I will spare you dad's savvy explanation, and, instead, will give you the more educated or professional definition of the word '
dem-a-gogue', as described by most renown dictionaries, to wit:
"a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument." In layman's terms, a political leader who simply tells you what you want to hear. That simple.
From my first formal encounter with the word [demagogue] to now, I also noted the term was invariably associated to dictators, autocrats, tyrants, despots, authoritarian rulers and, needless to say, communists. My familiarity with the term, as such, would only serve me in the years that followed as a tool enabling me to expediently identify these impostors. As expected, Barack Obama was no exception. Right from the start, at his
legendary 2004 Democratic National Convention's keynote address, I sensed this man was a master of demagoguery - a telltale sign, I am sorry to say, of things to come, including but not limited to his iniquitous speech made on September 10th regarding ISIS terrorist threats to the U.S. Talk about demagoguery at its best.
In case you missed it, last Wednesday, president Obama reluctantly took to the airwaves to address the nation announcing his plans: "
to degrade and ultimately destroy the terrorist group known as ISIL". The very first thing that struck me as unique was the president's ingenuous replacement of the acronym ISIS for ISIL. This sudden and abrupt change in the terrorist group's acronym was particularly worrisome as I was convinced this speech, of all things, would be warily crafted to please an agnostic audience. An audience which national polls, published through a secular media, was vehemently portrayed as increasingly disapproving of this president. Matter of fact, I personally thought Obama's speech was all but his way of vowing to the decadent public opinion polls of his failed administration.
No sooner had I began to try and understand the ISIL juxtaposition did it dawn on me that this seemingly inconsequential alteration had a lot more behind it than first met the eye - a vintage Obama habit of feigning the realities of his lamed presidency. As it turned out, the undemanding change of the "S" in ISIS for the "L" in ISIL, dealt, of all things, with a magnanimous concession of territorial control; one where the infamous letter "L" in ISIL, stands for "
The Levant", also known as the Eastern Mediterranean region, which today consists of Cyprus, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and part of southern Turkey, thus by using the revised version of the acronym, the Commander in Chief was, in essence, conceding to ISIS' presence covering a much more complex territorial universe than that formerly confined to Iraq and Syria - a universe preposterously larger and ever more dangerous; one significantly more threatening to our national security.
Hasty flip-flops in Obama's reign of political farces
The irony behind Obama's concession regarding ISIS or ISIL, was, in fact, greater than what we had all anticipated considering that as recently as January 7th, 2014, during an interview with
New Yorker's editor David Remnik, the president disavowed the ISIS threat, characterizing the latter as the equivalent of a "
JV" [Junior Varsity] terrorist organization - for non-sports readers, a characterization which underplayed the terrorist group as an inexperienced "
secondary" team - a radical departure from that offered to Americans in the September 10th speech. It was precisely these kind of hasty flip-flops in Obama's reign of political farces, the ones that have continued to erode into the president's approval ratings; it is these kind of hasty changes in policies and ideologies, the ones leading me to believe that our president has now reached a state of delusional paranoia - one where the man has begun to believe his own lies; one where the man is unable to discern between what is true and what is false; between reality and fiction; between authenticity and idealism. The man is sick, really sick.
Take, for instance, some of the literal components of the September 10th speech and you will soon come upon the greater realization that the president's cognitive and intellectual deterioration have now reached consummate plateaus of incredulousness. For a man who a couple of days back had publicly acknowledged: "
having no strategy to combat ISIS", Obama's speech was nothing short of a travesty to a believing America - an insult, if you will, to the more educated amongst us. To cite Somalia and Yemen, as examples of what America needed to do to combat ISIS, was outright idiotic and insulting. Obama's inference as to the United States' recruitment of a global coalition designed to ultimately destroy ISIS, was in fact, irresponsible - a clear indication that this president just does not know what is going on; a sign of total incompetence and a complete disconnect with reality. No sooner had our president made his unsubstantiated inference of a supporting world coalition, no sooner than the purported members of said "
coalition", announced their unwillingness to cooperate with the U.S., in Obama's proposed air strikes over the region. Turkey's geostrategic importance, having southeast borders with Syria and Iraq, located at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, lent itself as one of the U.S.'s most important and essential allies in the region in the war against ISIS and otherwise all other Islamic terrorists groups in the area, yet this highly critical member of the coalition would at the conclusion of Obama's speech, announce to the world their [Turkey's] reluctance to allow the U.S.'s use of their air bases for the proposed air strikes. Ditto for Egypt who claimed to be busy handling their own problems as well as did Jordan. Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations reportedly gave the U.S., tepid reports to support Obama's air strike strategy, while our European allies including Germany and the United Kingdom, just plainly said they would not support the U.S. - shame on you, Mr. President. It is time, I would assume, for the president to stop fantasizing with our nation's future security with so much at stake.
Our naive Nobel Peace Prize winner, continues to this day to disavow the Islamic nature of ISIS
What really infuriated me, however, was this president's continued demagoguery regarding the issues in general; his failed doctrine of appeasement. Americans, I would ask all of you to please stop wondering why ISIS has resurged as a major threat to the U.S. in their road to becoming a radical terrorist Islamic state. For one, dear friends, our naive Nobel Peace Prize winner, continues to this day to disavow the Islamic nature of ISIS - a parody, if you will to all men of goodwill; to the memory of those beheaded, James Foley, Steven Sotloff and British aid worker David Haines; to U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the three U.S. nationals killed in the Benghazi attack.
Today, our steadfast president would want you to believe he stands ready to conduct air strikes on Syria, without anyone's consent, yet only a few months back our distraught libertarian would be rejecting calls from his top advisors suggesting to arm and train Syrian rebels fighting President Bashar al-Assad and ISIS' chemical warfare causing the death of thousands of innocent civilians - all in the name of a more peaceful world.
Today our hypocritical demagogue tells America he is willing to bypass Congress, if necessary, in order to carry out his mission in an all out effort to make Americans believe he is a man of resolve and determination, while the truth is he dares not go to Congress, as he well knows that midterm elections are forthcoming, hence Congress' response to his proposed air strikes, will certainly take a highly politicized backseat to the ISIS conflict.
All in all, I was really wretched and dejected as I watched this impostor tread softly through a speech exclusively meant to please both supporters and detractors as well. In the end, Obama's stately strategy has been narrowed down to a dismantled coalition of former allies; to an unswerving commitment on his [Obama's] part not to be dragged into a ground war, other than a special non-combat force of 457 service members assigned to support a failing Iraqi and Kurdish quasi-military militia, and, last but not least, to the purported air strikes, presumably to be deployed from friendly air bases of allies now refusing to second our Commander in Chief.
Kudos, President Obama, for your continued show of statesmanship; for your unwavering desire to degrade and destroy ISIL; for your resolute commitment not to be dragged into another ground war; for your amazing display of strength shown in your willingness to bypass Congress; you did take a page or two from those that preceded you, didn't you, sir? And, kudos to all you my fellow Americans who thought your president's speech was truthful and sincere. Kudos to you, the 52% who originally put this man in office. I am to the point where I am beginning to no longer lay blame on anyone else but all of those uninformed Americans who continue to believe in the lies of a consecrated demagogue; to all of you who continue to support a president that has all but desecrated our values, our democracy and the respect we once commanded throughout the world. Our battle today is not with a secular army in uniform, but with an army of animals cowardly willing to behead Americans, just because of their nationality; with an army of animals who chose to cover their faces with hoods, as they dread looking into the eyes of other men - they are, indeed, an army of cowards.
We are at war, President Obama; we are not combating terrorists, sir; we are not just counter-attacking our enemies, sir, we are... at war
And finally, Mr. President, Mr. Nobel Peace Prize winner, it is about time, yes it is, that you, sir, understand and acknowledge publicly, sir, that we are indeed at war, sir. Yes, we are at war, Mr. President. We are at war with the animals that continue to behead good men around the world. We are at war with the same animals that perpetrated 9/11 back in 2001 and those that perpetrated the Benghazi embassy attack on 9/11, of 2012. We are at war, President Obama; we are not combating terrorists, sir; we are not just counter-attacking our enemies, sir, we are... at war. We are at war, sir, and while your expressed desire may be that of degrading and destroying ISIS, as you claimed, your air strikes alone will not do it sir, and you know it as well as we do. To degrade and destroy ISIS or ISIL, will take more than air strikes Mr. President, it will take an unyielding resolution on your part to give-up on demagoguery and your doctrine of conciliatory appeasement, once and for all. It will take, sir, our ground attack as well as our air strikes. We are not being dragged into a ground war, sir, we are already in a war direly in need of a ground attack support and, even though you could potentially lose your party's bid for re-election come 2016, it would be a small price to pay, I may add, for sparing humanity from subjugating the world to the evils posed by a herd of assassins whom we have kindheartedly chosen to call the ISIS terrorists.
May God save us all. May God save America.
