MUST SEE: “Obamalisk” Ridiculed Nationwide…

Barack Obama’s presidential center in Chicago has become a laughingstock after architecture critics revealed that text from his famous Selma speech wrapped around the building’s tower is virtually impossible to read, sparking nationwide ridicule of the $850 million monument to progressive excess.

Illegible Inscription Exposes Design Disaster

Architecture critic Lee Bey’s social media post documenting the confusing text inscription wrapped around the museum tower ignited a firestorm of criticism from Chicagoans who struggled to decipher the words. The inscription features text from Barack Obama’s Selma speech, but the display makes the message nearly impossible to read. This design failure exemplifies the disconnect between the Obama Foundation’s grand vision and practical functionality that everyday Americans expect from public buildings. The criticism reflects a broader frustration with elite projects that prioritize symbolism over substance.

Cost Overruns Reveal Fiscal Mismanagement

The Obama Presidential Center’s budget exploded from an initial $500 million estimate in 2017 to approximately $850 million by 2025. This 70% cost increase mirrors the pattern of fiscal irresponsibility Americans witnessed throughout the Biden years, when government-connected projects routinely exceeded budgets without accountability. While the Obama Foundation insists the center uses private funds rather than taxpayer dollars, the dramatic cost escalation raises legitimate questions about project oversight and management competence. President Trump accurately identified these problems when he called the project a disaster during a May 2026 meeting.

The Obama Library , occupying 19.3 acres of Jackson Park via a 99-year lease (not purchase), is the ultimate monument to DEI while pointing the middle finger at federal law.

The crown jewel of this Trash Can/Prison looking building is the railing. If you notice, the words are… pic.twitter.com/cpnNsDsPIq

— C-Reason🇺🇸 (@CreasonJana) February 18, 2026

Brutalist Architecture Offends Community Sensibilities

The center’s Brutalist design aesthetic has alienated Chicago residents who must live with this imposing structure in their neighborhood. Critics coined the derisive nickname “The Obamalisk” and compared the building to a “Klingon prison,” highlighting how the design clashes with community values and preferences. Kim Patterson, the Obama Foundation’s Deputy Director, defended the windowless design as necessary to protect artifacts, and claimed the building’s shape mimics “four hands coming together.” These explanations ring hollow to residents who see an unwelcoming concrete monolith rather than an inspiring community asset. The design controversy illustrates the progressive tendency to impose elite aesthetic preferences on communities.

Gentrification Threatens South Side Families

Chicago residents express justified concerns that the 19.3-acre presidential center campus will accelerate gentrification and displace longtime South Side families through rising property values. The Obama Foundation promotes the facility as an “economic engine for Chicago,” but this economic transformation threatens the very communities Obama claims to champion. The center includes a fruit and vegetable garden, athletic facility, museum, auditorium, and Chicago Public Library branch, amenities that will inevitably attract wealthier residents and developers. This pattern repeats the familiar story of progressive projects that ultimately harm working-class neighborhoods despite promises of community benefits.

Trump Criticism Exposes Project Failures

President Trump’s May 2026 criticism of the Obama Presidential Center cut through the foundation’s public relations spin to expose real problems with the project. Trump called the center “a disaster” and attributed delays and cost overruns to “woke” hiring practices that prioritize diversity initiatives over competence and efficiency. The Obama Foundation dismissed Trump’s comments as “not based in fact,” claiming issues stemmed from “a relatively common dispute between two subcontractors.” However, the dramatic cost increases, design failures, and community concerns validate Trump’s assessment that progressive ideology compromised this project’s execution and effectiveness.