What's In A Name

Suspected unconstitutional president Obama, all the news channels - even FOX - refer to the Iranian Ayatollah as the "Supreme Leader".

This Ayatollah, this old man who hates all things modern and western, claims that everything he does and says is divinely directed.

Well. If he's being divinely directed, then he's not the supreme leader. He's just what he appear so be... a religious hardliner with way too much unchallengeable authority.

What we should be calling him is what he really is... a religious dictator.

So why aren't we?

Because Obama calls him "The Supreme Leader", and our fellating national press says whatever he says. The president of the United States - legal or not - constantly refers to the dictator of an enemy state as "The Supreme Leader".

Does that bother you? That our president, who claims to be a Christian... but having known Muslim roots, having been taught in Muslim schools as a child, a man who bows to Muslim authorities, does it bother you that he refers to an Ayatollah as "The Supreme Leader"?

It ought to.

No one in our government should ever refer to this guy as a "Supreme" anything.

Why?

A billion and a half Muslims listen every day to the president of the United States referring to their Ayatollah as "The Supreme Leader". Every time Obama does this, he further empowers them, he re-enforces their attitudes of them being right and us wrong. It strengthens their view that Obama is nothing more than another subordinate and the we - as his subjects - need "correcting".

Obama is just being polite, you say. He's being civil to the head of another nation. Chamberlain treated Hitler with respect... You know how that worked out.

Words do have meaning in the rest of the world and carry consequences.. even if they don't appear to in the United states.