“Obama speech on Libya doesn’t satisfy all critics”

From the Washington Post @ 3:46PM on 28 March 2011  here

Whoever writes their headlines has a firm grasp of the obvious.  They proceed to inform the public that Republican leaders in the Senate have pointed out that Obama has outlined no timetable for a U. S. exit, irrespective of the shift to NATO leadership in the effort.

And then there is this gem:

How those guidelines will shape Obama’s response to future civil conflicts, especially those underway in the Middle East, is unclear. His senior advisers say the American public should not expect consistency in Obama’s policy toward popular uprisings and autocratic governments.

Where and when did anyone conceive of the notion that ANYTHING ends on a timetable? Why does this meme appear anywhere in the media? Has no one heard of the fat lady? And when is consistency toward the middle east even a good idea? Are we babies?

The ‘story’ continues:

Practical questions also remain about the Libyan operation, including some being raised by Democrats.

Those revolve around Libya’s rebel opposition, which is seeking to topple Gaddafi after 41 years in power. Little is known about the movement, particularly at the rank-and-file level, and fears are rising that some among them may be Islamist extremists.

Someone is always afraid of something. That’s why we’re the land of the free and the home of the brave. I am pretty sure there are lots of ‘Islamist extremists’ among the rebels, especially since Gaddafi insists that they’re in the mix. How many different ways are out there to spell this name? I never get it right from one typing to the next.

Is there a substantive difference between ‘islamist extremist’ and ‘islamic extremist’, and if there is, why didn’t they explain it? There is a difference to me: islamist is a noun and islamic is an adjective. So the former is a compounded noun, a double-noun, and the latter is a modified noun. Did they mean this to be different, or did they just screw up? I vote for the latter.

Other than quotes from the usual suspects, there is not one useful piece of information or analysis in this article. This is not journalism or even punditry; it’s a fan dance (which sadly, is an insult to the art of fandancery).

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: