Presidents speech tonight

President Obama's speech on Sunday night was his opportunity to announce changes in his policies for fighting the terrorism that's growing around the world and has recently spread to the United States.

But he announced no real changes.

We must be careful not to say bad things about Muslims, because we might offend Muslims who aren't radical Islamic terrorists.

We need more "gun control" laws imposed on law-abiding people in America, even if the laws he proposes wouldn't have done anything to stop the terrorist attacks we have seen recently.

We will keep hoping that other countries start sending troops to fight on the ground against ISIS, but we won't send any. Except possibly a small number of Special Forces.

---------------------------------------------------

Obama speech: Reassurances about ISIS fall flat in Oval Office address | Fox News

Obama speech: Reassurances about ISIS fall flat in Oval Office address

By Christian Whiton
Published December 06, 2015
FoxNews.com

In the wake of the worst terrorist attack in America since 9/11, President Obama could have used his Oval Office address on Sunday night to announce different policies than the ones that have obviously failed to keep America safe from radical Islam.

He could have explained why a long-feared arrival of low-tech, soft-target terrorism had occurred, and what he would do to rectify the problem—beginning with apologizing for giving a U.S. visa to a jihadist from Pakistan and agreeing to stop his plan to bring more Syrian refugees here.

He could have announced a plan to undermine the ideology of our enemies—radical Islam—which impelled Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik to wage war in San Bernardino last week.

Instead he did what he always does with security threats: blame others for his administration’s lapses and do the minimum to appear to be reacting to them without actually doing anything.

The president instinctively wants to react to every security threat by assailing his domestic opponents.

In calling for Congress to ban those on the no-fly list from buying guns, Obama is attempting one of his trademark shifts in blame for problems he has created. The president instinctively wants to react to every security threat by assailing his domestic opponents.

Even if his proposed ban and other gun control measures were in place, they would not have stopped the attack in San Bernardino. Recent attacks like those in Paris show that jihadists have little problem overcoming gun laws, which serve mainly to disarm the law-abiding. Obama could also look to his adopted hometown of Chicago to see that gun control doesn’t work.

Obama’s moralizing about avoiding “suspicion and hate” implied, once again, that Americans are bigoted — another attempt to shift blame. It echoed a statement last week by Attorney General Loretta Lynch that the government would prosecute anti-Muslim speech that “edges toward violence,” whatever that means.
 
We will keep hoping that other countries start sending troops to fight on the ground against ISIS, but we won't send any. Except possibly a small number of Special Forces.

"Whatever Obama is doing, we are against that."

By the critical tone of your post, I take it you favor sending in more "boots on the ground" and the necessary minimum of ten years of occupation of Syria.

It's funny how I can never get a "yes" or "no" out of you rubes, though.
 
Since ISIS is just an offshoot of Syrian freedom-fighters
That's a lie, as usual. ISI/ISIS/ISIL/IS is the 2006 offshoot of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, AQI.
Oh....really?

But......but.....you fuckers said al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq!!!!!:ack-1:

Now you do?

How fucking convenient!!!!:anj_stfu:
Again we see how the worthless lying scum on the Right lie by changing the CONTEXT. We said there was no Al-Qaeda in 2001 in Iraq. AQI did not begin to appear in Iraq until Bush's adventure of avenging his father in 2003.

CON$ are the lowest lying scum to ever crawl out of a sewer!!!
 
One has to wonder if Mac1958 will call out his conservative brethren on the outrageous lies in the OP. He being such an independent and all....
Wow, I remain amazed (and impressed!) at how far up in the heads of the Regressive Left I reside.

Tell you what. I'll be more than happy to provide my opinion - I do realize how important it is - if you will kindly answer two quick & easy questions:
  • First, why do you keep lying about my political affiliation, precisely?
  • Second, why should I communicate with someone who so often lies about me?
Then I'll be more than happy to bestow my clearly treasured opinion upon you.

Thanks!
.
Hello?
.
 

Forum List

Back
Top