Note all the quotes used in this post are taken directly from a White House generated transcript of the President's speech as written.
In Sunday evening's thirteen-minute speech the President tried to calm the American public's fears about the way Obama has been handling the war on ISIS. However if the public was expecting some new breakthrough strategy in the war against ISIS, they were terribly disappointed. The president didn’t lay out any new strategies for defeating ISIS or any other terrorist organization. Actually he seemed a bit defensive as he told people America that despite the terrorist attack on American soil, his strategy to fight ISIS was working. Then as soon as he could, Obama attempted a presidential sleight of hand by shifting the focus from terrorism to gun control proposals that would have done absolutely nothing to prevent last Wednesday's horrible bloodbath in San Bernardino.
For seven years, I've confronted this evolving threat each and every morning in my intelligence briefing, and since the day I took this office, I have authorized US Forces to take out terrorists abroad precisely because I know how real the danger is. As commander in chief, I have no greater responsibility than the security of the American people. As a father to two young daughters who are are the most precious part of my life, I know that we see ourselves with friends and co-workers at a holiday party like the one in San Bernardino. I know we see our kids in the faces of the young people killed in Paris.
And I know that after so much war, many Americans are asking whether we are confronted by a cancer that has no immediate cure.
Well, here's what I want you to know. The threat from terrorism is real, but we will overcome it. We will destroy ISIL and any other organization that tries to harm us. Our success won't depend on tough talk or abandoning our values or giving into fear. That's what groups like ISIL are hoping for. Instead, we will prevail by being strong and smart. Resilient and relentless. And by drawing upon every aspect of American power. Here's how.
The "here's how" was a continuation of what he has been doing. There was no announcement of a change in the rules of engagement which many in the military claim ties the hands of the bombing missions. Nor was their a promise in an up tic in American bombing missions. Just more of the same.
Obama's speech wasn't totally void of suggestions.
There are several steps that Congress should take right away. To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun. What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon? This is a matter of national security.
We also need to make it harder for people to buy powerful assault weapons like the ones that were used in San Bernardino. I know there are some who reject any gun safety measures, but the fact is that our intelligence and law enforcement agencies, no matter how effective they are, cannot identify every would-be mass shooter, whether that individual was motivated by ISIL or some other hateful ideology. What we can do and must do is make it harder for them to kill.
The President however did not mention how either one of gun control suggestions would have prevented what happened in San Bernardino. Does he really believe that somebody who would walk into a conference room and massacred the people he worked with, would let gun laws prevent him from getting a weapon, automatic or otherwise?
And if they couldn't get a gun, does anybody doubt that these San Bernardino terrorists, Mr. and Mrs. Farook wouldn't have used one of those dozen home-made pipe bombs found in their house to get the same exact result?
As for the no-fly list, neither of the Farook murderers were on the no-fly list so that wouldn't have helped. Besides the no-fly list contains many errors.
As recently explained in National Review:
While some people on “no-fly” lists are there because they are suspected of terrorist activity, you can also get added because you are a suspect in a criminal case, made controversial statements or tweets unrelated to terrorism, are the victim of a clerical error, or refused to become a government informant. Not only do the terror watch and no-fly lists target many people who aren’t really threats, they stop a lot of people who aren’t even actually on the lists. The late Senator Ted Kennedy was stopped from flying five times because someone with a similar name was on the no-fly list. Other prominent individuals such as The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes have also run into this problem.
Perhaps the Ted Kennedy example was just a case of a confusion between the no-fly list and the no-drive list.
Allow me to suggest that Obama's pivot to gun control was just another one of his presidential deflections. It is no different than what he did after Benghazi when he attempted to cover up a politically untimely act of terror by blaming an obscure anti-Mohammed video on YouTube.
Rather than admit his feckless ISIS strategy may have caused another terrorist attack on U.S. soil he tried to divert attention to another issue, gun control.