The White House seems to think its denial of radical Islam will stop people from believing the obvious.
By Jonah Goldberg
Could this argument be any dumber?
The Obama administration has forced America and much of the world into a debate no one wanted or needed. Namely, does Islamic terrorism have anything to do with Islam?
This debate is different than the much-coveted national conversation on race that politicians so often call for (usually as a way to duck having it), because that is a conversation at least some people want. The White House doesnt want a conversation about Islam and terrorism.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest says, We have chosen not to use that label (of radical Islam) because it doesnt seem to accurately describe what happened.
What happened was the slaughter last week at the satirical French newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The sound of the terrorists gunfire was punctuated by shouts of Allahu akbar! and We have avenged the prophet Mohammed!
Since no one questions the sincerity of these declarations, that alone should settle the issue of whether Islam had anything to do with the attack. And for normal people it would.
The problem is that the White Houses position is categorical denial. It is not that the role of Islam in such attacks is exaggerated. Nor is it that these attacks should not be used to disparage more than a billion peaceful Muslims around the world. These are mainstream and defensible positions.
But, again, thats not what the White House is saying. It is saying that one should not associate these attacks with the word Islamic, no matter what adjective you hang on it radical, extreme, perverted, etc. even when the murderers release videos attesting to their faith and their association with Islamist terror groups.
By taking this radical and extremist rhetorical approach, the Obama administration invites people to talk about Islam more, not less.
Think of it this way. A bird waddles into the room. It walks like a duck, it talks like a duck, it gives off every indication of duckness. If Josh Earnest says, Thats not a mallard, well, okay. You can have a reasonable conversation about which species the bird might be. But if Earnest says, That is not a duck. It has no relation or similarity to anatine fowl in any way, shape or form, and any talk of ducks is illegitimate. . . .
Well, now we have a problem.
Such rhetorical extremism almost forces people into an argument about what a duck is. Likewise, by denying the role of radical Islam, they invite sane people everywhere to focus more, not less, on Islam.
There are, of course, many problems with this analogy. The most important one is that ducks cannot talk. They cannot say, Look, I am a duck.
Terrorists can talk. And they do. They also form organizations with magazines and websites and Twitter accounts. They issue manifestos. They recruit in mosques. When we capture them alive, they demand Qurans and pray five times a day, bowing toward Mecca.
You know who else can talk? Non-extremist Muslims. And millions of them routinely refer to the bad guys as radical Islamists and the like.
I could go on, but you get the point if you dont work at this White House.
The Obama administration seems to believe that the wonder-working power of their words can get everyone to stop believing their lying eyes and ears. Its tempting to ask, How stupid do they think we are? But the more relevant question is, How stupid do they think the worlds 1.6 billion Muslims are? Wh**ever appeal the Islamic State may or may not have in the larger Muslim world, Barack Obama insisting it is not Islamic surely makes no difference whatsoever. And as for the jihadists, its not like his words speak louder than his drone strikes.
Its true that the Obama administration has had remarkable success playing word games. They created or saved millions of jobs as if that was a real economic metric. (For what its worth, I do or save 500 pushups every morning). They decimated core al-Qaeda, with the tautological definition of core al-Qaeda being the parts of al-Qaeda that we have decimated.
But this is different. Those distortions were political buzzphrases intended for domestic consumption and a re-e******n campaign. This is a much bigger deal. The threat of Islamic extremism transcends Obamas theological hubris and lexicological shenanigans. All that Obamas insipid rhetorical gamesmanship does is send the signal to friend and foe alike that he cant or wont see the problem for what it is.
JMHO wrote:
The White House seems to think its denial of radical Islam will stop people from believing the obvious.
By Jonah Goldberg
Could this argument be any dumber?
The Obama administration has forced America and much of the world into a debate no one wanted or needed. Namely, does Islamic terrorism have anything to do with Islam?
This debate is different than the much-coveted national conversation on race that politicians so often call for (usually as a way to duck having it), because that is a conversation at least some people want. The White House doesnt want a conversation about Islam and terrorism.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest says, We have chosen not to use that label (of radical Islam) because it doesnt seem to accurately describe what happened.
What happened was the slaughter last week at the satirical French newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The sound of the terrorists gunfire was punctuated by shouts of Allahu akbar! and We have avenged the prophet Mohammed!
Since no one questions the sincerity of these declarations, that alone should settle the issue of whether Islam had anything to do with the attack. And for normal people it would.
The problem is that the White Houses position is categorical denial. It is not that the role of Islam in such attacks is exaggerated. Nor is it that these attacks should not be used to disparage more than a billion peaceful Muslims around the world. These are mainstream and defensible positions.
But, again, thats not what the White House is saying. It is saying that one should not associate these attacks with the word Islamic, no matter what adjective you hang on it radical, extreme, perverted, etc. even when the murderers release videos attesting to their faith and their association with Islamist terror groups.
By taking this radical and extremist rhetorical approach, the Obama administration invites people to talk about Islam more, not less.
Think of it this way. A bird waddles into the room. It walks like a duck, it talks like a duck, it gives off every indication of duckness. If Josh Earnest says, Thats not a mallard, well, okay. You can have a reasonable conversation about which species the bird might be. But if Earnest says, That is not a duck. It has no relation or similarity to anatine fowl in any way, shape or form, and any talk of ducks is illegitimate. . . .
Well, now we have a problem.
Such rhetorical extremism almost forces people into an argument about what a duck is. Likewise, by denying the role of radical Islam, they invite sane people everywhere to focus more, not less, on Islam.
There are, of course, many problems with this analogy. The most important one is that ducks cannot talk. They cannot say, Look, I am a duck.
Terrorists can talk. And they do. They also form organizations with magazines and websites and Twitter accounts. They issue manifestos. They recruit in mosques. When we capture them alive, they demand Qurans and pray five times a day, bowing toward Mecca.
You know who else can talk? Non-extremist Muslims. And millions of them routinely refer to the bad guys as radical Islamists and the like.
I could go on, but you get the point if you dont work at this White House.
The Obama administration seems to believe that the wonder-working power of their words can get everyone to stop believing their lying eyes and ears. Its tempting to ask, How stupid do they think we are? But the more relevant question is, How stupid do they think the worlds 1.6 billion Muslims are? Wh**ever appeal the Islamic State may or may not have in the larger Muslim world, Barack Obama insisting it is not Islamic surely makes no difference whatsoever. And as for the jihadists, its not like his words speak louder than his drone strikes.
Its true that the Obama administration has had remarkable success playing word games. They created or saved millions of jobs as if that was a real economic metric. (For what its worth, I do or save 500 pushups every morning). They decimated core al-Qaeda, with the tautological definition of core al-Qaeda being the parts of al-Qaeda that we have decimated.
But this is different. Those distortions were political buzzphrases intended for domestic consumption and a re-e******n campaign. This is a much bigger deal. The threat of Islamic extremism transcends Obamas theological hubris and lexicological shenanigans. All that Obamas insipid rhetorical gamesmanship does is send the signal to friend and foe alike that he cant or wont see the problem for what it is.
b The White House seems to think its denial of ra... (
show quote)
The people have to realize that we have a Muslim Brotherhood in WH and that organization is banned in most of Middle East and a terrorists to boot.The "STUPID" v**ers did a helluva job twice.Goes to show how uninformed and naive they are.
Babsan wrote:
The people have to realize that we have a Muslim Brotherhood in WH and that organization is banned in most of Middle East and a terrorists to boot.The "STUPID" v**ers did a helluva job twice.Goes to show how uninformed and naive they are.
That pretty much says it all.
Babsan wrote:
The people have to realize that we have a Muslim Brotherhood in WH and that organization is banned in most of Middle East and a terrorists to boot.The "STUPID" v**ers did a helluva job twice.Goes to show how uninformed and naive they are.
Certainly the low-information v**ers have the responsibility for the results of first, "Hope & Change" e******n, but the second progressive strategy was pure chicanery!!! A c*******t intrusion of our formerly non-partisan Federal bureaucracies initiated the shutting-down of conservative voices by shunting the "tax-exempt" status of what the liberal progressive movement considered [their] enemies. Not terrorists, mind you, Tea Party conservatives!!!
I'm still trying to get-over the "curtains" being placed strategically over the Christian Chapels Crucifixes and pictures of Jesus Christ at the VA hospitals. No way, Jose!!! It's time for all the Judeo-Christian vets to visit the Chapels, all over America, to remove any "waste" that may be trying to cover our Judeo Christian heritage!!!
I'm gonna disagree with Babsan and quote SuperDave here:
"Obama can't be a Muslim. Muslims don't worship Obama."
just_sayin' wrote:
I'm gonna disagree with Babsan and quote SuperDave here:
"Obama can't be a Muslim. Muslims don't worship Obama."
Obama can't be a muslim. I saw a picture of him kissing Nancy Pelosi. No self respecting muslim would EVER kiss a pig.
just_sayin' wrote:
I'm gonna disagree with Babsan and quote SuperDave here:
"Obama can't be a Muslim. Muslims don't worship Obama."
F Y I Obama /Barry Soetoro is a Muslim by paternal lineage according to Islam.
Grugore wrote:
Obama can't be a muslim. I saw a picture of him kissing Nancy Pelosi. No self respecting muslim would EVER kiss a pig.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :thumbup:
PoppaGringo wrote:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :thumbup:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
JMHO wrote:
The White House seems to think its denial of radical Islam will stop people from believing the obvious.
By Jonah Goldberg
Could this argument be any dumber?
The Obama administration has forced America and much of the world into a debate no one wanted or needed. Namely, does Islamic terrorism have anything to do with Islam?
This debate is different than the much-coveted national conversation on race that politicians so often call for (usually as a way to duck having it), because that is a conversation at least some people want. The White House doesnt want a conversation about Islam and terrorism.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest says, We have chosen not to use that label (of radical Islam) because it doesnt seem to accurately describe what happened.
What happened was the slaughter last week at the satirical French newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The sound of the terrorists gunfire was punctuated by shouts of Allahu akbar! and We have avenged the prophet Mohammed!
Since no one questions the sincerity of these declarations, that alone should settle the issue of whether Islam had anything to do with the attack. And for normal people it would.
The problem is that the White Houses position is categorical denial. It is not that the role of Islam in such attacks is exaggerated. Nor is it that these attacks should not be used to disparage more than a billion peaceful Muslims around the world. These are mainstream and defensible positions.
But, again, thats not what the White House is saying. It is saying that one should not associate these attacks with the word Islamic, no matter what adjective you hang on it radical, extreme, perverted, etc. even when the murderers release videos attesting to their faith and their association with Islamist terror groups.
By taking this radical and extremist rhetorical approach, the Obama administration invites people to talk about Islam more, not less.
Think of it this way. A bird waddles into the room. It walks like a duck, it talks like a duck, it gives off every indication of duckness. If Josh Earnest says, Thats not a mallard, well, okay. You can have a reasonable conversation about which species the bird might be. But if Earnest says, That is not a duck. It has no relation or similarity to anatine fowl in any way, shape or form, and any talk of ducks is illegitimate. . . .
Well, now we have a problem.
Such rhetorical extremism almost forces people into an argument about what a duck is. Likewise, by denying the role of radical Islam, they invite sane people everywhere to focus more, not less, on Islam.
There are, of course, many problems with this analogy. The most important one is that ducks cannot talk. They cannot say, Look, I am a duck.
Terrorists can talk. And they do. They also form organizations with magazines and websites and Twitter accounts. They issue manifestos. They recruit in mosques. When we capture them alive, they demand Qurans and pray five times a day, bowing toward Mecca.
You know who else can talk? Non-extremist Muslims. And millions of them routinely refer to the bad guys as radical Islamists and the like.
I could go on, but you get the point if you dont work at this White House.
The Obama administration seems to believe that the wonder-working power of their words can get everyone to stop believing their lying eyes and ears. Its tempting to ask, How stupid do they think we are? But the more relevant question is, How stupid do they think the worlds 1.6 billion Muslims are? Wh**ever appeal the Islamic State may or may not have in the larger Muslim world, Barack Obama insisting it is not Islamic surely makes no difference whatsoever. And as for the jihadists, its not like his words speak louder than his drone strikes.
Its true that the Obama administration has had remarkable success playing word games. They created or saved millions of jobs as if that was a real economic metric. (For what its worth, I do or save 500 pushups every morning). They decimated core al-Qaeda, with the tautological definition of core al-Qaeda being the parts of al-Qaeda that we have decimated.
But this is different. Those distortions were political buzzphrases intended for domestic consumption and a re-e******n campaign. This is a much bigger deal. The threat of Islamic extremism transcends Obamas theological hubris and lexicological shenanigans. All that Obamas insipid rhetorical gamesmanship does is send the signal to friend and foe alike that he cant or wont see the problem for what it is.
b The White House seems to think its denial of ra... (
show quote)
Not hard to figure out , OBOGUS , Is ONE OF THE MUZZY MUTHAFUCLKIN TERRORIST ASSWIPE DUNECOONS . The TREASONOUS FRAUD ILLEGAL F*GGOT BASTARD , Should be SHOT , Then HANGED for All the WORLD to See , what WE do to TREASONUS TERRORISTS HERE
Babsan wrote:
F Y I Obama /Barry Soetoro is a Muslim by paternal lineage according to Islam.
:wink: :wink: :thumbup: :thumbup: Also by his Own Admission , DEEDS and Worship
JMHO wrote:
The White House seems to think its denial of radical Islam will stop people from believing the obvious.
By Jonah Goldberg
Could this argument be any dumber?
The Obama administration has forced America and much of the world into a debate no one wanted or needed. Namely, does Islamic terrorism have anything to do with Islam?
This debate is different than the much-coveted national conversation on race that politicians so often call for (usually as a way to duck having it), because that is a conversation at least some people want. The White House doesnt want a conversation about Islam and terrorism.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest says, We have chosen not to use that label (of radical Islam) because it doesnt seem to accurately describe what happened.
What happened was the slaughter last week at the satirical French newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The sound of the terrorists gunfire was punctuated by shouts of Allahu akbar! and We have avenged the prophet Mohammed!
Since no one questions the sincerity of these declarations, that alone should settle the issue of whether Islam had anything to do with the attack. And for normal people it would.
The problem is that the White Houses position is categorical denial. It is not that the role of Islam in such attacks is exaggerated. Nor is it that these attacks should not be used to disparage more than a billion peaceful Muslims around the world. These are mainstream and defensible positions.
But, again, thats not what the White House is saying. It is saying that one should not associate these attacks with the word Islamic, no matter what adjective you hang on it radical, extreme, perverted, etc. even when the murderers release videos attesting to their faith and their association with Islamist terror groups.
By taking this radical and extremist rhetorical approach, the Obama administration invites people to talk about Islam more, not less.
Think of it this way. A bird waddles into the room. It walks like a duck, it talks like a duck, it gives off every indication of duckness. If Josh Earnest says, Thats not a mallard, well, okay. You can have a reasonable conversation about which species the bird might be. But if Earnest says, That is not a duck. It has no relation or similarity to anatine fowl in any way, shape or form, and any talk of ducks is illegitimate. . . .
Well, now we have a problem.
Such rhetorical extremism almost forces people into an argument about what a duck is. Likewise, by denying the role of radical Islam, they invite sane people everywhere to focus more, not less, on Islam.
There are, of course, many problems with this analogy. The most important one is that ducks cannot talk. They cannot say, Look, I am a duck.
Terrorists can talk. And they do. They also form organizations with magazines and websites and Twitter accounts. They issue manifestos. They recruit in mosques. When we capture them alive, they demand Qurans and pray five times a day, bowing toward Mecca.
You know who else can talk? Non-extremist Muslims. And millions of them routinely refer to the bad guys as radical Islamists and the like.
I could go on, but you get the point if you dont work at this White House.
The Obama administration seems to believe that the wonder-working power of their words can get everyone to stop believing their lying eyes and ears. Its tempting to ask, How stupid do they think we are? But the more relevant question is, How stupid do they think the worlds 1.6 billion Muslims are? Wh**ever appeal the Islamic State may or may not have in the larger Muslim world, Barack Obama insisting it is not Islamic surely makes no difference whatsoever. And as for the jihadists, its not like his words speak louder than his drone strikes.
Its true that the Obama administration has had remarkable success playing word games. They created or saved millions of jobs as if that was a real economic metric. (For what its worth, I do or save 500 pushups every morning). They decimated core al-Qaeda, with the tautological definition of core al-Qaeda being the parts of al-Qaeda that we have decimated.
But this is different. Those distortions were political buzzphrases intended for domestic consumption and a re-e******n campaign. This is a much bigger deal. The threat of Islamic extremism transcends Obamas theological hubris and lexicological shenanigans. All that Obamas insipid rhetorical gamesmanship does is send the signal to friend and foe alike that he cant or wont see the problem for what it is.
b The White House seems to think its denial of ra... (
show quote)
Great post.
Explains it completely.
I puzzled it out ...It's a duck
And Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is Islamic
Thank you for posting.
rkevin wrote:
Certainly the low-information v**ers have the responsibility for the results of first, "Hope & Change" e******n, but the second progressive strategy was pure chicanery!!! A c*******t intrusion of our formerly non-partisan Federal bureaucracies initiated the shutting-down of conservative voices by shunting the "tax-exempt" status of what the liberal progressive movement considered [their] enemies. Not terrorists, mind you, Tea Party conservatives!!!
I'm still trying to get-over the "curtains" being placed strategically over the Christian Chapels Crucifixes and pictures of Jesus Christ at the VA hospitals. No way, Jose!!! It's time for all the Judeo-Christian vets to visit the Chapels, all over America, to remove any "waste" that may be trying to cover our Judeo Christian heritage!!!
Certainly the low-information v**ers have the resp... (
show quote)
The Second time was all pure 100% V***R F***D . Stats shown on E******n night proved that . And not one friggin thing was said . Fear of National Race r**ts if he lost and v***r f***d was shown . in a nutshell . :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Babsan wrote:
F Y I Obama /Barry Soetoro is a Muslim by paternal lineage according to Islam.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.