What to listen for in Obama’s speech tonight
Yesterday I wrote a post about a speech Obama made in response to the San Bernardino terrorist attack. This evening at 8 PM he will be delivering another speech from the Oval Office on the subject:
It will be Obama’s third Oval Office speech as president, his first since announcing the end of U.S. combat operations in Iraq on Aug. 31, 2010.
I doubt that Obama will connect the dots between that speech and this, but that doesn’t stop the rest of us from doing it, because the rise of ISIS followed directly from that decision of Obama’s.
The speech this evening is an indication that Obama realizes that people here are angry and upset, and that he’s got to do a bit of damage control. The announced topic is “the broader threat of terrorism, including the nature of the threat, how it has evolved, and how we will defeat it.”
Here are some predictions of mine about the emphasis and content of the speech. I don’t know whether Obama will conform to all of these, but based on previous performance this is how I think it will go:
(1) He will not use the word “Islamist” or “Islamic” to modify the word “terrorism.”
(2) If he does mention Muslims or Islam, it will be mostly in the context of saying terrorists attacks have nothing to do with Islam, are not supported by almost all Muslims, and that we must guard against Loretta Lynch’s biggest fear, which is a backlash against Muslims. Watch for language of the sort I pointed out yesterday (in the ADDENDUM here), in which Obama might use passive, acted-on terms such as “succumbed,” “were radicalized,” or “fell victim to” to describe jihadi terrorists in this country and elsewhere.
(3) He will mention so-called “right-wing terrorism” as a big concern, too, and will lump people such as isolated-crazy-loner Colorado Springs shooter Dear in with the right. If he discusses the Dear murders, he will call them the “Planned Parenthood shootings” although so far there is no evidence that Dear targeted PP, since the shootings seem to have occurred in a parking lot rather than in the building where he took refuge.
(4) He will say his campaign against ISIS [correction: “ISIL”] has been quite successful.
(5) He will reiterate that the Syrian refugees must come here, that those who are trying to say “no” are fear mongers, and that we should not give into fear, which is what the terrorists want.
(6) He will pivot to gun control, and tie the whole thing in with more restrictions on Americans’ 2nd Amendment rights, even though he will not be able to explain how his proposals would actually have stopped any terrorist attack. In this, his reasoning will be something like the arguments his propaganda sheet the NY Times advanced in its huge front-page editorial yesterday on the subject, in which the Times admitted that, although strict gun control in many countries in Europe has not stopped ISIS attacks in their nations, “at least those countries are trying. The United States is not.”
That sort of approach in the Times editorial—lauding symbolic yet ineffective actions and/or words—is what I spotlighted yesterday in Obama’s earlier address on the subject. It is one of the hallmarks of the preening, self-involved, “I’m righteous because I’m trying so hard” left. That it would just happen to restrict the constitutional liberties of law-abiding US citizens, and increase the government’s potential power, is icing on the cake for the left and Obama.
Take that, bitter clingers.
We’ll see/hear how it goes tonight. I won’t be watching Obama’s speech, but I’ll be reading it.
[ADDENDUM: There’s a 7th possibility that I want to add. Obama may announce in his speech that he’s figured out a way to implement some new gun control measure by executive order. Who’s gonna stop him? SCOTUS might—they’ve defended 2nd Amendment rights before—but I wonder who would have standing to challenge such an action of Obama’s if he decided to go that route. The NRA? A private citizen? I don’t think it would be Congress.]
Good list, Neo. But incomplete. You left out global warming.
F:
Good catch.
Why listen to another litany of lies? Obama’s lying while acting to destroy America’s ability to defend itself is a long, consistent pattern. Indeed, Obama is accelerating and broadening his attacks upon American society. From his efforts to disarm law abiding Americans to his linking the TTP agreement to his climate control agenda, on every front Obama and the Left are working to disembowl America.
The Democratic Party is going to have to figure out what to do about the groundswell of anger building in America. There is no fear. There is anger.
My bet is they’ll hunker down and hope it subsides.
We need, really need, a Big Kablooie to generate a wave that will wash the Dems off the deck and into the sea. I hate that it is necessary. But it is.
I’d like to watch but I have to iron my socks.
I bet all of your predictions will come true, Neo.
I would just add: he will become animated only when expressing how beyond fed up he is with the GOP’s irrational fear of refugees, glib Islamaphobia (a potshot at Trump), and continued opposition to his “common sense gun safety” proposals. It will be the GOP who are the real enemy in all of this, not ISIS nor Islamic terrorism. This is what he does, it’s who he is: a community activist who divides and conquers.
What a pathetic excuse for a president Obama has become when a blogger is able to accurately predict the contents of a major speech before he even gives it. Yet the probability that Neo is wrong on even the smallest detail is infinitesimlly small.
Neo didn’t discuss the reaction of the so called mainstream media (aka legacy media) and the Holly Wood crowd who will swarm to the nearest microphone to proclaim that the greatest speech ever and to maintain that Obama is the greatest orator since Cicero. Watching them make asses of themselves will be more interesting than the speech itself.
No reinforcing reminders how awful and unworkable George W. Bush’s policies were, and how those are perfectly responsible for placing the United States in this condition of terrible suffering from which only our beneficent PresidentIVotePresentAndWonPenPhone seeks to extract us?
Will Pearl Harbor find a mention by the man from Hawaii? That surely wouldn’t be kosher in the best schemes of forward thinking progressivism though now would it? On the other hand, who thinks of Dec. 7th on Dec. 6th?
My facebook page was more than occasionally graced with shame/guilt inducing appeals for letting in refugees. Jesus was an undocumented alien, etc.
Not a word since. Not a single freaking word.
Note that the Russians gave the FBI the Tsarnaevs on a silver platter.
Comey of FBI and Clapper of DIA say vetting the Syrians is impossible.
The alphabet news got more red flag info on Mrs. Shooter in a day than the fabled vetting process that let her in.
The government is not only incapable of protecting us against these risks, they are monumentally uninterested in doing so.
And they pretend to be puzzled about why we’re upset.
French upset.
Anger much in France? The National Front took 30% of the entire vote, catapulting the party into 1st place nationally. Sarkozy is pissed, saying he didn’t return to politics to have Le Pen’s daughter in the north and Le Pen’s niece in the south to work with.
In previous elections, when the National Front did “well”* in the first round of elections, people were so shocked they said it was a matter of national pride to utterly defeat them in the second round of voting.
I don’t think that will happen this time.
If it can happen in France – who last threw out an experiecned centrist president for an utterly inexperienced socialist – it can happen here.
*definition of “well” to the French meant that the National Front garnered as many votes as the Communists.
neo wrote,
“(4) He will say his campaign against ISIS has been quite successful.”
Wellll, yeah, that’s the way you or I might express the thought; but if he does express the thought at all, it would come out as,
“(4) He will say his campaign against *ISIL* has been quite successful.”
How many times previously have the talking heads said, “Well, (so and so) didn’t present any new ideas…”.
Wouldn’t it be sweet to hear, (or read about tomorrow), “Well Wolf, we didn’t hear any new lies tonight, just the same old Obama swill …”.
I’d add look for two phrases: “that’s not who we are” and “wrong side of history.”
sdferr,
Usually, I’d expect him to say something implicating blame in a deflecting way such as referring obliquely to the “unintended consequences” of Bush’s decisions.
But I wonder whether he’ll feel compelled to more directly emphasize the Iraq War stigma this time in order to reject re-normalization of the paradigm of ‘strong horse’ American leadership that manifested with OIF.
If he does raise the Iraq War stigma, or even if he doesn’t, it remains critical to de-stigmatize OIF, discredit the false narrative (and false narrators), and set the record straight in order to re-normalize the ‘strong horse’ type of American leadership of the free world and restore the needed range of action.
…is it necessary to point out those two phrases will be directed at Americans, not medieval-minded, murderous cretins?
As hobby-horses go . . . . . . that’s a sturdy un, fo sho.
Google is right now headlining an NBC News article —
Public Split On Biggest Worry–Terrorism vs. Gun Violence — on a poll taken before the San Bernardino massacre that showed the biggest worry of 36% of those polled was a terrorist attack and for 31% the biggest worry was gun violence in general.
I’d imagine that 36% has gone way up since San Bernardino. No wonder Obama and the MSM have been so busy focusing on guns.
By the way, that NBC article doesn’t mention the fact that the poll was taken before the massacre until the sixth paragraph. Good little troopers to the end.
After he’s done Trump will in his way mock it where it needs to be mocked. The rest of the Republican field will head for the tall grass with their tales between their legs. With the possible exception of Cruz.
Nobody gets it. O’s goal in foreign policy is to eliminate US influence culturally, militarily and economically. His internal goal is to Balkanize the country into impotence.
He is well on his way of meeting both and it will take incredible effort to turn it around.
I don’t think we can do it. He had run us past the tipping point.
tails.
Oval Office = Big Deal
He won’t say anything interesting or new about terrorism, but he will announce sweeping new gun regulation by executive order. It just can’t wait.
What would be big enough to justify this dramatic production?
Registration of all weapons? No. Instant insurrection there.
Clamping down on gun makers and distributors with heavy new insurance, liability and paperwork requirements? Yeah, that’s the way I’m betting. Because it sounds so mundane and innocuous, and its fatal impact will not be felt openly or at once, and is hard to explain to the voters. Like Obamacare.
Neo: “the rise of ISIS followed directly from that decision of Obama’s”
I don’t say “the rise of ISIS followed directly from that decision” because ISIS and other al Qaeda affiliates more directly relied on the Syrian civil war and other fecund Arab Spring opportunities to recover and surge.
Instead, I say:
Listen for the tone of Obama’s voice during the speech. The parts about combating terrorism are going to be at best perfunctory, with the president sounding like a teacher talking to particularly dim-witted students while going over the lesson plan for the 15th or 16th time. There will be no passion in it, just as there was no passion in his condemnation of the Paris terror attacks last month … until he got to the part about Republicans and gun control.
That’s where the passion again will be tonight. President Wonderful still is in awe of his own oratory skills, and thinks the reason people haven’t flocked to his side is simply because he’s been delivering his anti-gun remarks in morning or afternoon briefings or press conferences. But he and his enablers are sure a prime-time speech to a national audience will make all but the evil NRA types sit up and take notice, especially after the front pages of The New York Times on Saturday and the Daily News the two days before that. Obama will save all his passion tonight for going after his domestic enemies, with the only question being whether or not he’s feeling his oats enough to issue an executive order on restricting gun buys under certain conditions.
Perhaps on account of the presence in the conventional war jargon of this fell term “existential threat” President Barry will help his American serfs out with the origins of existentialism; working his way backward through the famous Frenchmen (and woman) to Heidegger; through Heidegger to Nietzsche; so from Nietzsche to the Hegelian History complex — demonstrating it just ain’t soap?
On second thought, PresidentIWonPenPhone surely doesn’t give a toot about all that. Nah, he’ll just blink, for who better — more fitting — to be der letzte Mensch than he?
Great list, and I’m sure he will hit on every point. He will also present with his “flat affect” which always indicates to me that he doesn’t believe a word he is saying.
He will also reassure us and try to calm our “fears.” Well, I am not afraid, I am angry! Think of the people who would be alive today if he and his ilk had not made Americans ashamed and alienated from their basic human intuition. The ticket taker at Logan, the neighbors in Redlands: so many people have not reported activity because of their fear of being racists and so many innocents have been killed as a result.
Don’t forget all the straw men he will create. “Those that oppose feeding hungry children and want to deny healthcare to senior citizens” or some such blather.
From ABC News– What to Expect From President Obama’s Rare Oval Office Address:
The Olde Man:
Actually, I think a great many people get it.
On this blog, in the comments and posts, and on many other blogs around the blogosphere, it’s been said for a long time that Obama is trying to weaken this country’s influence around the world, set its people against each other, and effect demographic changes that will assure the future dominance of his party and his way of thinking.
I’m through listening to this little man.
How about he talks up the success of the War on Drugs and Prohibition of alcohol as ways the government has previously taken care of society’s problems?
G Joubert:
Your “tails between their legs” description might work for Bush and Kasich. It will not be the case for Cruz, Rubio, Fiorina, Christie, or even Carson (in his own gentle way, he often says things that are quite hard-hitting).
Over and over, I’ve seen people describe Trump as being the only one who will speak out against a certain thing, when actually those people are ignoring what plenty of the other candidates say that is equally hard-hitting. Trump usually says it in a coarser way, but they all say it. He’s the one who gets the most press coverage, so it’s easier to notice what he says, as well, for that reason.
carl in atlanta:
I haven’t listened to him for years. But I read his speeches.
Ann:
Well, it certainly would be nice if he’d lay off the politics for a moment. You can be assured, however, that if he does, it’s only a brief interlude.
The NYT article was likely battlefield prep. The editorial board there conspires to promote whatever bit of agitprop the left wants so it would not surprise me if something is announced regarding the curtailment of 2nd Amendment rights in some form or fashion. Since they took the unusual step of editorializing on the front page it makes me fear Obama is about to do something particularly pernicious.
Obama will cry that he wasn’t able to get legislation to prevent those who have been convicted of no crime from buying a gun if they are on some list or other. Then he will announce he is taking executive action that will eventually be struck down by the courts. The net effect will be that the press will talk about something other than his giving ISIS their homeland and allowing them a free field when he pulled out of Iraq and bungled Syria.
Reports are it is the Oval Office because the E room and the FDR room are all decked out for Christmas.
Also, WH Instagram just sent has a pic and states that he will be standing at a podium in front of the desk in the Oval Office.
We won’t be watching or listening to him. We will check the reaction of various bloggers and their commenters, starting here.
Hey, Great article! I have never owned a gun. I never thought I would need a gun. Obama and the left, crime, ISIS and Muslim refugees have made me rethink my position. I plan on supplying my family with the training and weapons necessary to insure they are not at the mercy of some criminal, terrorist or psychopathic agent of the state without the ability, choice and free will to use lethal force in self defense . Thanks, Barry O for creating such domestic tranquility> NOT!! Not since the civil right rights era of the 1960’s has the nation seen such racial division, political polarization and civil unrest instigated purposely by the President of the United States. Now is the time when the inalienable right of self defense. the most vital to the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is needed as a bulwark against the overreach of the federal Gov’t. George Washington said, “Government is like fire, a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” Do you feel like the government is your servant or your master? Either way you need to be skeptical and be aware of all the current excrement that continues to spew out of the corroded rectum of the left and the right and the courts. The system is so corrupt and they are so afraid, now obviously the Government is a fearful servant. I’m a a Constitution Lover. Those who don’t are anti-American. Tonight’s speech is just going to be another blame America first speech while wrapping it in the flag. It’s just too bad the Flag Emperor Obama pledges allegiance to is blood red with the Hammer and sickle. The dreams from his father have become the American nightmare. PS: FUCK YOU OBAMA
And, of course, the always popular:
“If you like your 2nd Amendment
you can keep your 2nd Amendment. PERIOD.”
Have no interest in listening to Obama.
He is just going to say what he is being forced/can no longer avoid saying. ( And for sure he will not utter the words Extremist Muslims or Radical Islam. He will use the word terrorism only because he was forced to because the FBI wasn’t about to play his word games anymore (couple days) after the attack. Any person who had just half a brain and heard the attackers had long guns and handguns, wore mask, ccamo type gear and bulletproof vests and walked into a party room and just fired knew it was Terrorism with a capital T.
As soon as I heard about the attacks I knew he and his underlings, with him and back at White House were sitting around, not discussing how this was going to be stopped, but thinking up euphemisms O. could use to obfuscate, deny, or outright lie to American people (let alone the world at large who I’ll bet were eager to listen as much as we were after Paris and then a massacre here).
He has insulted every single American not just by consistently and transparently lying to us, but by showing no interest whatsoever in protecting the American people in any way from the greatest threat to our very existence and the freedoms we cherish.
And note: Poor Barak. This is interfearing with his big night out with Hollywood stars at Kennedy Center . But no worry. He plans to change into black tie as soon as he’s off camera and running off to the gala!
I will check the blog later and tomorrow.
You get the prescience award for Channakah 🙂
PS Did anyone see reports today that the father of the San Bernardino terrorist told an Italian news outlet that his son was fully in sympathy with Isus and Al Quaeda, that he fully supported killing the Jews and destruction of Israel,…
So the father went to authorities right? To protect his fellow Americans, of course!
Wrong!!!! All those good Muslims who don’t open their mouths when they kno these things or even suspect such are as much the problem.
When Muslim Americans — and all those muslims who are not Americans that the President has been importing into this country, under federal programs to expedite vetting and green cards care about the rest of Americans — or any human beings living here — I will believe they
I’m studying for an exam in March. Can’t watch the least intelligent person I know say anything…
.. they are the human beings that care about those outside of their own community (even tho’ Islamic terrorists have shown theirr willingness to murder anyone and everyone in the name of their Jihadist causes no matter what their religion and background witnessed throughout the Iraq wars, on 9/11, and countless other attacks including San Bernardino).
Islamic terrorism kills muslims just as willingly as non muslims BECAUSE when a jihad advocating Imam was asked “But what about the Innocent s??” The aspiring jihadi was told ” If they are truly innocent they will go to Allah’s Paradise” Is this not a death cult ? Lives have zero value to them ! The entire ideology is devoid of any empathy whatsoever. Kind of suits Obama & his cold, joyless demeanor especially when he comments on the USA.
“I’m shocked! SHOCKED! to learn that you reactionaries think the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant has anything to do with Islam.”
Listen for the Mind Control…
Well you will have to pardon Democrats who might disbelieve it. What after all has the Democratic Party to do with actual political democracy, rule of law, and self-government?