President Obama addressed the nation again Thursday regarding the Christmas Day terrorist attack on Flight 253. He made the speech under the guise that he had new information to share: supposedly the results of reviews and announcements of new strategies. Of course there was no such new information. As with every public statement (or lack thereof) since the attack occurred, he just keeps trying new rhetoric in a desperate struggle to hopefully stumble on the right approach. He came close today with the following:

Continued...

"We are at war. We are at war against al-Qaida, a far-reaching network of violence and hatred that attacked us on 9/11, that killed nearly 3,000 innocent people and that is plotting to strike us again. And we will do whatever it takes to defeat them."

While I am pleased to hear the president acknowledge the obvious, it is just as obvious that his recent actions do not match his words. If he truly believes what he's now saying, that we are at war with al-Qaida, why would he continue to treat the enemy like common criminals in civil courts? Why is the latest enemy attacker in that war being represented by a civil attorney, paid for by US tax dollars, in a civilian court where he will be afforded all the rights and protections such a court provides?

If Mr. Obama really has had an epiphany and suddenly realizes terrorist attacks carried out by al-Qaida operatives are acts of war, why hasn't he stopped his Attorney General from trying the admitted mastermind of the worst of those acts of war in a civil criminal court with the same taxpayer funded defense team and the same rights?

I do not doubt that most of the weak-on-terrorism decisions made by President Obama and his administration have been made to placate his far-left political base. But he has to decide which is more important to him - satisfying a political base that is out of touch with the real world we live in or our national security? And he needs to decide quickly.