It has been noted for some months now that President Obama tends to use the phrase “extremists” or at worst “violent extremists” rather than “terrorists.” This has been a sharp contrast to the Bushian “War on terror” mantra, and naturally been used as a slam against Obama, as if he were endeavoring either to ignore threats against America or–even better–placate America’s enemies.
Normally I’m not a big supporter of the watering down of our language. In this instance, though, it seems incredibly obvious to me why Obama has embraced this change in terminology: It’s because there’s no reason for him to do the job of America’s enemies for them.
Being a terrorist isn’t just about blowing stuff and people up. It’s about getting people to live in a state of constant fear and edginess. Bush thoroughly cooperated with this mindset, readily speaking the language of terror during every speech, every debate, every public appearance, keeping Americans in a constant state of unease and war footing so that…well, so that he could stay in office, I suppose. Just as Cheney and would-be GOP presidential candidates continue to remind Americans why they should be terrified, doubtlessly delighting bin Laden and his ilk in the process. “Extremists,” even “violent extremists,” is simply a less scary term. Obama appears to have made the conscious decision not to encourage Americans to be in a constant state of fear. At the very least, he doesn’t seem to want to contribute to it through word choice that emphasizes terror, terror, terror. I think he deserves praise for that, not condemnation.
PAD
• 
Recent Comments