of the same things as Trump’s haters. Who to believe?

In a newsletter post titled “Nikki Haley and letting Trump be Trump”, Byron York wrote at the Washington Examiner last week:

“The latest to voice frustration with Trump is the opponent he defeated in the Republican primaries, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley. ‘This is a winnable election, but you need to focus,’ Haley told Fox News’s Bret Baier [a week ago]. ‘And the one thing Republicans have to stop doing — quit whining about her.’

“Haley, who began by saying, ‘There’s no question that I want to see Donald Trump win this election because we can’t have a Kamala Harris and Tim Walz,’ brought a clear list of Republican do’s and don’ts. On the do’s: Voters, especially female voters, ‘want someone to talk about the fact that prices have gone up 19%,’ Haley said. ‘The fact that Kamala wants to raise taxes, the fact that she’s taken money from those that didn’t go to college and has given it to those who did … she doesn’t think illegal immigrants are illegal. … They want someone who’s going to talk about the status of education right now in this country and that our kids are getting dumber, not smarter. They want someone to talk about homeownership and how hard it is to own a home.’

“Then the don’ts. ‘The campaign is not going to win talking about crowd sizes. It’s not going to win talking about what race Kamala Harris is. It’s not going to win talking about whether she’s dumb. You can’t win on those things. The American people are smart.’”

Like most Trump fans, I’ve given quite a lot of consideration to the question of whether Trump is his own worst enemy and if he brings much of the ruling class angst and venom upon himself simply by treating politics as he’s always approached business and his opponents in a particularly contentious golf match.

You know, as enemies and adversaries rather than the “loyal opposition” or fellow countrymen and women. Think of senile Joe Biden, Crooked Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi in this regard.

I’ve personally heard “Trump tweets too much” from friends in polite conversation, folks who are well-informed and care deeply enough about our country to support the best candidate regardless of his personality and, to put it mildly, less desirable fixations. Nikki Haley isn’t the first person to toss out advice that Trump needs to get real and talk issue turkey instead of giving himself satisfaction by lobbing verbal ordinance at his enemies.

One could tell that Trump was cut from a different political cloth nine years ago when he faced off with his Republican competition in the GOP primary debates, where wishy washy career pols like John Kasich preached making friends with Democrats and finding middle ground rather than lofting bombs and trying to brand the Democrats as though they harbored evil in their hearts.

The full brunt of Trump’s competitive nature was eventually turned towards Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and the first-time politician made no secret of his willingness to cut deep to win. Then, with the GOP nod secured, he turned his focus to branding Hillary Clinton, who’s just about as mean and nasty as they come. It goes without saying – the Trump/Crooked Hill match-up was about as epic as it gets.

Trump won, of course, which only served to reinforce his belief that he could say and do practically anything and get away with it. The Republican establishment had its revenge, too, with then-Speaker Paul Ryan thwarting Trump’s push to ditch Obamacare and then Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stifling Trump at… pretty much everything the president wanted to do legislatively, except passing a tax cut.

Trump being Trump wasn’t always a good strategy. Trump’s fan club never lost their loyalty, but his inability to put a cap on the antagonistic establishment media and their “Russia, Russia, Russia” probe definitely cost him.

So what’s it going to be? Is Nikki Haley correct that Trump needs to dial it back – or cut it out completely – when it comes to criticizing cackling Kamala and the Democrats?

In his piece, York points out that Trump’s defenders say that the nominee already includes more than enough discussion of substantive issues in his rallies. Typically running about two hours in length, Trump’s teleprompter-mixed-with-ad-libbed material speeches are chock full of ideas along with discussion of his adversaries’ bona fides – or lack thereof.

Establishment media reporters and talk show hosts mostly concentrate on the insults and barbs – and there usually are plenty of them, enough to fill an entire cable news show. But the content is there if you look for it. Trump has evolved quite a bit as a politician and a candidate since he first entered the political arena, and his memory is sharp and knowledge of people and issues is first-rate. It’s fair to say that he doesn’t mind being asked about anything.

His answers aren’t what the questioners are seeking, necessarily, but it’s not as though Trump is like Kamala and Tampon Tim, outright refusing to even get in the ring with the media. Or public.

When watching a Trump event, I frequently suppose, ‘Man, I wish he hadn’t said that’. Or, ‘Uh-oh, he’s at it again’. And, ‘Is he nuts? He’s bagging on Brian Kemp instead of telling all Georgians to help out. Is this 2020 all over again?’

Haley is correct in lecturing that Trump should cut out the references to 2020 altogether. The last election is over and done with and there’s nothing that could be gained by dwelling on the “rigging” and “stealing”. It reminds the fence-sitters of January 6th – and who wants that?

Trump shouldn’t be providing any more incentive not to vote for him. Period. Defining and branding Harris and Walz is one thing. Causing potential voters to reject you because you’re being “mean” and “below the belt” are quite another. Such tactics worked wonderfully in 2016 when confronting Crooked Hillary Clinton, who everyone knew was a corrupted scumbag. This year is different.

In his press conference last week, Trump answered a query on his personal attacks, basically alluding to the fact the Democrats had pursued him to the extent of the law, invaded and searched his home, prosecuted him for things he never did and forced him to lay out huge sums of money to defend himself. All for being himself. And because they hate him.

Trump is right. The Democrats have given worse than they’ve ever gotten and calling them names or branding them with nicknames is tame by comparison. So there is some room for Trump to be Trump, but he must discern where the dividing line lies.

I believe Donald Trump would do well to take someone like Kellyanne Conway’s advice as much as feasible. Conway was the “conscience” of the 2016 campaign, and he needs a similar moderating voice of reason this year. Just not Nikki Haley. Trump has got a pretty good thing going, but taking the counsel of seasoned pros with common sense could make him that much better.

Summing up Tuesday’s DNC

It seems evident that Tuesday night’s DNC program was designed to make Democrats nostalgic for the not-so-long-ago days when their president wasn’t senile and their presidential nominees weren’t a complete ditz or a Bernie Sanders-look-alike who’s trailed by communists and total government control freaks.

But 2024’s Obama duo aren’t in power any longer and Democrats are stuck with what they have. Two days in, are Democrats still so enthused about Harris and “Tampon Tim” Walz? We’ll find out.

• Joe Biden economy

• inflation

• Biden cognitive decline

• gas prices,

• Nancy Pelosi

• Biden senile

• Kamala Harris candidacy

• Donald Trump campaign

• Harris Trump debates

• J.D. Vance

• Kamala vice president

• Speaker Mike Johnson

• Donald Trump assassination

• 2022 elections

• Donald Trump

• 2024 presidential election

• Tim Walz