Caitlin O'Connor Rule 5

Well, this Caitlin's a real woman, heh.

Watch, via the Chive, "Who's That Girl - Get to Know Caitlin O'Connor."

And she's on Twitter.

BONUS: At WWTDD, "Topless Caitlin O’Connor Has Commercial Grade Boobs."

Insider Reports: Obama Refuses to Read Fresh Intelligence on Radical Islamist Threats

Well, following up on our "Worst. President. Ever."

It turns out Barack Hussein won't even read fresh intel on Islamic jihad.

Here's Katie Pavlich, "Attkisson Source: Obama Is Flat Out Refusing to Hear Intel on Islamic Terror Groups."

And listen to the interview from Steve Malzberg, "Sharyl Attkisson: Sources Say Obama Won't Read Reports on Terrorist Groups..."

Hey, Thanks to the Reader Who Bought Michael Savage's New Book, Government Zero: No Borders, No Language, No Culture

Actually, thanks to all of my readers who've been shopping through my Amazon links. I appreciate it.

But special thanks to the reader who picked up Michael Savage's new book. I didn't even know Michael Savage had a new book, heh.

Here, Government Zero: No Borders, No Language, No Culture.

Worst. President. Ever.

From Robert Tracinski, at the Federalist, "Barack Obama: Worst. President. Ever." (Via Instapundit.):

I still remember a lot of people telling me in 2006 that George W. Bush was the “worst president ever.”

They had no idea what they were talking about. This is what the “worst president ever” looks like. In his response to the attacks in Paris, Barack Obama has shown us a leader who is not just inadequate to his core responsibilities, but contemptuous of them...

In Historic Shift, More Mexicans Leaving the U.S. Than Entering (VIDEO)

This was at Pew Research the other day, "More Mexicans Leaving Than Coming to the U.S."

And at the Sacramento Bee, "Study finds more Mexicans leaving the US than coming":

SAN DIEGO - More Mexicans are leaving than moving into the United States, reversing the flow of a half-century of mass migration, according to a study published Thursday.

The Pew Research Center found that slightly more than 1 million Mexicans and their families, including American-born children, left the U.S. for Mexico from 2009 to 2014. During the same five years, 870,000 Mexicans came to the U.S., resulting in a net flow to Mexico of 140,000.

The desire to reunite families is the main reason more Mexicans are moving south than north, Pew found. The sluggish U.S. economic recovery and tougher border enforcement are other key factors.

The era of mass migration from Mexico is "at an end," declared Mark Hugo Lopez, Pew's director of Hispanic research.

The finding follows a Pew study in 2012 that found net migration between the two countries was near zero, so this represents a turning point in one of the largest mass migrations in U.S. history. More than 16 million Mexicans moved to the United States from 1965 to 2015, more than from any other country.

"This is something that we've seen coming," Lopez said. "It's been almost 10 years that migration from Mexico has really slowed down."

The findings counter the narrative of an out-of-control border that has figured prominently in U.S. presidential campaigns, with Republican Donald Trump calling for Mexico pay for a fence to run the entire length of the 1,954-mile frontier. Pew said there were 11.7 million Mexicans living in the U.S. last year, down from a peak of 12.8 million in 2007. That includes 5.6 million living in the U.S. illegally, down from 6.9 million in 2007.

In another first, the Border Patrol arrested more non-Mexicans than Mexicans in the 2014 fiscal year, as more Central Americans came to the U.S., mostly through South Texas, and many of them turned themselves in to authorities.

The authors analyzed U.S. and Mexican census data and a 2014 survey by Mexico's National Institute of Statistics and Geography. The Mexican questionnaire asked about residential history, and found that 61 percent of those who reported living in the U.S. in 2009 but were back in Mexico last year had returned to join or start a family. An additional 14 percent had been deported, and 6 percent said they returned for jobs in Mexico.

Dowell Myers, a public policy professor at the University of Southern California, said it's lack of jobs in the U.S. — not family ties — that is mostly motivating Mexicans to leave. Construction is a huge draw for young immigrants, but has yet to approach the levels of last decade's housing boom, he said.

"It's not like all of a sudden they decided they missed their mothers," Myers said. "The fact is, our recovery from the Great Recession has been miserable. It's been miserable for everyone."

Also, Mexico's population is aging, meaning there's less competition for young people looking for work. That's a big change from the 1990s, when many people entering the workforce felt they had no choice but to migrate north of the border, Myers said.

While the U.S. economic recovery is sluggish, Mexico has been free in recent years from the economic tailspins that drove earlier generations north in the 1980s and 1990s. While many parts of Mexico suffer grinding poverty and violence, others have become thriving manufacturing centers under the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Still more.

Donald Trumps Walks Back Comments on Establishing Database to Track Muslims (VIDEO)

Shoot, I love the idea of Muslim database.

And frankly, it's not even Donald Trump who's been pushing the idea, but the leftist media that's trying to smear him as a Nazi. See Joel Pollack, at Big Government, via Memoerandum, "How the Media Smeared Donald Trump as a Nazi."

No matter. The politically correct mobs have called for Trump's head, just like ISIS beheads apostates.

At the Washington Post, "Trump distances himself from database to track Muslims":

Donald Trump on Friday backed away from the idea that he wants to create a database to track Muslims in America as fellow presidential candidates blasted the proposal as “abhorrent” and “shocking.”

Trump said the notion that he would implement a database as a way to follow Muslims was not his.

“I didn’t suggest a database — a reporter did,” Trump tweeted Friday. “We must defeat Islamic terrorism & have surveillance, including a watch list, to protect America.”

NBC News asked the candidate Thursday night whether there should be a “database system that tracks Muslims” in the country. Trump said “there should be a lot of systems beyond databases” and started talking about the U.S. border and building a wall across it. When asked whether it was something a Trump White House would implement, the candidate said,“Oh, I would certainly implement that — absolutely.”

Trump appeared somewhat confused — or annoyed — when asked about the proposal later in the night. When asked to explain the difference between a Muslim database in the United States and the registry of Jews that once existed in Nazi Germany, Trump repeatedly said, “You tell me.”

Yahoo News first asked Trump about a database Thursday. The candidate did not take a stance but raised concerns about Muslims in the United States. Trump has said that he would close mosques and would not rule out the idea of giving Muslims identification cards noting their religion.

“I find it abhorrent that Donald Trump is suggesting we register people,” former Florida governor Jeb Bush said Friday on CNBC.

“You’re talking about internment. You’re talking about closing mosques. You’re talking about registering people. And that’s just wrong — I don’t care about campaigns,” Bush said. “It’s not a question of toughness — it’s manipulating people’s angst and their fears. That’s not strength. That’s weakness.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), who introduced a bill that would have barred Syrian refugees from coming to the United States, said he does not think that people should be tracked by their religion. Democrats blocked Cruz’s bill Thursday.

“I’m a big fan of Donald Trump’s, but not a fan of government registries of American citizens,” the presidential candidate said in Sioux City, Iowa. “First Amendment protects religious liberty.”

Another GOP hopeful, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, said Trump’s comments show that he is “unable to unite and lead” the country.

“The idea that someone would have to register with the federal government because of their religion strikes against all that we have believed in our nation’s history,” he said in a statement.

Kasich is an idiot. It won't be long before his campaign folds like a cheap pup tent.

Still more at the New York Times, via Memeorandum, "Donald Trump Sets Off a Furor With Call to Register Muslims in the U.S."

Islam Still Rooted in the Dark Ages

From Julia Hartley-Brewer, at Telegraph UK, "Islam is still rooted in the values of the dark ages – and until we accept that, we will never get rid of radicalism":

British Muslims must “tackle extremism”.

We must stop tolerating “social segregation”.

“For too long we have buried our heads in the sand” about the growth of extremism among young Muslims in our country.

No, not the words of Ukip’s Nigel Farage but of Labour’s London Mayoral candidate, Sadiq Khan, speaking today at a Westminster lunch.

Mr Khan, a Muslim born in London to Pakistani immigrants, is one of the very few politicians in mainstream politics who is brave enough to speak the truth about the ever growing issues facing Britain’s Muslim population.

Of course, being a Muslim himself, Mr Khan is automatically exempt from the usual barrage of cries of “racist” and “Islamophobe” from the liberal thought police.

Yet it is nevertheless a courageous politician who dares to point out what is blatantly obvious to the rest of us – but which our elected representatives are mostly too timid to admit.

Yes, as Mr Khan said, British Muslims “have a special role to play in tackling extremism”. As he says, that’s not because they – simply by virtue of sharing the same religion as the terrorists – are any more responsible for terror attacks than non-Muslims, but because they can be “more effective” at tackling that extremism.

Britain’s extremist Islamists, after all, are not coming from ordinary Christian, Sikh, Hindu, Jewish or atheist backgrounds. They are coming from ordinary Muslim families, they have Muslim friends and they live in largely Muslim neighbourhoods.

It is therefore those families, friends and neighbours who are likely to be the first to hear those extremist views and thus be in the position to challenge them at the earliest opportunity and, we hope, stem their growth into full-bodied Islamist violence.

And that is crucial to Sadiq Khan’s other key point: it is time the social segregation of Muslims came to an end.

For too many decades, many of Britain’s 2.7 million Muslims have lived here as a separate, co-existing community, right at the heart of our great cities but at the fringes of our society.

As Mr Khan said: “Too many British Muslims grow up without really knowing anyone from a different background. We’ve protected people’s right to live their cultural life at the expense of creating a common life.”

Huge numbers of British Muslims are concentrated in distinct neighbourhoods, often living with, going to school with, working with, befriending and marrying only other Muslims. “This,” as Mr Khan so rightly pointed out, “creates the conditions for extremism and radicalisation to take hold.”

Is it really any wonder then that so many young British Muslims feel they are not really British when they have grown up isolated and alienated from the rest of the population?

British Muslims need to face up to some home truths. But so too does Sadiq Khan.

Because, despite talking so much sense about integration and tackling extremism, the Labour MP still wasn’t brave enough to tell the one truth that really does need to be faced if we are going to end this deadly threat.

“It is ludicrous to pretend that Islamism has nothing to do with Islam. It has everything to do with Islam.”

In the very same speech, Mr Khan said the Paris terror attacks were carried out “in the name of a sick and evil ideology, a grotesque and perverse worldview which has nothing to do with the Islam that I know.”

That is nonsense. It is ludicrous to pretend that Islamism has nothing to do with Islam. It has everything to do with Islam and that is precisely why it has such a potent appeal to so many young Muslim men and women.

As any scholar of Islam will tell you, the ideology behind Isil and al-Qaeda is as rooted in the Koran as are daily prayers and eating halal meat. Like Christianity, it just depends which verses you care to read and how literal an interpretation you choose to give them.

The ideology behind Isil is as rooted in the Koran as are daily prayers  Photo: Getty

While Christianity has certainly been the cause of more than its fair share of violent bloodshed over the centuries, it has now evolved into a religion that is largely a force for peace.

Islam, though, has never been through an enlightenment or a reformation and is still rooted in the values of the dark ages. That is why Islamic extremism has boomed at a time when the rest of the world is embracing the liberal, democratic values of the 21st century.

Sadiq Khan should be applauded for his courage in speaking the truth about segregation and radicalisation.

But until we all accept the truth about the roots of Islamic extremism, we won’t win the battle for hearts and minds – let alone the bloody war that awaits...

Paris Terror Mastermind Abdelhamid Abaaoud Also Visited Germany

At Der Spiegel, "Abdelhamid Abaaoud's Death: Paris Terror Mastermind Also Visited Germany":

SPIEGEL ONLINE has learned that Abdelhamid Abaaoud, the suspected mastermind behind Friday's Paris terrorist attacks who was killed in a Wednesday police raid, also entered Germany multiple times.

The man who has been described by French officials as the mastermind and "brains" behind Friday's terror attacks in Paris has been confirmed dead. The local public prosecutor said Thursday that Abdelhamid Abaaoud was killed during a raid on an apartment in the Paris suburb of Saint-Denis on Wednesday. Officials identified the terror suspect by way of skin samples of the 27-year-old Belgian extremist.

According to information obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE, Abaaoud made repeated visits to Germany. Federal Police at the Cologne-Bonn Airport registered him on Jan. 20, 2014 as he tried to catch a flight to Istanbul. At the time, he told officials he wanted to visit friends and relatives in Turkey before returning to Cologne. Officials believe he then used another route to return to Europe.
At the time, Belgian authorities had issued orders to track Abaaoud's movements in the Schengen Information System (SIS), a database used by countries that are members of the European Union's Schengen area of borderless travel. Under the Belgian orders, he was not to be arrested or detained. German officials passed the information on to Belgium at the time.

Security sources in Germany say that Abaaoud also visited Cologne back in 2008, when he reportedly applied for an export registration plate for a large vehicle. But the circumstances surrounding the visit remain unclear. Investigators say they have no further information about the visit.

Abaaoud was considered Belgium's most dangerous Islamist extremist and was believed to have been a key figure in Friday's deadly attacks in Paris. The Islamist extremist, born in Brussels' Anderlecht district, is suspected of having organized the attacks, and security forces had conducted a desperate search for him after the massacre. French security forces killed Abaaoud during a seven-hour police deployment early Wednesday morning in the northern Paris suburb of Saint-Denis, during which officers fired more than 5,000 rounds.

In addition to Abaaoud, Hasna Aitboulahcen, a woman identified by officials as the terror mastermind's cousin, also died in the raid on Wednesday after detonating a suicide vest...

Actually, reports now say that Hasna Aït Boulahcen did not detonate a suicide bomb. See the London's Daily Mail, "'Cowgirl' cousin did NOT blow herself up... but died when third ISIS terrorist detonated suicide vest standing next to her in Paris siege apartment, police reveal."

In any case, still more at Der Spiegel.

Record Number of #Refugees Around the Globe

At USA Today, "Record refugee crisis hits all parts of globe":

LONDON — The heart-wrenching plight of desperate refugees, most of them Syrians, who are fleeing to Europe by land or sea is a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions. Yet it is only part of a troubling trend that has reached unprecedented levels:

More people from every corner of the globe have been uprooted by war, persecution or natural disasters than ever before in history.

That amounts to 55 million people "forcibly displaced" at the end of 2014, according to the United Nations Refugee Agency. That doesn't count tens of millions more in poverty who are voluntarily seeking a better life elsewhere.

Given all the conflicts and chaos raging around the world — and distressed economic conditions in so many countries — the world's migrant crisis likely will remain at record levels this year, too. And it is sure to prompt more pushback from nations worried about the costs of housing migrants and threats from terrorists sneaking across borders amid the hordes of refugees...

Keep reading.

The Ululations of Radical College Crybabies

From Michelle Malkin:

Deray McKesson, the professional agitator whose racial rabble-rousing began at tax-subsidized Teach for America, proudly unveiled his new enterprise on the Internet Thursday: A website chronicling “THE DEMANDS” of his radical brothers and sisters on college campuses across Northern America.

“We recently launched http://thedemands.org which compiles the college demands from across the country,” he tweeted. “Check it out.”

I did. Man, oh, man, are the kids “DEMAND”-y these days!

Whoops, kids, did I offend you with “Man, oh, man?” I plead guilty to “cisheteropatriarchy.” Also: ageism! Prosecute me for serial microaggressions and throw me in the safe-space violators’ slammer.

But I micro-aggress-digress.

The current list of campuses represented on TheDemands.Org includes 37 institutions of higher learning. Or rather, higher moaning.

I’m calling the website the Social Justice Warrior Entitlement Mob Tracker.

It’s a useful database of progressive brats who are part of a clearly coordinated “Black Lives Matter” hijacking of American colleges and universities (with a few Canadian groupies tagging along). Whatever legitimate complaints these privileged — yes, you are privileged to be attending college in America in the 21st century — students may have had, they’ve utterly beclowned themselves with their over-the-top hysterics.

Leading the list is the University of Missouri, which claimed the scalps of the school’s president and chancellor last week for insufficient attention to alleged bias incidents and drunken catcalls.

It wasn’t enough. Never enough.

The Mizzou mob is also demanding a new race-based hiring quota increase for “black faculty and staff members campus-wide by 10 percent” and an increase in “funding and resources for the University of Missouri Counseling Center for the purpose of hiring additional mental health professionals, particularly those of color.”

Shakedown godfathers Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have taught their protesting progeny well.

At Amherst College, the “uprisers” are pressuring the president to make — take a deep breath — a “statement of apology to students, alumni and former students, faculty, administration and staff who have been victims of several injustices including but not limited to our institutional legacy of white supremacy, colonialism, anti-black racism, anti-Latinx [sic] racism, anti-Native American racism, anti-Native/ indigenous racism, anti-Asian racism, anti-Middle Eastern racism, heterosexism, cis-sexism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, ableism, mental health stigma, and classism.”

Alas, there’s no safe space from coddled, overly verbose narcissists...

Still more.

Rachel Harris Playboy's November Playmate of the Month (VIDEO)

Watch, "A Creative Force: Miss November 2015 Rachel Harris."

BONUS: At Egotastic!, "RACHEL HARRIS TOPLESS PLAYBOY PLAYMATE OF THE MONTH COVERED IN NOTHING BUT SEXTASTIC."

ISIS: The State of Terror

More for your war on terror library, from Jessica Stern and J. M. Berger.

At Amazon, ISIS: The State of Terror.

Mali Hostage Crisis Ends With 27 People Dead (VIDEO)

At WSJ, "Mali Hostage Crisis Ends With 27 People Dead, Including Five Attackers, Military Officials Say":

Soldiers in Mali’s capital shot their way into a Radisson Blu hotel and liberated dozens of captives after a 10-hour siege by Islamist gunmen that left 27 people dead, including five attackers, ending one of the biggest hostage standoffs in recent years.

Troops from France—the former colonial power—and United Nations peacekeepers blocked roads while Malian soldiers with Kalashnikov rifles fought their way to the top floor of the seven-story hotel in Bamako. Inside, five gunmen had been holding 170 hostages, according to officials and witnesses.

Several hours earlier, the gunmen—who witnesses said chanted “Allahu akbar” as they burst into the hotel around dawn—released 30 hostages who said they successfully recited the Islamic profession of faith.

Malian military officials confirmed the death toll early Friday evening without identifying the other 22 people killed. At least one American and one Belgian were among the dead, officials from those countries said.

“When the terrorists understood that we were coming for them, they executed the hostages in their possession,” said one soldier.

Next to him, another soldier had tears streaming down his face. “He just lost his friend,” the first soldier said.

It remained unclear who conducted the attack. Early on, officials feared it was the work of Islamic State allies looking to strike French interests, just a week after the group killed 130 people in Paris.

But those fears didn’t appear to be borne out by early evidence, and Islamic State made no claim of responsibility.

Mali has some half-dozen Islamist groups. For three years, al Qaeda allies here have been waging smaller assaults on police and soldiers on a monthly basis, alongside threats of worse to come.

Just last week, Mali’s most prominent Islamist commander, Iyad Ag Ghaly, called for attacks on French targets, and the Radisson, used by French officials, seems in keeping with that. Linked to al Qaeda, he is on the State Department’s list of specially designated global terrorists. Several al Qaeda-linked accounts on Twitter cheered Friday's attack as a success...

Keep reading.

Black Friday Deals

At Amazon, 12 Days of Deals - TV, Video, Audio.

Also, Cyber Monday - Save $25 Off $100 Bosch Orders.

And, Cyber Monday - Save $25 Off $125 Dremel Orders.

And by popular demand, Fredrik Logevall, Embers of War: The Fall of an Empire and the Making of America's Vietnam.

Jackie Johnson's Got Your Weekend Weather

It's been pretty nice out, warm.

Poll: 6 in 10 Say United States at War with 'Radical Islam', Repudiating President Obama and Hillary Clinton

That's one of the major findings in this new blockbuster Washington Post/ABC News poll.

See, "Americans more fearful of a major terror attack in the U.S., poll finds." The raw internals are here:

Fears among Americans about terrorist attacks on U.S. soil have risen sharply a week after a major assault in Paris killed 130, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, which finds a majority believing that the country is at war with “radical Islam.”

Fully 83 percent of registered voters say they believe a terrorist attack in the United States resulting in large casualties is likely in the near future, rising from 73 percent in a Quinnipiac University poll earlier this month asking the same question. Forty percent say a major attack in the United States is “very likely,” up eight percentage points since last week’s attacks to match the record level of concern recorded after the 2005 subway bombings in Britain.

The Post-ABC poll finds a majority of Americans want the United States to join a military response to the Paris attacks, including increasing airstrikes and sending ground troops to fight the Islamic State, which asserted responsibility for last week’s mayhem.

But the poll also finds evidence of the public hesitation about a major military commitment, with more saying the United States should play a supporting role, and only one-third of all respondents supporting deployment of large numbers of ground forces.

The findings underscore the heightened anxiety many Americans feel after the Paris attacks, as well as a broader dissatisfaction with President Obama’s approach to terrorism. They come as the House voted Thursday by a large majority — 289 to 137 — to restrict Syrian and Iraqi refugees from entering the United States, despite a White House veto threat, and as several Republican presidential candidates are urging stricter control on admitting refugees and a deeper military involvement overseas. The poll found over half of adults oppose accepting refugees from Syria and other Middle Eastern countries, even if they are screened for security.

Rather than rally around the commander in chief, the public’s ratings of Obama on dealing with terrorism have fallen to a record low 40 percent, with a smaller 35 percent approving of his handling of the Islamic State. Obama’s ratings on terrorism have fallen seven points since January, driven largely by a 20-point drop among political independents and an 11-point drop among moderates.

Ken Kaas, a 50-year-old heavy-equipment operator in Pottstown, Pa., described the president’s approach in a single word: “horrible.”

“I just think he’s just politically correct, doesn’t want to ruffle feathers and is not a strong leader,” said Kaas, a Republican, who added that he preferred the strategy espoused by many GOP presidential candidates. “They’re stronger, and they seem to be more caring of Americans and our cause, as opposed to trying to appease the world.”

The Paris attacks also appear to have bolstered public support for circumventing civil liberties to pursue potential terrorists. A 72 percent majority say the federal government should investigate possible terrorist threats even if they intrude on personal privacy, rising nine percentage points since January to the highest level since 2010....

Fifty-nine percent of respondents say the United States is “at war with radical Islam,” while 37 percent say it is not. Republicans have embraced the term and criticized President Obama and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton for not using it. Clinton, who is running for president, says “radical Islam” wrongly conflates Islamist jihadists with the teachings of Islam and Muslims more broadly, but fellow partisans do not appear to have such reservations. Fifty-two percent of Democrats say the nation is at war with radical Islam.

Sixty percent support sending more ground troops to defeat Islamic State. That's a really striking figure, considering the intense opposition we've had to Middle East ground deployments this last few years.



Americans have had it with this administration on national security, and it's going to hurt the Democrats. Independents and moderates have swung sharply against Obama in his handing of the terrorist threat. A shrewd GOP nominee will be able to eviscerate Hillary Clinton on the issues next year, and the field seems to be narrowing down to Trump and Rubio as the front-runners. Carson's fading.

More at the link.

Xenia Deli Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Casting Call (VIDEO)

A nice Friday treat.

Al-Murabitoon, with al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, Claims Responsibility for Mali Hotel Attack (VIDEO)

At Long War Journal, "Al Qaeda group claims credit for attack on hotel in Mali’s capital."

Also at Pamela's, "Mali: Muslims screaming “Allahu akbar” take hostages, free those who can recite Qur’an."

Plus, at CNN, "UPDATE: #ParisAttacks death toll rises to 130, says French Prime Minister."

House Approves Tougher Screening of Syrian Refugees

It's a major blow to Obama, although the bill's gotta go through the Senate, where Democrats are threatening a filibuster. This oughta be interesting.

At WSJ, "House Passes Bill to Halt, Overhaul Syrian Refugee Process":

WASHINGTON—Nearly four dozen Democrats joined House Republicans to pass legislation Thursday that would halt the resettlement of Syrian and Iraqi refugees in the U.S. and overhaul the screening process, delivering a rebuke to the White House in response to public anxiety sparked by last Friday’s Islamic State attacks in Paris.

President Barack Obama, who threatened to veto the legislation, and many Democrats have argued that barring Syrian and Iraqi refugees would be contrary to American values and a strategic blunder in the effort to combat the spread of Islamic State ideology.

The White House left open the possibility of agreement on different legislation—for which there was early bipartisan support—that would block other ways terrorists might be able to infiltrate the U.S.

The struggle to respond to the Paris attacks rippled first through the 2016 presidential campaign before quickly arriving on Capitol Hill in a messy legislative battle less than a week after the violence in France. The defection of 47 House Democrats suggested that Mr. Obama’s initial visceral response wasn’t sufficient to unify Democrats on national security, with voters feeling more vulnerable on that front heading into the elections.

In early public comments, Mr. Obama focused on the contrast between his philosophy and that of Republicans, some of whom suggested the U.S. take in only Christian, not Muslim, refugees. He said that those ideas were “shameful” and un-American and that halting the program would anger potential sympathizers with Islamic State and push them toward radicalization.

But as the House took up its bill Thursday, Mr. Obama and his administration concentrated more directly on the policy reasons for opposing it.

“We already have in place the most vigorous vetting process that we have for anybody who is admitted,” Mr. Obama said at an international summit in the Philippines. “We subject them to a process that takes anywhere from 18 to 24 months before they are admitted. And the idea that somehow they pose a more significant threat than all the tourists who pour into the United States every single day just doesn’t jibe with reality.”

White House officials on Thursday said security measures in the waiver program have already been enhanced, but expressed an openness to working with Congress on the issue.

Thursday’s vote exposed tension between lawmakers’ desire to take steps to bolster national security and the administration’s philosophical and policy objections to a bill that officials said would also be impossible to implement...

Keep reading.

Plus, see the huge roundup at Memeorandum.

New Islamic State Video Threatens to Blow Up the White House (VIDEO)

Kimberly Guilfoyle speaks with Catherine Herridge: