October 17, 2012

Who here thinks hillary clinton saying "the buck stops with me" was a set

up so Obama could step up and slam dunk "I am totally responsible". She set him up for the commander in chief close.

October 12, 2012

Yup. They can't win if they run against Obama so they have been running against

Communism here, or running the Clintons against Obama in previous months. They put Romney up against Obama in an ad? They lose.

October 12, 2012

His body language is the narrative of the debate it is so great.

October 10, 2012

I think Jihad is a general term that means struggle. Here is wikipedia on the subject.

Jihad (English pronunciation: /dʒɪˈhɑːd/; Arabic: جهاد? ǧihād [dʒiˈhæːd]), an Islamic term, is a religious duty of Muslims. In Arabic, the word jihād translates as a noun meaning "struggle". Jihad appears 41 times in the Quran and frequently in the idiomatic expression "striving in the way of God (al-jihad fi sabil Allah)".[1][2][3] A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid; the plural is mujahideen. Jihad is an important religious duty for Muslims. A minority among the Sunni scholars sometimes refer to this duty as the sixth pillar of Islam, though it occupies no such official status.[4] In Twelver Shi'a Islam, however, Jihad is one of the 10 Practices of the Religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad


I think the people who did the original ad were well aware that people would conflate "Jihad" with "muslim". The two words go together. If the original ad had used the word "terrorism" that would have been much clearer that they did not mean to include all muslims in the ad. It is one of those vague messages that people will project meaning onto. That being the case, people have every right to defend muslims from such a slur because they were a target, even if the authors claim it was only military terrorism against civilians that they meant. If they meant that, why didn't they say that more clearly?

October 9, 2012

Romney will go on and on about women this and that in the middle east.

Obama is in a tough position because he has been dealing with the people in the middle east as they and their beliefs exist today while Romney has not had to deal with them so he can paint a picture of his foreign policy that helps women and girls a great deal and a hell of a lot more than the people of the middle east are willing to move today. Obama is tied down by the reality on the ground for the last 4 years. Romney is free to try and get the women's vote in the USA through the very real threat of what does or could happen to women's rights in middle east. I hope Obama can get out of such a trap. It goes without saying that Obama wants great women's rights in the Middle East but that message may be lost if Obama isn't careful.