Following up on the terrorist attacks of this past weekend,
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said at a press conference, “We are in
a narrative battle.”
Perhaps Josh Earnest is vying to become Secretary of Words in Hillary
Clinton’s administration, if she is elected. If the United States truly is
engaged in a narrative battle, we don’t seem to be winning. We are obviously
going to need much better writers.
Jumping to conclusions?
Every time a bomb goes off in the middle of a major city or
an apparent Jihadist tries to kill large numbers of people in a mall, or in a
subway, or in a nightclub, or in some other busy area, some high government
official - mayor, governor, whatever - immediately urges people not to jump to
conclusions about the culprits or any connection to Islamic terrorism.
People like President Obama and Secretary Clinton always stay
very cool, calm, and collected as they read their comments off Teleprompters. Why
can’t they get angry? When this stuff happens, I’d like to see someone get
hotheaded and pound on the lectern for a change. That would be refreshing! And
why not jump to a conclusion once in a while? Where would be the tremendous
harm in that?
After Benghazi, President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton,
and everyone else in that administration jumped to the conclusion that the murderous
attack, which killed Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, was due to
the theatrical release of a terrible, horrible movie that cast Muhammed in a
less than favorable light. (The President and his team did a fine job of
selling that narrative too.) So, where was the harm in jumping to that erroneous
conclusion? What difference did it make?
I’m Danny Murphy and I approve of this rant.
#MakeAmericaLaughAgain
No comments:
Post a Comment