Obama Accuses JD Vance Of Promoting ‘Blood And Soil’ Politics
Former President Barack Obama rarely mentions Vice President JD Vance by name, but that changed this week with one of his sharpest public attacks since Vance took office.
The comments immediately fueled speculation that Democrats are beginning to focus more attention on the vice president as Republicans look ahead to the post-Trump era.
Speaking Thursday during a conversation with author Malcolm Gladwell, Obama accused Vance of promoting what he described as a “blood and soil” vision of America, despite being married to Usha Vance, the daughter of Indian immigrants.
Obama made the remarks while discussing the Reconstruction era and arguing that many of the same debates over citizenship, voting rights and national identity continue today.
“We have a politics now that at least one of our major parties has been captured by politics that is not that subtle about suggesting that ‘We the people’ means a certain kind of people,” Obama said.
“When you have the vice president, current vice president, making a speech that is basically a blood and soil version of ‘We the people,’ that it matters who your parents were and how long they’ve been here despite him being married to a daughter of an immigrant himself.”
The phrase “blood and soil” is historically associated with Nazi Germany and white nationalist ideology.
Obama went on to argue that debates over who belongs in America remain central to the nation’s politics.
“That echoes, then, ideas about who can be a citizen, who belongs, who gets to make decisions,” he said.
Gladwell followed by accusing Vance of hypocrisy, arguing that the vice president was making what he called a nativist argument despite his own family’s immigrant background.
Obama agreed.
“That is progress,” Obama said.
“Listen, hypocrisy is progress. It is, because it means that you feel guilty enough to either lie to yourself or others.”
Fox News Digital reported that it reached out to Vance’s office for comment.
Obama did not identify the specific speech he was criticizing, but Vance’s most recent nationally televised remarks came during Independence Day celebrations marking America’s 250th birthday.
In that speech, Vance encouraged Americans to reject what he called a “two-dimensional view” of the country focused only on its historical failures.
“So what I’d ask you to do, my fellow Americans, on our 250th birthday, is to reject the two-dimensional view of your fellow citizens and reject the two-dimensional view of your country,” Vance said.
“Reject the view of your nation that sees only its sins, but not its grace and its greatness.”
He also emphasized that America’s accomplishments were achieved by “a common people working towards a common future.”
Obama has generally avoided making Vance a regular target since the vice president took office.
One notable exception came during the 2024 presidential campaign when then-Vice President Kamala Harris selected Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate.
Without naming Vance directly, Obama contrasted Harris’ choice with the Republican ticket.
“When a presidential candidate chooses a running mate, it says a lot about who they are and what kind of president they’ll be,” Obama said at the time, Fox News reported.
Political observers have increasingly discussed Vance as a potential frontrunner for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination, though he has not announced any plans to run.
Against that backdrop, Obama’s unusually direct criticism is likely to fuel speculation that some Democrats are beginning to sharpen their message against a politician they view as a likely future standard-bearer for the Republican Party. While no Democratic leaders have publicly described their strategy in those terms, prominent figures often begin drawing contrasts with potential future rivals well before a presidential campaign officially begins.
Whether that proves to be the case remains to be seen, but Obama’s remarks marked one of his most pointed critiques of Vance to date and ensured the vice president once again found himself at the center of the national political conversation.
Fox News DRAMA - Maria Bartiromo's Attorney Drops Bombshell After 'Firing'
When Fox announced that Maria Bartiromo was gone after more than twelve years, the statement was a masterpiece of saying nothing: thanks for the work, best of luck on the next chapter, no reason given. Corporate language that smooth usually exists to cover something rougher underneath. The reporting that followed suggests it did.
Here is the reconstructed sequence, and it should be read as the reporting of Status and Puck’s Dylan Byers rather than confirmed fact — Bartiromo’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, has since pushed back on the “fired” characterization, and the full story isn’t settled. With that caveat squarely in place: Bartiromo reportedly wanted to pursue a story tying China to 2020 election-security questions. For Fox that subject is radioactive. The network paid a historic settlement to Dominion Voting Systems over its 2020 coverage and still faces active Smartmatic litigation on the same ground. A Fox Business executive reportedly sent written guidance steering staff away from the topic, and most fell in line.
Bartiromo didn’t. According to the reporting, when Trump or a White House aide asked why Fox wasn’t covering the story, she confirmed her bosses had blocked it — and then forwarded the internal message proving it. Fox reportedly learned of the leak, concluded it violated her employment agreement, and pulled her off the air August 9.
Reports subsequently said she was “fired.” But according to her lawyer, Bryan Freedman, that’s not the case at all:
For many years, Maria Bartiromo hosted three number one rated television shows on Fox channels. She has been, without question, one of the hardest working journalists throughout her award winning career.
The irresponsible reports that have been published stating that Maria Bartiromo was fired or is no longer an employee of Fox are absolutely and unequivocally false. Make no mistake, we have the receipts and witnesses and they will come out whether through the courthouse or otherwise. Those reporting her firing or the incredulous facts supporting that fiction have exhibited a complete and utter reckless disregard for the truth.
We’ll keep you updated on this.
When Fox announced that Maria Bartiromo was gone after more than twelve years, the statement was a masterpiece of saying nothing: thanks for the work, best of luck on the next chapter, no reason given. Corporate language that smooth usually exists to cover something rougher underneath. The reporting that followed suggests it did.
Here is the reconstructed sequence, and it should be read as the reporting of Status and Puck’s Dylan Byers rather than confirmed fact — Bartiromo’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, has since pushed back on the “fired” characterization, and the full story isn’t settled. With that caveat squarely in place: Bartiromo reportedly wanted to pursue a story tying China to 2020 election-security questions. For Fox that subject is radioactive. The network paid a historic settlement to Dominion Voting Systems over its 2020 coverage and still faces active Smartmatic litigation on the same ground. A Fox Business executive reportedly sent written guidance steering staff away from the topic, and most fell in line.
Bartiromo didn’t. According to the reporting, when Trump or a White House aide asked why Fox wasn’t covering the story, she confirmed her bosses had blocked it — and then forwarded the internal message proving it. Fox reportedly learned of the leak, concluded it violated her employment agreement, and pulled her off the air August 9.
Reports subsequently said she was “fired.” But according to her lawyer, Bryan Freedman, that’s not the case at all:
For many years, Maria Bartiromo hosted three number one rated television shows on Fox channels. She has been, without question, one of the hardest working journalists throughout her award winning career.
The irresponsible reports that have been published stating that Maria Bartiromo was fired or is no longer an employee of Fox are absolutely and unequivocally false. Make no mistake, we have the receipts and witnesses and they will come out whether through the courthouse or otherwise. Those reporting her firing or the incredulous facts supporting that fiction have exhibited a complete and utter reckless disregard for the truth.
We’ll keep you updated on this.
