White House Puts its Media Skills to Work on Diplomacy

I think this White House video of Muslim Americans Serving in the U.S. Government is a very clever and effective use of new media to advance US interests around the world. Soft power!


This entry was posted in Politics: International. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to White House Puts its Media Skills to Work on Diplomacy

  1. upside_down says:

    Stop drinking the Obama koolaid.

    1. Essentially, the US government has now produced a video whereby it implies that religious beliefs of certain kinds are promoted by the US government. Under a Bush administration you would be screaming bloody murder over such a video. Now, you blindly walk down the path Obama lays out for you without question. Quite sad.

    Consider, the recent DHS report that announces that we are under a greater threat from Christian and Jewish-based extremism in the US. Why then, does the US government not also produce a video for domestic consumption showing how many Christian, Mormon, and Jews are in the US government? Is such a notion not ridiculously absurd?

    Why are US taxpayer dollars funding this clear violation of the Establishment Clause? At its core, the video promotes Islam, plain and simple. I thought we weren’t abandoning our principles to fight terror, Professor?

    2. Consider the quote of the Justice Department Civil Rights attorney, Bashir, stating her father was born in “Northern Palestine.” Northern Palestine does not exist, only Northern Israel. This is not the least bit disturbing to you, that a US government official apparently does not recognize the existence of Israel? Sends a pretty clear message to Jewish Americans, don’t you think?

    3. Can you coherently explain how this improves the situation in the middle east? Much like an Obama speech, this is nothing more than fluff with absolutely no substance. Tell me exactly how this video leads to Iran ceasing its drive towards holding nuclear weapons? Will it stop Hamas from launching rockets into Israel?

    And while you are at it, explain how Obama’s recent apology tour did not undermine democratic movements in the Arab world? When, exactly, will Saudi Arabia be ruled by anything other than a despotic monarchy? How exactly did it help that Obama (and Bush) continually bestow legitimacy on them?

    I guess we can wait to see if Hezbollah wins the election in Lebanon. If it does, consider Obama’s apology tour a failure.

  2. Randy Paul says:

    Michael,

    I hope you get a better class of troll than this.

  3. Randy Paul says:

    Or at least a troll who knew enough history to realize that Lema Bashir’s father was probably born before 1948, when Israel was not yet a nation and the UK had a mandate over a land that then was called Palestine.

  4. upside_down says:

    Mr. Paul-
    Don’t apologize for a person you don’t even know, and whose mind you cannot read. You don’t know if she was “innocently” referencing a prior name of the area, or was making a highly inflammatory and antisemitic political statement.

    The fact is, someone in the White House reviewed her statement, and thought “that kind of language is exactly what the “moderate” Muslim world wants to hear, i.e. denial of Israel’s legitimate existence.”

  5. Randy Paul says:

    You don’t know if she was “innocently” referencing a prior name of the area, or was making a highly inflammatory and antisemitic political statement.

    Nor do you, but at least mine has a logical explanation while yours merely relies on a fresh ladleful from the bottomless pit of bile that constitutes discourse from the right these days.

    BTW, Hizbollah lost in Lebanon. Are you prepared to acknowledge the success of the president’s trip?

  6. upside_down says:

    “Nor do you, but at least mine has a logical explanation while yours merely relies on a fresh ladleful from the bottomless pit of bile that constitutes discourse from the right these days.”

    If that were true, why not censor the right? Clearly, if your characterization were true, then censorship would be justified. More likely, your choice of language is a reflection of the fact that you really don’t have a good response to the fact that the White House allowed such comments to be promoted to the Muslim world. Reasonable minds must agree that some investigation should be done, not so much concerning that one individual’s views, but rather why the comment was part of the video. Perhaps you’re just not reasonable.

    “BTW, Hizbollah lost in Lebanon. Are you prepared to acknowledge the success of the president’s trip?”

    Obama’s speech might deserve some credit for it, sure. I kind of doubt that Iran will stop meddling in Lebanon, or abandon Hizbollah as a proxy for its war against Israel, but who knows? Maybe Beirut won’t see civil war again.

  7. Randy Paul says:

    If that were true, why not censor the right? Clearly, if your characterization were true, then censorship would be justified.

    Apparently you are unacquainted with the first amendment. I certainly don’t favor censoring the right; quite the opposite: the more they say the greater the hole into which they dig themselves.

    Reasonable minds must agree that some investigation should be done, not so much concerning that one individual’s views, but rather why the comment was part of the video. Perhaps you’re just not reasonable.

    Perhaps you should learn the difference between opinion and fact. You should also probably disabuse yourself of the notion that those who have the temerity to disagree with you are not “reasonable.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.