President Obama’s initial post-Orlando “terror” speech was alarming in its near laissez-faire attitude toward the war on terror. It lacked both a grasp of reality and honest concern about what we are facing. The speech contained his usual empty proclamations, but avoided even identifying our main enemy in the world today — radical Islamist ideology. Worse, it came across as emotionless with not a smidgen of passion for the battle ahead. This is not leadership in any sense of the word. Our Commander In Chief is sleepwalking through this era of a jihadi movement that threatens us and our European friends. Given the scale of evil exhibited in Orlando and its traumatizing effect on our nation, and particularly the LGBT communities, where was the anger? Two days later, however, the anger suddenly emerged in a second address. Obama became visibly energized and passionate, even vitriolic in his anger directed not at ISIS, but at his critics in a thin-skinned defense of his stance to not use the term “radical Islam.” “What difference does a label make?” Well, Mr. President, an appropriate label should fully identify the evil we are faced with, and not attempt to soften it.
Charlie Nations, Eagle