Following is the text of President Obama’s weekly address to the nation:

Hi, everybody.  This weekend, our hearts are with the people of San Bernardino—another American community shattered by unspeakable violence.  We salute the first responders—the police, the SWAT teams, the EMTs—who responded so quickly, with such courage, and saved lives.  We pray for the injured as they fight to recover from their wounds . . .

Most of all, we stand with 14 families whose hearts are broken.  We’re learning more about their loved ones—the men and women, the beautiful lives, that were lost.  They were doing what so many of us do this time of year—enjoying the holidays.  Celebrating with each other.  Rejoicing in the bonds of friendship and community that bind us together, as Americans.  Their deaths are an absolute tragedy, not just for San Bernardino, but for our country.

We’re also learning more about the killers.  And we’re working to get a full picture of their motives—why they committed these revolting acts.  It’s important to let the investigators do their job.  We need to know all the facts.  And at my direction, federal law enforcement is helping in every way that they can.  We’re going to get to the bottom of this.

It is entirely possible that these two attackers were radicalized to commit this act of terror. And if so, it would underscore a threat we’ve been focused on for years—the danger of people succumbing to violent extremist ideologies.  We know that ISIL and other terrorist groups are actively encouraging people—around the world and in our country—to commit terrible acts of violence, often times as lone wolf actors.  And even as we work to prevent attacks, all of us—government, law enforcement, communities, faith leaders—need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to these hateful ideologies.

More broadly, this tragedy reminds us of our obligation to do everything in our power, together, to keep our communities safe.  We know that the killers in San Bernardino used military-style assault weapons—weapons of war—to kill as many people as they could.  It’s another tragic reminder that here in America it’s way too easy for dangerous people to get their hands on a gun.

For example, right now, people on the No-Fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun.  That is insane.  If you’re too dangerous to board a plane, you’re too dangerous, by definition, to buy a gun.  And so I’m calling on Congress to close this loophole, now.  We may not be able to prevent every tragedy, but—at a bare minimum—we shouldn’t be making it so easy for potential terrorists or criminals to get their hands on a gun that they could use against Americans.

Today in San Bernardino, investigators are searching for answers.  Across our country, our law enforcement professionals are tireless.  They’re working around the clock—as always—to protect our communities.  As President, my highest priority is the security and safety of the American people.  This is work that should unite us all—as Americans—so that we’re doing everything in our power to defend our country.  That’s how we can honor the lives we lost in San Bernardino.  That’s how we can send a message to all those who would try to hurt us.  We are Americans.  We will uphold our values—a free and open society.  We are strong.   And we are resilient.  And we will not be terrorized.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

86 COMMENTS

  1. The real first responders were the victims, not the police or EMTs. Too bad the first responders were unarmed in the state of Comifornia. Disarming victims will not stop terrorists nor murderers.

    “If you’re too dangerous to board a plane, you’re too dangerous, by definition, to buy a gun.”
    No, if you are too dangerous to board a plane, you are too dangerous to be walking freely in this country.

    • Still wondering if he would say people on the “no fly” list should be subject to warrantless searches of their homes, preventive detention without a warrant, denial of counsel if arrested, being held incommunicado, etc, etc…

      • I see his lips moving but all I can hear our head a-hole neighbor needing a job (potus) say is “I can’t be the tyrannical dictator I identify as, as long as you have your own weapons, so I’ve sic’d your other a-hole neighbors needing jobs (your state’s representatives) to hep me do that.”

        So, at least return the favor, call your reps, snd demand a push-back on this by at least 130%.
        FU ON THE NO FLY LIST, the tip of the spear there is homeland sevurity through the TSA.
        FU ON GUN CONTROL, we need to have some immediate repeals, tax breaks, tax incentives, etc.
        NO ONE CAN PROTECT YOU ON THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL. Maybe not even you, don’t let them tie your di<K to you ankle and call it 'keeping you from bumping your head on something'.
        Further F ALL OF YOU IF YOU GIVE US THIS OR WORSE NEXT NOV.

        • John Cornyn(R_TX) offered amendment to put a 3 day hold on gun purchasers who’s name appear on these secret lists, to give the FBI time to check and see if the person actually trying to buy a firearm really is a terrorist, and the Democrats shot it down.

          Chuck Grassley(R-IA) introduced am amendment to make gun trafficking a federal crime, (I thought it already was), along with improvements to allow military spouses to acquire CFL’s in the states where the spouse’s duty station is located, and that was shot down too.

          As Senator Cruz pointed out the other day, the democrats are actively courting the felon vote. Vigorous prosecution of gun law violations, such as straw purchasers are neither desired or wanted by the democrats. A convicted felon, in most states, loses his voting privileges for the term of sentence, and in some states for good, until restored by gubernatorial pardon, or the decisions of pardon/clemency boards.

          The democrats have taken their party so far to the fringes, they can no longer sustain it among the regular population. They need to import voters, (illegal immigration & amnesty), and make sure that all of the felons get voting privileges restored as soon as possible.

          All you need do is look at the Badger Firearms lawsuit, and the murder of Officer Sherry Orozco, two cases recently in the news.

          In the Badger case, the straw purchaser received a 2 year prison sentence, and was back out on the streets before the lawsuit made it to trial.

          In the case of the woman who bought the gun that killed Ofc. Orozco for her vicious gang banger boyfriend, who texted her as she was buying the Glock, to remind her to pick up a 50 round drum magazine, too, she was sentenced to six months house arrest, and no jail time at all. By an Obama appointed judge…

          Even in Chicago, for all their bluff and bluster, straw purchasers rarely see jail/prison time, and when they do, it’s never close to the five year sentence. They seem to think that being a felon is punishment enough.

          Want to see firearm crime plummet in this country? Obama could do it, by executive order, anytime he wants. Her could direct Loretta Lynch to direct ALL U.S, Attorneys to vigorously prosecute all straw purchasers, and seek the maximum 5 year federal sentence. The only plea bargaining involved should be home close to your home you do your five years.. Go to trial, get convicted, and you should do your time as far away from you friends and family that it will take a plane ticket or a week on a Greyhound bus for your loved ones to pay you a visit.

          In the two above cases, the gun didn’t travel a long circuitous path though gun shows or several private sales, it went straight from the straw purchaser’s hands to the shooter. If Quayfeema begins to realize that buying Dontrelle a gun ‘coz he can’t buy his own, is gonna land her in prison for 5 years, and her kids in foster care, she won’t be so quick to do it.

          If Obama did that, (and he never would), firearm crime, especially in the big democrat run cities would drop, not completely, and not all at once, but it would make a huge difference. He’d be a hero to the Republicans, and the poor honest folks who live in these crime ridden cesspools. The only ones who would object would be the democrat party, the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, and all of the other social justice warriors out there.

          Do that, along with 50 state concealed carry, and our crime rate will be lower than half of Europe. The democrats simply want everyone to be able to vote, and no one to be able to own a gun, except the special people, their connected friends, and of course their armed bodyguards.

  3. If you’re too dangerous to buy a gun why are you free to walk the streets?

    Talk about global warming, you putz. Maybe your dingbat base will respond better.

  4. I’m actually really surprised they haven’t just lied and said one or both of these two were on the no-fly list.

    No doubt the next one will be whether true or not.

    • HOW MANY TIMES DOES THE PRESIDENT (AND YOUR GOV’T) HAVE TO SAY THAT HE CAN’T PROTECT YOU, BEFORE YOU BELIEVE HIM???

      FU<K PEOPLE WAKE UP!!!,

      it's been a mantra since before we were even a country.

      If anyone's position is that they 'cannot protect you unless you do [fill in the blank]' only the first part of that is true.

  5. Free and open??

    The terrorist watch list isn’t even free and open. It’s closed and secretive.

    The terrorist watch list – more precrime, speculative, guilty until proven innocent nonsense. Completely unamerican.

  6. The President no longer speaks to the American People , only to his true believers. He is his own Baghdad Bob. (Reference to Sean Davis)

    • Opening a speech at this time in the history of the world and faced with a declared and actual jihad against our very way of life the POTUS opens a speech with “Hi, everybody”? WTF?

    • You are correct sir! I have been wondering how anyone could graduate high school much less Harvard and de Bar with so little knowledge of the application of Constitutional rights and Supreme Court rulings. I know that since I was educated Tubbman has become a bigger player than Franklin in the founding of our country but whodda thought that established law would vanish?

  7. I would say this is grasping for straws. Yes. It’s a terrible idea for citizens of the U.S. and an extremely clever way to confiscate guns. But it shows the desperation of people who want to erode the 2nd Amendment.

    And thanks California. The first responders were nothing more than victims thanks to your restricive government.

  8. “A free and open society” as long as you dont say anything we deem offensive or do anything that makes me uncomfortable because I very thin skin and have no individual responsibility.

    Big Poppa government is supposed to do everything for me.

  9. If someone gets on a plane for the first time, suddenly realizes they have an acute fear of flying, and starts freaking out as the plane takes off, forcing the plane to land, do they get put on the no fly list? Does this then mean their 2nd amendment rights should be taken away?
    Rhetoric at its finest, Mr. President.

    • All you need to know about the no-fly list is that at one point Senator Ted Kennedy was on it. Granted, it was an error, but we all know that the government almost never makes errors, right?

      • It was no error and he only got removed because he was a Kennedy. Teddy Kennedy is indirectly responsible for hundreds of American deaths via the liberal laws that he authored, and directly responsible for at least two. He did more damage to America than any foreign terrorist….

      • Ted Kennedy was on the no fly list due to his killer Oldsmobile! It killed more people (women) than most people’s guns ever did.

  10. “If you’re too dangerous to board a plane, you’re too dangerous, by definition, to buy a gun.”

    1. If you’re too dangerous to board a plane, you are too dangerous to be loose on the streets. Guns? They have access to all the material in the world to orchestrate and execute terrorist attacks. Gasoline, fireworks, pressure cookers, hardware stores, vehicles, etc. So if that is the case the government has failed at putting known dangerous criminals behind bars and keeping them there.

    -If you aren’t too dangerous to be free in the streets then you shouldn’t be able to be put on a no-fly list without due process. So if that is the case, the government has failed at protecting the rights of presumably innocent citizens.

    ISIS is probably telling their soldiers to use AR-15s in these attacks because they know the president and politicians will tie themselves in a debilitating knot over that detail, fixate on nothing else, and leave the rest of the road wide open for more attacks.

  11. I flew in August. Guess I’m not on a no fly list. Can I have my dangerous military style weapon of war now?

  12. Im creating a new pharse

    If we can ban “assault weapons”
    Then why can’t we ban “assault religion”
    #Assaultreligiondoesntmatter
    If religious doctrine is violent and includes convert or die, it needs to be banned.

    • Ban militant-style assault religions! Even if it’s not the same kind of religion that militants use, if it shares 3 or more features with a militant religion it’s too dangerous and should be banned!

  13. Most people will miss it, but this may actually be his most dangerous comment:

    “As President, my highest priority is the security and safety of the American people.”

    Why don’t you just allow us to protect ourselves? We’re capable of it if you’d just quit shamelessly using every despicable excuse to disarm us.
    Your highest priority should be to uphold the Constitution, not screw things up as Commander in Chief in times of war, veto laws which the majority of Americans are against and act as our honorable ambassador to foreign dignitaries (I’m sure there are other constitutional duties I’m forgetting).
    Your highest priority is NOT to create a nanny state where everyone is under the delusion than we can be physically, financially and emotionally secure under the rule of our benefactors.

    • The oath of the office of president:
      “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

      What he’s doing is an end-run around the Constitution, Relying on his Cult of Personality to get away with it.

  17. I’d believe his statement about the no-fly list if it wasn’t for the fact that children, elderly and other random people were put on that list because of clerical errors.

  18. “It is entirely possible that these two attackers were radicalized to commit this act of terror” – I think at this point we can say that it is a certainty, not a mere possibility

    “It’s another tragic reminder that here in America it’s way too easy for dangerous people to get their hands on a gun.” – you mean the benchmark for common sense gun control was still “too easy” for people to get weapons to commit murder? Assault rifle ban, magazine limits, waiting periods, background checks on all sales, etc. is too easy? I would like to hear a proposal that would have prevented these attacks while respecting the 2A

    “And we will not be terrorized.” – so I will be using a secret list to bypass any semblance of due process to strip Americans of their right to bear arms

  20. The figures in power speak, yet the ones broadcasting the snippets never challenge the claims. The unchallenged is accepted as bonafide. Yesterday at work, an assistant manager who had engaged me about firearm training and licensing some time back, mentioned to some subordinates that he would take a day off this coming week for the prerequisite training. The response from the others was exactly what I expected, considering POTUS’ thanksgiving request. The ladies-one a fiercely liberal french woman, the other a NYC transplant questioned and berated the need for more firearms. I’m pretty sure that even though this gentleman is getting this pressure from his subs and his fiancee, he will continue on his quest to join the POTG, time will tell. Black Friday demonstrated, once again, that Americans do not feel the same as the press or the anti-2a politicians would have us believe. There will always be two sides (at the very least) to any given argument. For one of the sides to suggest that doing away with the rivals or their rivals’ rights collectively, because they disagree or feel uncomfortable over those rights is anathema to what America is supposed to stand for. In a rational nation, those who benefit from the 1st would defend the 2nd.

  22. “We need to know all the facts” Since when Barry/first to jump in with stupid?

    The mainstream dimtards have written Barack Hussein as irrelevant and ineffectual in further advancing the marxist progressive agenda, He has to go more wacko to stay “relevant” to them. After all his “library”/monument has not yet been constructed.

    We Will Not Be Terrorized Useless jackwagon has terrorized the nation for 7years. The next year is likely to make our eyes bleed and heads explode.

  23. Obama is the radical islamists favorite president of all time. He is doing his best to make it easy for them

  24. I was flagged for “no-fly” a few years back. Found out when I attempted to check-in for a business trip.
    Why was I on the list? Seems I had the same name as some other actively suspected person.
    This proposed restriction by the POTUS is going to affect thousands of law-abiding citizens.

    • Divide and conquer, death by a thousand cuts. He has caused more division in this country than anyone before him, think this maybe was part of the master plan??

    • Apparently, there are a lot of people of Irish ancestry, with typical common Irish names that get flagged because their name is the same as an IRA bomber from 20-30 years ago.

  25. I never knew that weapons of war had bullet buttons 🙂 but, but, but…it looked just like the gun in Kerry’s Vietnam pictures, Dear Leader. Yes, all the guns were black so they must have evil intentions Sarc!

  26. I’m beginning to think that the useless empty suit in the White House and the useless empty pantsuit that wants to replace him are one and the same person with different plumbing. Maybe.

  27. How many other civil rights should be suppressed if one is found to be on a no fly list? Assembly? Speech? Religion? Search and seizure? Self defense/bear arms? Press? Perhaps they should always have troops quartered in their residences? No trial, no due process?

    Why stop at one? If we decided that any are ok to be usurped then shouldn’t the whole package be revoked? And if the even one can be revoked than what is the point in pretending anymore? Why not just admit that people are given excessive bail and fines, detained, searched, disappeared, tortured, no speedy trial, perhaps no trial, denied assembly, press, redress of grievances, no right to arms or self defense…

    If we are going to have a constitution and a bill of rights why trample on them? To what end other than tyranny?

    Why do we all keep pretending? Is it that it hasn’t hit home yet, hasn’t come home to roost? Are we too comfortable, willing to endure it because it doesn’t weigh on us directly? At what point do we organize and do something different? And if we do what does it look like? Will it be top down, authoritarian, hierarchical? Will there be unaccountable authority? Will we make it worse? Will there be room for most or will it be so sectarian that sides are drawn between family and divisions of divisions? Will it be simply removing the state or would it have to be everyone? What common principals could we rally round.

    I’m not religious, I am anti statist, I want horizontal personal, social and economic relationships and federated metropolises based in mutual aid, solidarity, free association… I want equality in these relationships (not of endowment) such that we never organize a structure whereby one can consolidate and wield power over others. To the greatest extent possible, I want to remove violence, coercion and oppression from all of our relationships by dismantling hierarchies and power structures that allow rule of one over another … would there be room for me? If others like me formed a consensual living situation/city based in these principals would there be room for that? Right now there is not.

    For 25-30 years now, this situation has been feeling more ominous, more dangerous, present in a way that feels as though the wolves are breathing right through the gates. It feels bad, and the facade and pretending makes it so gross, dystopian and otherworldly. I sometimes wish it would just break so we can get it over with, so we can find out if human nature tends more towards fascism, oppression and tyranny or liberty, free association and anti authoritarianism. Every president, every bureaucrat, every statist looks like a phantom/robot/automaton ready at any moment to change into the gestapo. Every cop looks like the future guardian of gulags. Sometimes it is all so surreal…

    Mostly everyone is just going about their daily lives and all the functionaries are just people with families and jobs and just getting by and living life like you or I.

    But there is something beneath, something lurking… It’s been said that civil wars are often a longtime coming and stem from a collective human feeling of inevitable apocalypse that brews for years until we decide suddenly that its time to cleanse. I’ve read that this country had been gripped by a collective feeling of end times/Armageddon for a while prior to the civil war and that it in large part was the contributing factor making it possible.

    I just don’t want my children to live in those times. I wish that everyone would step back from the edge and that we could somehow reel the state back in and follow the Bill of Rights and Constitution above all else. I have a feeling that my rifle will always need be ready.

    Just needed to get that off my chest and out into the digital ether…

    • I totally get what you are saying. For things to calm down and back away from potential mass civil uprising, I believe the government needs to be the first to back down, back off, and start following the constitution.
      They have long forgotten that they are our servants, not the other way around.

  29. “We’re also learning more about the killers. And we’re working to get a full picture of their motives—why they committed these revolting acts. It’s important to let the investigators do their job. We need to know all the facts. And at my direction, federal law enforcement is helping in every way that they can. We’re going to get to the bottom of this.“

    They are dead, so what exactly is there to get to the bottom of?

    I realized after 9-11 that the US is really good at ‘investigation after the fact.’ It’s institutionalized and actually appears to be part of the cultural fabric. We like to wring a problem to death, even after it is done and over with and knowing all the why’s in the world won’t change that fact.

    Yes, there’s the argument that knowing “why” can help prevent it in the future. Only, it never does. Knowing why some uncle killed a nephew over the TV remote on Thanksgiving does nothing to bring the nephew back, and it does nothing to stop the next heated crime of passion family dispute that sadly ends in bloodshed.

    Knowing why THESE two people did what they did will, if history is any guide at all, have little bearing on why the NEXT attack occurs. Lumping it under some huge, vague umbrella terms like “terrorism” or “workplace violence” or whatever does not change the basic fact that we always seem to be chasing yesterday’s news rather than facing the real world today.

    • Those aloha snackbar twerps will be counted in the annual stats of deaths due to gun violence compiled by MDA.

    • “We’re going to get to the bottom of this.“

      That means: This is somehow the fault of America and it’s Citizens and we’re going to make them pay…

  32. Yep, president zero strikes again. One of the few things to look forward to is his last day in office. I’m seriously having myself a steak that day. Let’s make his last year a hard one by doubling down on memberships to national gun rights organizations and your most effective state organizations. Literally, the anti-rights folks are grasping at straws.

  33. Does he know that you can get on the no fly list just for having a name like Hussein?

  34. It is entirely possible that these two attackers were radicalized to commit this act of terror. Gee, President Obvious, you really think these people might be terrorists? Might be a workplace dispute.

  35. people on the No-Fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun. That is insane. If you’re too dangerous to board a plane, you’re too dangerous, by definition, to buy a gun.
    ….and all of this is done without due process on an arbitrary bureaucratic whim resulting in more unconstitutional acts by thugs of the Union of Soviet Socialist States.

  36. Dear TTAG,

    I think your translation service is not working. You missed the beginning and ending sentences.

    Barry opened by stating “To the most merciful and prophet Muhammed from whom all blessings flow.” He closed by shouting “ALLAH AKBHAR”

    just saying.

  38. Right now, I think the only people in the world that have abythingto fear from this guy are Constitutionalist Americans.

  39. “That is insane. If you’re too dangerous to board a plane, you’re too dangerous, by definition, to buy a gun. And so I’m calling on Congress to close this loophole, now. We may not be able to prevent every tragedy, but—at a bare minimum—we shouldn’t be making it so easy for potential terrorists or criminals to get their hands on a gun that they could use against Americans.”

    Above is the nub of the argument that might persuade persuadable people. Stated plainly, the argument is:

    1) Implied – there’s no up side to citizens having guns.

    2) Vaguely alluded to – and there may be some down side.

    3) So, simply take them away – no cost or burden imposed – when there might be any risk at all.

    And some persuadable people will crack under an onslaught of repetition – the big lie. So, what to do?

    1) Put the up side to citizens having guns out there. Relentlessly, regularly, as a drumbeat, so it becomes “common knowledge” and “common sense”, so that people *feel* that their good neighbors having guns makes them safer.

    You won’t win against essentially an emotional argument – somebody got killed, we feel bad, here’s the culprit, let’s do something – with reason at that moment. You’ll win with a competing emotion.

    2) Put the down side of restricting arms for citizens out there, just as above. Talk about last-ditch self-protection by mothers in closets after they already fled from home invaders. Talk about race-based gun laws as a means of keeping black people disempowered, for decades. And use of firearms, often in collusion with the local Boss Hog, against civil rights activists in the 1960s – activists many of whom armed themselves, to make the space in which to speak.

    And talk about summary judgment, crappy lists, Kafka-esque entanglements. Talk about grandmothers, kids, and of course Ted Kennedy = “You mean that list? BTW, can I put you on it? Oh, cops and similar? So, can the beat cop who has a beef with a local black kid name the kid, enlisting the rest of the apparatus to keep the oppressed, oppressed?”

    0) And manage the emotion they are trying to hijack. So orient the caring to the harmed, and what we can do for them. Orient the anger to the bad actors. And constantly, “We’re required to think, clearly. Our caring requires us to be as effective as we can be.”

    No, President Obama,

    We will not be terrorized. We will not be terrorized, even by an act of terrorism in the continental US, which you have barely, belatedly been willing to name as such. We will help the harmed. We will pursue those who did this, and who put them up to this. We will respect and honor the people who made this less of a tragedy than it might have been, and learn from their example. And we will do this calmly, rationally, and implacably, not letting the terrorists stampede us into doing something pointless, or counter-productive, or damaging to the institutions and values that they so dislike.

    No, we will not abandon due process, rule of law, or individual civil rights, in emotional response to a terrorist event. We will not be terrorized.

    (Although you seem a bit wee-weed up, or trying to get other people so.)

    • This^^^^

      This is the most insightful comment summarizing how deeply tweaked the last Weekly Address.was.

      Taken together with the following commentary (the one of December 5, 2015 at 15:59) you have written a powerful rebuke to Obamas terrorizing, emotional, hysterical remarking. Bravo Zulu.

  40. Is there ANYBODY, any more, who even believes it is possible that this jerkwad might have *earned* a law degree from anywhere, let alone Harvard? That he has even read the constitution, let alone studied it? Much less TAUGHT it?

  41. I am noticing some of the language crafting in that statement. Starting with “We will not be terrorized.” I speculate that part of the difficulty in persuading folks of the other position is that embedded in their particular emotional matrix, citizen gun ownership arguments read very differently than from a different one.

    In the Lakoff-type language arts, “We will not be terrorized.” is an embedded command. The common example is “Don’t think of an elephant.”, which AIR is the title of one of his books. Get told not to do This Thing Here, you are stuck thinking about This Thing Here. So, “… be terrorized.” Your brain has to think of the thing to *not* be. And at the end of the sentence, that notion hangs there. It hasn’t been unwound.

    Consider this alternative: “We will not be terrorized. We will be resolute. We will be calm. We will do what must be done, and carry on.” This example actually strengthens the “resolute” and so on, because of the contrast with “terrorized.” I ends with commands to “do what must be done” and “carry on.” Well, isn’t that different.

    If you want, try reading the speech above with my intro first. It will probably feel different.

    So, yeah, with the President’s opening any proposal, anything at all, to maybe, possibly, kinda reduce guns at all must be A Good Thing, since We Are Terrified (just as ordered), and Guns Did It. I gotta believe that’s purely intentional. These guys are good.

    Once you are terrorized, as ordered, the rest reads differently, especially this bit:

    “That is insane. If you’re too dangerous to board a plane, you’re too dangerous, by definition, to buy a gun. And so I’m calling on Congress to close this loophole, now. We may not be able to prevent every tragedy, but—at a bare minimum—we shouldn’t be making it so easy for potential terrorists or criminals to get their hands on a gun that they could use against Americans.”

  42. One angle I haven’t heard on this… we are apparently still confident that we can screen 10,000 Syrian immigrants when it is obvious that we failed in the screening of the female terrorist. This remains a horrible idea and I’m surprised that the right isn’t pointing out this failure in every single sound bite.

  43. Terrorized? Shee-it. You want to terrorize me tell me hillary is potus. Or that KFC and Carl’s Jr. is going vegan.

    My job takes me thru Oakland every day. Unarmed. Ain’t nothing ISIS got that’s any scarier.

  45. “another American community shattered by unspeakable violence”

    “They’re working around the clock—as always—to protect our communities.”

    Blah, blah.

    Non collectivists realize INDIVIDUALS’ lives are shattered, and that’s what matters. And also, that cops are supposed to protect American INDIVIDUALS. “Community” is nothing more than a currently fashionable term for sheep flock that whose supposed role in the childish progressive machine is look up to and bend over for worthless hacks fashioning themselves “leaders.”

  47. Couldn’t bring himself to speak the “I” word, AGAIN. No surprise. (“I” for Islam, not “I” as in self, which he absolutely relishes in going on about in speeches)

    Mr. President, I am terrified of what you would do in the name of that ‘right to safety’ you keep mentioning. I noticed you framed the event in terms of “violent ideologies” –plural.

  48. Literally within two paragraphs, he says we should be resilient and uphold American values, just after espousing perhaps the most fascist and anti-American policy to ever be suggested in this nation’s history. You can’t make this stuff up.

  49. Obama was wrong in so many ways in that little speech. He congratulated the police for a fine job. Great. They did a good job. Then he talked about the lives they saved. That is just so so wrong. Despite getting there very quickly, they did not save any lives. The action was long over before they got there. Perhaps they saved lives when they killed the two Jihadis, but they totally missed any opportunity to save the lives of the victims of this shooting.

    Later he is talking about how we have to try to stop this violence by making it harder to get weapons. He thinks that terrorists will not find ways to get weapons. He piles on to that the concept that he can make people safer by taking away weapons from folks who did not do any crime.

    The Jihadis respect true strength and will take advantage of any weakness. Obama’s attempts to disarm the rest of America only makes us that much weaker. They will scoff at that and simply be emboldened. We need to go the other route and make them respect us, even fear us.

    The only way we will beat the Islamist Extremist Jihadis will be for us to out gun them. When they pop up their heads somewhere, lawfully armed citizens will pull out their guns and put an end to them. The violence from the Jihadis will continue until a good guy with a gun ends it.

  51. Of course the royal “We” won’t be terrorized with a personal security detail for the rest of his life.

Comments are closed.