05-23-2018 10:30:41 AM -0700
05-18-2018 12:27:15 PM -0700
05-17-2018 08:38:50 AM -0700
05-11-2018 07:34:04 AM -0700
05-09-2018 10:17:16 AM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.

When Is a Religion not a Religion?

Hillary Clinton has managed to stay out of the limelight these last four years. Her image and approval rating had been pretty high. The media and most of the public have assumed she has been doing a good job. It is not clear why, as it is difficult to state what she has accomplished. It is just a mantra that is regurgitated. The too-clever-by-half people even accorded to her extra political gamesmanship and skill for not being overly linked with any of the more controversial Obama proposals. Many believed she could be a serious candidate for president in 2016.

The woman who warned about the 3 a.m. call in her critique of Obama in 2008 has succumbed to a complete intellectual breakdown, oddly enough at about 3 a.m. At least she actually seems to feel a certain moral responsibility for what is happening in the Middle East, even as she insanely deflects blame to a publicly released opinion video by a single U.S. citizen. As if tens of millions of people did not at least empathize with his views. Her facial expressions reveal shock and cognitive dissonance; she appears truly dazed and confused.

Obama, on the other hand, can hardly take the effort to fake concern. Nor does he have enough knowledge to even fake having knowledge about what is going on. On the other hand, he seems genuinely excited about his road show and money-raising activities. This has always been what turns him on. Great practice for his post-presidency (I predict he becomes the first ex-president billionaire). The man who would be king, but cannot even submit budgets, clearly has no calling for governance or learning the details about who wants to destroy the U.S. Even his ever-repeated and absurd self-promotion over the Osama bin laden killing has all the appearance of a bad Wizard of Oz production. That picture of him sitting in the back of the room, intently watching as if it had been a post-production review of the Last House on Main Street 8, makes him look like a director's assistant who received a last-second invitation. That is the best picture they have of him "leading" the charge? I assume it must be.

Back to now. With the exception of Kirsten Powers, I cannot think of one media liberal who does not see how utterly delusional the administration's response to these riots has been. This may be going out on a limb, but my guess is this had been in the planning for a long time. I wonder what other Muslim deaths movie man was responsible for in the last week? How about the 92 people killed in 13 separate bombings in Iraq on the conviction in absentia of former VP Tarique Hashemi; or the 12 people killed in a car bombing in a public market in Pakistan near the Afghan border; or the assassination attempt on 9/11 of the Yemeni foreign minister which killed about 12; or, on his second day in office, the suicide bombers' killing of 12 while failing to assassinate Somalia's new president; or perhaps the suicide bombers' attempt to blow up a police station in Istanbul?

Besides an incomprehensible lack of normal human common sense, the core of this administration's failure is one of semantical confusion, particularly in the use of the term "religion" to describe various movements within the Middle East. When is a religion not a religion? When it is a political movement?