An angry president went after his enemies [Monday], passionately denouncing those who suggested that if we are going to take more Syrian refugees, they should be Christians. “[T]hat’s shameful. That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion,” he said.

In fact, Obama’s refugee policy does appear to have a religious test — one that seems to discriminate AGAINST Christians. At the beginning of the Syrian civil war, 10% of the population was Christian, but only 2.4% of the Syrian refugees are Christian. How can this be?

The United States relies on the United Nations’ refugee application process which requires refugees to register. But many Christians in places like Syria are afraid to register and they are afraid to seek shelter in U.N. refugee camps.

Why? Because some Muslim refugees in those camps, the very refugees that Obama wants to bring here, threaten, harass and beat them. These attacks on Christians are also taking place in refugee camps in Europe, where Christians have been placed in separate facilities because of the violence against them from bigoted Muslim migrants.

Even on migrant boats crossing the Mediterranean, Christians have been attacked and thrown overboard to their deaths by Muslims outraged because they were praying.

The fact is that Christians in the Middle East are the target of a radical Islamic-inspired genocide. Since we can’t take every refugee from Syria, it makes the most sense to take those most at risk, and the ones least likely to commit acts of terror.

What is shameful is that President Obama has done little if anything to save them and other religious minorities. He is too busy lecturing America about our alleged Islamophobia to be bothered.

There are plenty of places in the Middle East where Muslim migrants can find refuge in the Sharia governed countries they desire. There is virtually no place in the vast Islamic world where Christians can find that safety.

It is shameful that President Obama and Secretary Kerry don’t appear to give a damn. Obama is in no position to throw around the word “shameful.”

What Else Did He Say

President Obama’s performance at [Monday’s] press conference in Turkey was deeply demoralizing to the Western world that is attempting to rally itself to defeat radical Islam.

Consider this comment Obama made yesterday: “But what I’m not interested in doing is posing or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning, or whatever other slogans they come up with…”

Really? We are engaged in a war with radical jihadists who want to destroy us. They have vowed to attack Washington, D.C. The commander in chief had better be interested in American leadership and winning this war!

Even the liberal media is largely negative in its reviews. The Washington Post editorial board called Obama “petulant sounding,” adding that he offered a “false choice” between his own “underpowered” policies and a full-scale invasion of Syria.

Roger Cohen of The New York Times tweeted, “Where was the anger in that Obama press conference? I’m in Paris. His words fell shamefully short of sentiment here.”

When the president did show flashes of anger, it was misdirected. Obama didn’t show much anger at the murders of Parisians, but he certainly seemed frustrated by the probing questions from reporters about his failed policies and by governors calling for a moratorium on a growing influx of refugees, which may include Islamic fighters.

The Wall Street Journal wrote [Tuesday], “If Mr. Obama fought the Islamic State with half the vigor with which he delivers moral lectures, he’d find that a much less fearful America would welcome far more refugees.”

Even left-wing columnist Eugene Robinson was critical, writing, “Obama’s tone in addressing the Paris atrocity was all wrong. At times he was patronizing, at other times he seemed annoyed and almost dismissive.”

On Capitol Hill [Monday], California Senator Diane Feinstein, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said, “I have never been more concerned” about ISIS.

“I read the intelligence faithfully. [ISIS] is not contained, [ISIS] is expanding,” Feinstein said, adding, “They just put out a video saying it is their intent to attack this country.”

Governors Say “Stop!”

The number of governors objecting to the administration’s Syrian refugee relocation program has grown dramatically since our report [earlier this week]. As of this morning, 27 governors are telling the Obama White House to stop sending refugees to their states.

President Obama suggested [Monday] that the governors were “shameful,” but their concerns are based on common sense. As Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley put it, “My heart says that we should let these people in. But my head says that I have to protect the people of the state of Alabama and keep them secure.”

Gov. Pat McCrory of North Carolina said [Tuesday] morning, “Right now there’s almost no coordination or communication between the state and federal officials on this issue. It’s fair for the governors to ask the question — what type of background check can you do when individuals [are] coming from a country that’s torn apart?”

Gov. McCrory is right. Last month, FBI Director James Comey testified before Congress that his agency could not fully vet them. (This administration can’t even vet Obamacare enrollees properly!)

Who is vetting these refugees? As I wrote above, the U.N. is. But we know from Europe’s experience that the vast majority of the so-called refugees are not Syrians.

While the governors are acting on common sense security concerns, more than a dozen mayors recently asked the federal government to send them more refugees.