Cori Bush Has Had Enough of This Word Being Used Against Progressives
The Bubbling Cesspool of Feces That Is the Ivy Leagues
Arizona's Dem Governor Begs Biden for Border Help As Her State Is Overrun
There Was a Big Problem With CNN's Announcement of a Debate at Saint...
Jonathan Chait Applauds Ivy League Presidents
'I'm Sorry': Harvard President Issues Apology Amid Outrage Over Congressional Testimony
Biden Caught In Another Lie
Biden's Border Crisis Is Encouraging Record Crime from Illegal Aliens, Mexican Drug Cartel...
So This Is What Chris Christie Told Megyn Kelly After She Humiliated Him...
FBI Under Fire for Targeting 'Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology'
Community Notes Has Now Gotten Involved as Republicans Fight Over NDAA Compromises
Texas AG Will Sue Doctor Who Performs Second-Trimester Abortion
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan Subpoenas DHS Secretary Mayorkas After 'Woefully Inade...
11-Year-Old Girl Assigned to Sleep With 'Trans' Student on School Trip, Parents Say
Residents in These Republican-Led States Have More Money for Christmas Shopping Despite Bi...

March Madness: Obama Champions One-Percenters

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of

When Barack Obama picked his NCAA brackets, he should have done what he always does: champion the underdog, and demonize the “overdog.”

It’s March Madness, and the underdogs are running wild – everywhere except in the President’s NCAA brackets.


There, where it counts, the President spent a disturbing amount of time and mental energy picking what he felt were the best teams with the best chances of becoming #1 (which led him, this year, to choose two #1 seeds to meet in the NCAA finals).

If President Obama ran his March Madness brackets like he runs the country, instead of picking two #1 seeds to meet in the finals, he would have demonized them for being fat-cat 1%ers. And he would have avoided six “upset” losses in his bracket so far, if he had just stood up for the underdog instead of picking perennial 1%er teams like Michigan, Duke, UNLV, Missouri and Temple.

Heck, if he treated basketball’s most successful teams and players the same way he treats America’s most successful companies and workers, he would go on 60 Minutes and call UNC and Kentucky a bunch of “fat-cats” for winning so many games. His campaign speeches would call for more “fairness” in the league. And he would ram through an unconstitutional law to close the “unfair” gap between winning teams and losing teams.

While we’re on the subject of picking winners and losers: why should there be any losers in the NCAA tournament at all? What kind of madness has the President of the United States succumbed to: actually picking winners? That means he’s picking losers, too! Is it fair for any team to lose? And why does the President pick so many fat-cat 1%er teams to win, and so many “little guy” underdog teams to lose?


Have you lost your soul, Mr. President? Have you not even read the speeches on your teleprompter? They tell a different story. When it comes to the American economy, you consistently champion the underdog and demonize those who succeed in America – even when their success leads to millions of jobs for millions of underdog workers across the country.

What does success in the NCAA tournament lead to? More millionaire basketball players in the pros. That’s right: more hated 1%ers.

If only the President treated successful Americans the same way he treats successful basketball teams and players.

Then maybe he would pick us, for a change.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos