In remarks overseas, President Obama categorized opposition or even reluctance to admit swarms of Syrian refugees to the United States as offensive and needing to stop.
And what if it doesn't?
The free speech of actual Americans is a higher constitutional priority than granting entrance to those who are not.
The President added, “We are not well served when in response to a terrorist attack we descend into fear and panic.”
Would he be as brave if he was not surrounded by multiple layers of security?
White House propagandists have developed a social media hashtag welcoming refugees.
Will these migrants --- either vetted or unvetted --- be allowed to congregate unrestricted in the vicinity of the First Family?
The President and his decreasing number of supporters in Congress insist that welcoming refugees is an American tradition.
At one point, so was marriage only being between a man and a woman.
Liberals certainly didn't mind altering that to suit their policy agenda.
In his support of flooding American cities with potentially Islamist refugees, President Obama asked are critics afraid of widows and orphans.
However, it must be remembered that Islamic societies do not necessarily gage the age of majority in the same manner as Western ones.
After all, it must be remembered that many of these savages think nothing of marrying nine year old brides and deriving carnal pleasure from them in the same manner mentally healthy men do with woman around their own age.
In an attempted compromise, a number of Republicans have suggested that perhaps a system could be implemented granting verified Christians resettlement priority.
The President insisted such a religious test was an outrage and unacceptable.
However, it is more of a humanitarian gesture than what Saudi Arabia is even extending to fellow Muslims, none of whom will be allowed into that desert kingdom but for whom mosques will be gladly built in Western lands as part of their religious obligation of planetary subjugation.
If religion is not to be taken into consideration in determining refugee status, why is the Obama administration denying it at a higher rate to Christian applicants than Islamic ones?
It is generally considered bad form at best and borderline treason at worst for Americans to criticize their nation or even its leaders while on foreign soil.
As such, shouldn't a similar standard apply to the President as well?
By Frederick Meekins