'Divisive And Deeply Dishonest Campaign Speech': Tucker Carlson Blasts Obama For Politicizing John Lewis Funeral
By: dailycaller
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Fox News host Tucker Carlson blasted former President Barack Obama for delivering a "divisive and deeply dishonest campaign speech" at the funeral of the late Democratic Georgia Rep. John Lewis.
Obama's Thursday speech included a call for an end to the Senate filibuster, calling it a "Jim Crow relic," so Democrats can pass their agenda items should they win in November.
Before turning to the topic of the former president's speech, Carlson began his Thursday night "Tucker Carlson Tonight" monologue by referring to the ongoing violence sparked by the death of George Floyd a "power grab" that is currently "being coordinated by the most ruthless and cynical figures in American politics."
"They accuse you of the crimes they themselves are committing," said the Fox News host. "It makes your head spin. Arguing with them is pointless. They're nihilists. They don't believe in the existence of truth, or in the fixed meaning of words. They care only about power."
"If you needed more evidence of that, Barack Obama showed up at Congressman John Lewis' funeral today," he continued. "Obama claimed he was there to eulogize his old friend. But that's not true and that's not what he did. Instead, Obama gave a divisive and deeply dishonest campaign speech in church."
After playing a clip from Obama's speech, Carlson said, "It's hard to believe that clip is real, but it is, down to the coined fake accent, Mr. Hawaii guy. Imagine if some greasy politician showed up at your loved one's funeral and started throwing around stupid partisan talking points about senate procedure. Can you imagine that? You would be shocked if that happened. You'd probably walk out. Desecrating a funeral with campaign slogans? What kind of person would do that?"
"But Democrats in the audience didn't seem offended," he said. "They didn't blink. They cheered. It all seemed normal to them. And why wouldn't it? Political power is their religion. It's not out of place in a church. it's what they worship."
Carlson contended that Democrats seek to make the changes they seek "permanent, by packing the Supreme Court, packing the United States Senate, packing the electorate itself by importing tens of millions of new voters."
Article is LOCKED by moderator [smarty_function_ntUser_get_name: user_id or profile_id parameter required]
Tags
Who is online
106 visitors
Let the reader decide. (you need to be at 23:00 of the tape to hear where Obama begins making it political)
Trump and his supporters are clearly Off Topic
Odd that you originally wrote "let the reader decide",
then amended your comment to point out where you became offended.
But thank you for posting the full version. It made most of the other speaker's efforts look lame.
Nice to see it uninterrupted by work or commercials.
Odd that you would vote up a comment that contained off topic remarks.
Odd that you considered Obama's own words off topic in a seed about Obama's speech.
Too bad you didn't notice that Obama never used his name. He is never named in the text:
So, how long do you want to continue this silliness?
That portion of the text is fine - It's what a Eulogy is supposed to be. Clearly not the portions that Carlson has highlighted.
Or are we going to hide behind John Lewis? That would be "silliness."
nothing to do with Carlson,
everything to do with the portion of JR's comments that you deleted as off topic.
George Wallace was on topic.
Not as Wallace was used by Obama. You can mention Wallace but not as a comparison to .....Oh I see, you've got me doing it for you! You see, that is what I'm not going to allow. You shouldn't be here if you want to discuss that topic. JR provides endless seeds on that subject. I shouldn't have to go though this with you, of all people.
BTW Obama also drew an outrageous comparison between "Bull Connor" and America's Police Departments. How may cops were executed when Obama was president for rhetoric like that?
[DELETED]
Vic tries to make narrower parameters for his seeds than anyone else on NT. Everyone knows that. He is trying , by fiat, to proclaim that Obama was off topic when he made "political" comments at the funeral of a politician and political activist. The absurdity speaks for itself.
[DELETED]
John, I only limit one item from certain articles. It's the very one you can't ever stop talking about. Your fixation is not my concern.
He is trying , by fiat, to proclaim that Obama was off topic when he made "political" comments at the funeral of a politician and political activist.
Wrong again. Those comments are the topic
Okay..
"Yesterday there was a new George Wallace. He appeared in an Atlanta church to eulogize the late Democratic Congressman John Lewis, Lewis a certifiable hero of the 1960s civil rights movement...There were, in fact, three former presidents there, including George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. But it was former President Barack Obama and Obama alone who chose to use the literal pulpit to divide by race. Among things said by the former president were these gems:
"But we can witness our federal government sending agents to use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators.
We may no longer have to guess the number of jellybeans in a jar in order to cast a ballot, but even as we sit here, there are those in power, who are doing their darndest to discourage people from voting by closing polling locations and targeting minorities and students with restrictive ID laws and attacking our voting rights with surgical precision — even undermining the postal service in the run-up to an election that’s going to be dependent on mail-in ballots so people don’t get sick
Can you imagine if some Republican — Bush 43 in this instance — had stood up at the Lewis funeral and pushed the Republican agenda? Not to mention if he got up and played the race card?
Yes, you can. All un-shirted hell would have broken loose.
What is particularly despicable here is that the race card was played at a funeral for a man whose famous moment of heroism was protesting … racism. Not to be forgotten here is that the state troopers involved that day in Selma when John Lewis had his skull cracked were in the employ of Democrat Gov. George Wallace."
And of course those statements are not only divisive, but false:
"But we can witness our federal government sending agents to use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators.
They were clearly not "peaceful". The nightly assault on the federal courthouse is there for all to see. The agents were there to protect the Courthouse.
We may no longer have to guess the number of jellybeans in a jar in order to cast a ballot, but even as we sit here, there are those in power, who are doing their darndest to discourage people from voting by closing polling locations and targeting minorities and students with restrictive ID laws and attacking our voting rights with surgical precision — even undermining the postal service in the run-up to an election that’s going to be dependent on mail-in ballots so people don’t get sick
Nobody is suppressing votes.
What a useless pointless article that was.
Obama was channeling Orwell with the “peaceful protester” nonsense. Sadly for reality deniers like Obama, video of the protests exists.
Maybe they'll take it down for ya, too!
It doesn't? Then defend his claim of peaceful protesters in Portland
Ahhhh Political Flare..........................................
"A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence ( Learn More ). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source."
Source is not accepted by MBFC:
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence ( Learn More ). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.
Detailed Report
Reasoning: Extreme Left, Propaganda, Conspiracy, False information, Lack of Transparency
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180
History
Founded in 2018 , Political Flare is a blog created by Nicole James. According to their about page “The Political Flare is a news/opinion site for Democrats, by Democrats. I am not a journalist, I aggregate my stories from major news sources, and choose stories that I, as a blogger, feel my audience would be interesting in reading.”
Read our profile on United States government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
Political Flare does not disclose ownership or funding, but it is assumed it is the personal blog of Nicole James. Revenue is derived through advertising.
Analysis / Bias
In review, Political Flare openly disclaims they are a left-leaning blog. Story selection always favors the left and frequently denigrates the right and in particular President Donald Trump such as this: Trump Removed All the Furniture Melania Chose for the WH and Replaced in With Tacky Gold Crap and this People Think Trump Staged This Situation Room Photo Because Trump Was Actually Golfing When Raid Happened . While this latter story may turn out to be true or not, as of this review, it is a conspiracy theory that is published without evidence. In general, this source is hyper-partisan in favor of the left while consistently denigrating the right through sensational wording and one-sided story selection. While Political Flare might be accurate at times, they jump the gun frequently to implicate Trump/Republicans and do not correct errors.
Failed Fact Checks
Overall, we rate Political Flare far left-biased and Questionable based on the promotion of conspiracy theories, left-wing propaganda, lack of transparency, and publication of false information. (D. Van Zandt 10/27/2019)
Source:
FYI. Yes it was already established without your questionable source chiming in.
You're welcome.
FYI I said it had already been established without your source that you added (unapproved as it is) only to bolster YOUR angst with the Carlson comments. It wasn't necessary and needs to be removed. Period. Unapproved is unapproved and NOT to be used as a source for ANY "stories".
We are just letting you see what it feels like when sources are questioned. Funny that your response should be similar to mine when under the same criticism.
But the NT rating service does not recognize it. Your friend SP ripped one down that I once had.
I'm sure you would have had it removed if I didn't supply the source for my quote.
You have to use sources approved by MBFC
Problem is, like always, seems the sources are always cherry picked off of the yahoo news feed. There are other sources with the same "story". But one would have to search farther than that. Here's one............
And another..................
And yet another.............
For a source
I know and that is the way it goes. A rule is a rule.
Where did he specifically say it was Portland?
Maybe he meant Lafayette Square, cleared of peaceful protestors to make a path for a photo op.
Lets assume then that it was Lafayette Square. It would still be a lie. The protesters there vandalized the square almost burned down a church and threw projectiles at various police units, injuring police:
D.C. businesses damaged over the weekend include restaurants, pharmacies, coffee shops and more, as chronicled by local publications like DCist , the Washingtonian and PoPville . One of the victims was the Oval Room restaurant near the White House, which is owned by prominent Washington restaurateur Ashok Bajaj.
"People were just coming in and out, breaking windows right in front of our own eyes. Oval Room is completely done. It’s just sad," he told the Washingtonian .
The Associated Press reported that other places that took damage included Canali's, a men's boutique, Mervis Diamond Importers and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau building.
The basement nursery of St. John's Church in Lafayette Square near the White House was set ablaze by rioters, but the flames were put out before much damage could be done to the rest of the building.
cleared of peaceful protestors to make a path for a photo op.
That's an additional lie:
"We did not clear the park for the photo op," acting Chief Gregory Monahan told the House Committee on Natural Resources in a hearing designed to examine the violent and subsequently contentious events in Lafayette Square two months ago. "There is, 100%, zero, no correlation between our operation and the president's visit to the church."
Monahan said Park Police leaders had been informed earlier in the day that the president planned to visit the park to inspect damage created by the protesters, but they did not know when that would take place. The operation to clear out protesters was solely designed to restore order after the agency assessed that the situation on the ground had turned violent, and to follow through on prior plans to install more impenetrable barriers around the park, he said.
I saw parts of that speech and couldn’t believe how divisive it was.
The last part of it was nothing more than a campaign speech - the most negative kind!
Ya, but he has to speak for the vegetable now representing the democrats.
The vandalism at the church occurred at a different time, it was already boarded up in the morning of the
When the Park Police began tossing gas and pepper and advancing on the crowd at Lafayette they were being well behaved. It's pretty clear on the films.
It seems as if the lies were perpetrated by the "acting chief" of the Park Police, who at least lied about using handheld megaphones contrary to their testimony, argued for days over the semantics of tear gas, pepper spray and chemical irritants, failed to record radio transmissions and refuse to share written logs or wear body cameras.
Either just another lie, or a remarkable coincidence.
There is humor in watching a Tucker Carlson call someone else partisan. Practically everything Carlson says on his show is an advocacy for or a defense of his brand of conservatism.
If John Lewis was a plumber or high school coach or a shoe salesman or a truck driver the idea of prohibiting "politics" from his eulogy would make sense. But he was an activist, a political activist in the sense that civil rights advocacy involves politics. It would have been more odd to avoid the subject than it was to include it.
The best part was when Obama slyly compared you know who to George Wallace.
That's known as attacking the messenger.
If John Lewis was a plumber or high school coach or a shoe salesman or a truck driver the idea of prohibiting "politics" from his eulogy would make sense. But he was an activist, a political activist in the sense that civil rights advocacy involves politics.
After Boxer loyally serves the cause his entire life he is used after his death and turned into glue. Emphasis on the word used.
Oh, ya, Obama did play the race card. Nobody plays it better than the great divider!
Imagine, black people eulogizing John Lewis and talking about race.
Are you serious?
Yes I am. John Lewis fought for Civil Rights via non-violence. People like Obama are stirring the pot of racial animosity to obtain power by using the memory of Lewis.
We all have our opinions, don't we?
Praising John Lewis and the work and sacrifices he did for his race is eulogizing, bringing Obama's hatred and name calling of others is not.
Obama was politically grandstanding at a funeral...he is a lowlife.
Stirring the pot?
Have you watched the news for the past few months? Obviously you watch Tucker Carlson, do you decry his power grabbing when he stirs the pot?
Thanks for you unsolicited opinion.
This is an open platform. Your welcomed.
Yes
Have you watched the news for the past few months?
Yes
Obviously you watch Tucker Carlson, do you decry his power grabbing when he stirs the pot?
Advocating for the people doesn't quite rise to the level of "power grabbing." But do make it about Carlson if you want.
Maybe not welcomed by the likes of you but that is what NT is about - opinions! Not personal attacks!
That's quite an argument.
removed
Carlson is on topic.
bwah ha ha
Yes he is. Topics are to be discussed. Name-calling is a form of what?
... conservative deflection.
Wrong - the answer is Trolling.
name calling is a coc, like comment 2.1.11
In that case. Let me administer the warning right now.
Now that Iv'e administered the warning - shall I ticket all the trolling that everyone can clearly see and was finally pointed out?
I have to issue you this warning: You can't actually call anyone a troll.
Last warning!
No problem
He can whip up a crowd. He must have studied Hitler's performances.
Personal power. The cult of which talking head can get away with the most outlandish words.
The power of more viewers, higher ratings, more compensation from Fox Entertainment and it's sponsors.
Tucker Carlson is a great American! 🇺🇸🦅
[DELETED]
Tucker Carlson is one of the most divisive little pieces of shit in America right now. The amount of hate he has heaped on Obama, liberals and progressives cannot be measured. Conservatives only see attacks on their ideology as divisive, they see attacks on the "left" as common sense and their only concept of bringing the country together is to force everyone to accept their flawed bullshit conservative ideology. President Obama was inclusive and invited all to join the fight for equality, only those anchored in prejudice and hate would see his message as divisive.
As usual, I see a lot of demeaning adjectives but few facts.
Didn't Obama call for the end of the Senate filibuster claiming that it was a relic of the Jim Crow era?
That courtesy has benefited democrats handsomely in 2017 & 2018! Now that Obama thinks that dems can win both houses he'd like to do away with it!
Please tell us how that is not a power grab???
BTW: Associating it with "Jim Crow" paints anyone who defends it as "racist."
Few facts?
This whole seed is opinion....
The facts are the words spoken by Barak Obama in delivering what was supposed to be a Eulogy.
The opinion is Carlson's.
We can discuss them without devolving the conversation into mud slinging.
Yes, President Obama stated facts, the sad little bigoted weasel Carlson spouted his biased opinion. I believe the majority of those watching the eulogy heard, understood and agreed with President Obama, but there are always some sniveling racists ready to pounce on any word or syllable the first black President utters and proclaim he's the one dividing the nation along racial lines. They never blame the Nazi's marching in the streets side by side confederate defenders and the white nationalists who have been actively working to conserve some fantasy "white culture" and those conservatives determined to re-segregate the nation. Telling the white nationalists, white supremacists, Nazis, confederates and KKK members to go fuck themselves is not divisive, it is the only rational thing to do when confronted with such blatant disgusting bigotry.
Actually he lied and smeared people.
the sad little bigoted weasel Carlson spouted his biased opinion.
Other than calling Carlson a racist, how was his opinion biased. Can you even restate his opinion?
I believe the majority of those watching the eulogy heard, understood and agreed with President Obama
I doubt it.
but there are always some sniveling racists ready to pounce on any word or syllable the first black President utters and proclaim he's the one dividing the nation along racial lines.
So, you are going to use the color of his skin to shelter him from the consequences of his divisive speech?
They never blame the Nazi's marching in the streets side by side confederate defenders and the white nationalists who have been actively working to conserve some fantasy "white culture" and those conservatives determined to re-segregate the nation. Telling the white nationalists, white supremacists, Nazis, confederates and KKK members to go fuck themselves is not divisive, it is the only rational thing to do when confronted with such blatant disgusting bigotry.
Oh, I know, I'm told that is our main danger. The reality as everyone can see coming from our besieged cities says otherwise.
I'm not clear on what part of the eulogy you believe to be a lie.
Please clarify.
I know it's getting a bit lengthy, but take a look back at Post # 1.1.14 rather than me repeating myself.
[DELETED]
Thread deleted. Please stay on topic.
Here is a portion of Obama's eulogy deemed to be dishonest and deeply dividing by the seed:
Don't you see why the gop feels attacked by that?
How dare he? Do I need /s here to indicate satire?
The GOP?
Yes, the once Grand Old Party of Abe Lincoln [DELETED.]
No, that is not the portion of Obama's eulogy that was called into question.
And unbiased person would know where it was.