Dems rushing to claim that popular policies they opposed were really their idea all along

When Democrats realize large numbers of voters are starting to support a conservative policy, they know just how to counter-attack:  Claim that the policy (and its success) has almost nothing to do with conservatives (or a Republican president they hate), but was really the Democrats' policy and goal all along. 

This, of course, is a brazen lie, but no mainstream media outlet will call 'em on it, cuz it would hurt The Narrative.  Instead the Dems' media allies will enthusiastically support this...um..."revised history."

Thus we read an interview Hillary Clinton gave to the left-wing U.K. paper The Guardian last week, in which she said immigration was inflaming voters and contributed to the election of Donald Trump and Britain’s vote to leave the EU."

“I think Europe needs to get a handle on migration because that is what lit the flame,” she said.  “I admire the very generous and compassionate approaches that were taken particularly by leaders like Angela Merkel, but...Europe...must send a very clear message – ‘we are not going to be able to continue provide refuge and support’ – because if we don’t deal with the migration issue it will continue to roil the body politic.” ...

So we've got to "deal with immigration"?  Wait...is this the same Hillary Clinton who headed the party that called for open borders, unlimited immigration based on unverifiable claims that the wanna-be immigrant was seeking "asylum"?  Cuz, you know, that sorta sounds like a complete reversal of her prior position.

Um...yes, that would be correct.  Cuz a bare majority of voters don't like the Democrat open-borders goal.  Solution?  'We never said we were for that.  And look here:  In an interview our wonderful leader--after Obama (pbuh)--said she thinks countries "need to get a handle on migration."  See??'

Similarly, the Lying Mainstream Media credits the booming economy--reportedly the lowest unemployment in 50 years--not to that eeeebil Orange Man but to... Barack Obama.  Here's the New York Times:

Barely a day passes without President Trump boasting about the growing economy, claiming with a mix of hyperbole and fact that it is “booming like never before.” But former President Barack Obama finds all the Trumpian chest-thumping more than a little grating, given that the “booming” started on his watch.

Similarly, the mainstream media credit Obama with defeating ISIS.  The Washington Post helpfully explains, "Obama’s ISIS policy is working for Trump ... an acknowledgment that in Syria, Trump is using President Barack Obama’s playbook. So far, it’s working out pretty well for him."

Damn, that's...odd.  Here I thought that Obama-ordered rules of engagement barred U.S. forces from taking virtually any offensive action.  As a former Air Force pilot I watched the details of our air operations very carefully, and while we flew lots of "combat missions," 75 percent of the time our planes came back from missions without dropping a bomb or firing a shot, due to bullshit rules of engagement.  When Trump lifted those, our military started kicking ISIS ass.  

But it sounds so GOOD to give Obama credit.  Trump?  Nada.

As Democrat pols now cast themselves as the defenders against the Russian menace, how many Americans recall how recently Obama sneered at Mitt Romney's suggestion that the Kremlin could ever be a threat?  "Senatory, the 1980's called.  They want their foreign policy back."

Boy, that was a great line, eh?.  The WaPo and NYT were giddy about how cleverly our brilliant, accomplished black president ridiculed the upstart Romney's claim that the Russians could possibly be a threat.

One more:  How's the price of gasoline now?  Around here in flyover country regular is around $2.38 a gallon.  And why?  Because U.S. oil production is at an all-time high.  We now produce more oil than Saudi Arabia, and even more than the former #1 producer, Russia.  

But wait...didn't Barack Hussein say something like "It's ridiculous to think we can drill our way to energy independence"?   The NYT and WaPo, CNN, MSNBC and the alphabet networks duly repeated this, solemnly endorsing the wise words of the man they regarded as more brilliant than any president before him, while ridiculing any voter who might be dumb enough to think we could do anything about energy prices.  

So just watch:  In a few months you'll start seeing stories about how lower gas prices are really due to the brilliant policies of...Obama.  See, by ordering his Department of Energy to give billions of taxpayer dollars to GM to produce the technological miracle called the "Volt," it triggered Toyota and Nissan to build their own electric cars.  Which has now reduced oil demand world-wide so much that the price of oil and gas have fallen!

Yup yup yup!  Dat's da ticket, citizen!  Had nothing whatsoever to do with more drilling and astonishingly higher U.S. oil output.  Instead it's all due to electric cars, which got their start by Obama's spurring GM to produce the Volt. 

Revisionist history--it's not just for the Russians anymore.