Obama and Radical Islam

Obama explained why he does not use the term: Radical Islam. “It would not change anything in the fight against terrorism.” I could not disagree more.

For some reason Democrats and liberals alike have a way of trying to change the meaning of words or reword phrases to be politically correct. There are many dangers in this type of behavior. For instance, the neighbors of the San Bernardino terrorists refused to call authorities about strange happenings because they were afraid they would be labeled as a racist (not only does Obama refuse to call Radical Islam what it is, what’s worse he race baits). If Obama called out Radical Islam, then maybe vigilant people would not be afraid to call authorities on Muslims. And just maybe the San Bernardino terrorist attack could have been avoided. If Nidal Hasan would have been labeled as a radical Islamic terrorist instead of his Fort Hood massacre being labeled as “workplace violence”, then maybe people would not cave to political correctness. Heck, anybody else other than a Muslim committing such an act of violence would be labeled as a terrorists – similar to the Charleston massacre (and rightly so).

Obama shows his hypocrisy by calling out issues with Christianity time and time again. If he can call out one religion for its flaws then he must be consistent. This hypocrisy only polarizes and divides the American public.

By failing to label Radical Islam then the solution to the problem fails to address the issue at hand. For example, the liberal solution to the Radical Islamic attacks in the U.S. is to have more gun control (never let a national calamity go to waste). Unfortunately, the gun control legislation proposed would not stop any attacks. It is also important to note, that most terrorist attacks do not even use guns. In other words, according to Obama and liberals, the Orlando attack was not the fault of Radical Islam, but instead it was the fault of our system that allowed the terrorist to legally buy a gun. Unfortunately, if the FBI did its job and followed through with dozens of complaints and the findings by Disney World, then the attack could have been avoided completely.

Since we refuse to call Radical Islam what it is, it provides cover for law abiding Muslims. It allows Muslims to wrongly look the other way and fail to speak out against this extremist branch of their religion. Law abiding Muslims could be helpful in trying to identify terrorists and putting forth programs to help prevent terrorism. But since we fail to identify their religion, they do not feel obligated to defend their practices.

By labeling something what it is, is honest, accountable, and responsible. What is wrong with that?

One thing that Obama and Democrats have done – they have cemented the legacy of Bush. While Democrats (under Obama’s tutelage) use terrible disasters to divide and conquer the American public to get their agenda pushed through Congress whereas Bush united Americans following such disasters.