Cynical Wordsmithery

In this age of ISIS, the administration has struggled with how to address the growing threat, both at home and on the battlefield.  The latter reflects a troublesome issue that has existed since the end of World War II -- how to deal with guerrilla or unconventional warfare.  Since Vietnam, the military has studied this problem and arrived at different methods for combat in this new arena, but the problem really lies in the nexus between political and military spheres of influence.  That is another blogpost altogether.

The question of how to handle this threat at home is a completely different matter, although this is some crossover, given the explosion of the internet and the immediacy of news reporting.  Yet the approach the administration takes in its reporting to the American public is mostly a domestic issue, one that requires tact insofar as the repercussions of its pronouncements are concerned, but also a deft hand.  This administration lacks both.

To begin, it is glaringly apparent that this administration, from the President down to his lowly mouthpieces, thinks itself superior to the American public where intelligence is concerned.  There are two kinds of intelligence, of course:  The kind gathered by our spy agencies and the natural kind with which every human is imbued, to one degree or another.  And make no mistake, the President is a smart man.  But he's smug to think that he has all the answers and that there are no other smart people in this country.  This same attitude seems pervasive in the administration, especially when it comes to the spokespersons who are tasked with getting the administration's message out to the people.

Where it becomes toughest to swallow -- besides the condescending smiles and the eyerolling in which the administration and its minions engage -- is when they say something that is either patently false or obviously ridiculous, and then not only expect the American public to believe it but are affronted when it doesn't.

It first became noticeable when the administration declared the shootings at Fort Hood to be workplace violence and not acts of terrorism.  More than anything, the denial of Purple Hearts to those wounded or killed in that attack infuriated people who saw clearly the hand of radical Islam as the motivating force.

The trend continued with the terrorist attack on our consulate in Benghazi.  Despite all indications to the contrary, the administration floated the idea that this was a spontaneous demonstration unconnected to organized terrorism at all.  Despite the mounting evidence that this was a coordinated strike -- on the anniversary or 9/11, no less -- the administration trotted out its professional pinata Ambassador Susan Rice to parrot the same tired line on all the Sunday morning talk shows.  Then, when confronted with the lie, the administration dog paddled as fast as it could to try to say that despite the original justification for the attack -- some lame story about an even lamer movie somewhere -- the President did refer to the attack as terrorism, despite the turgid fib being thrown around like a football that it was only some misguided youths run amok.

Then there was Obamacare.  This fiasco is too well known, but it bears repeating:  If you want to keep your doctor, if you want to keep your health plan, you can keep them.  Period.  Except that period didn't mean period, exactly, causing Americans to rush to their dictionaries to see if Bill Clinton was the author.

Then there was the IRS debacle.  Despite the mountain of evidence that conservative groups were being targeted, they weren't -- if you listened to the administration.  Cognitive dissonance is now officially a political tool.

The Bowe Bergdahl swap -- which makes the Herschel Walker trade look good by comparison -- was derided by both the left and the right, yet again professional pinata Ambassador Susan Rice was sent out to tell the American public that the trade was motivated by the concept that Americans don't leave their own behind and that Bergdahl had served with honor and distinction...a claim laughably refuted in the weeks following the trade when a court martial was instituted to investigate charges of desertion.  The military's findings are now in administrative limbo somewhere.

Then came Syria.  It's a confusing situation, to be sure.  But the President decided to draw a red line in the sand that, if crossed, would mean greater American intervention...only that it didn't.  On the heels of that weak-kneed response to a crisis -- together with its tepid approach to the overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya -- ISIS metastasized, and the opportunities for more robust leadership presented themselves.  The only problem with that is that robust is another of those words that have different meanings for different people.

Even though ISIS is the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the administration bends over backwards to remind us that it's not Islam that is committing the atrocities, but a group perverting Islam.  At the same time, it won't hesitate to call it white supremacy when skinheads are involved, although as a white person I'm offended and disgusted by white supremacy, and it won't shrink from targeting right-wing fanatics when addressing potential home-grown terrorism.  In other words, it's OK to use labels sometimes but not others.  The last time I checked, neither the white supremacists nor the right-wing fanatics were beheading or burning its opponents alive.

When twenty-one Coptic Christians were murdered, the administration referred to them as citizens, not Christians.  The administration insists on calling it ISIL, not ISIS, like the rest of the country. Then the half-witted spokesperson from the State Department suggested that we can't kill everyone in ISIL, doggonit, so perhaps we should look at medium- and long-term solutions involving employment opportunities, so these knuckleheads wouldn't turn to terrorism.  When called on that in an interview, she doubled down, suggesting that perhaps this notion was too nuanced for some people.

There you have it, folks!  Finally, an admission from our government:  We're too stupid to know what's going on, they have it all handled and we should just be thankful for their insight.  Of course, Jonathan Gruber prepared us for this; he wasn't as nuanced in his delivery, but he kept it hidden longer.

As someone who's not just fallen off the turnip truck, I'm beyond offended.  The government, after all, is supposed to be by the people, for the people and of the people.  To put it plainly, I'm a people. And although I don't have the high level security clearance to know what the latest intel is, I know a terrorist attack when I see one, I know what desertion is compared to serving with honor and distinction, I know that citizens are Christians too and I know that a jobs program isn't going to stop a terrorist in the short-, medium or long-term.

I'm tired of being treated like a child who has no concept of what is going on.

This administration needs to stop playing word games, to stop parsing sentences with the Bill Clinton Dictionary and to begin talking straight to the American public.

(c) The Truxton Spangler Chronicles