I have yet to find one convincing.”

You won’t ever go broke betting on their dedication and ability to rationalize.

I have read numerous serious, albeit intermittently entertaining, pieces centering on speculating just what it might take to convince the Democrats to turn on the incumbent.

I have yet to find one convincing.

I do not doubt that the boy king and 90% of democrats think we on the right side of the bell curve are ‘enemies of the state’ and in this they are correct. We are the enemy. We oppose their agenda. We insist on being free of their oppression. We recognize they are the enemy that wishes to deny us of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We will have to wait a while, no more than a few years, to see how much blood and gore they are willing to expend once push comes to shove.

Meanwhile, I continue to buy powder and primers and cast bullets from wheel weights and other sources of scrap lead.

Obama “agitates for strife and division here at home” because he believes that the Western domestic right are the real enemy, not misguided jihadists and misguided criminals. He believes we are the real enemy because it is we who are preventing them from leading the ‘misguided’ to the light of understanding… which they as the elite have been granted by their demonstrated nature.

How’s that for narcissistic insecurity?

Obama is sympathetic to our enemies because he believes their complaints and hostility toward us are valid and justified. He agrees with George Soros’ view that, “The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.” Obama believes that the UN should lead in all cases of foreign disputes.

Qatar is an interesting case. We have a big military base there and they were our allies during OIF. They have begun to play the duplicitous role of cunning Muslims – two faced and untrustworthy. Why we don’t get out of there and move our base to Kuwait is a question I have. They also host and fund al Jazzera – that loving voice of Muslim peace. 🙁

Eric, I was saying that Obama seems to believe that, if Maliki would just make nice with the Sunnis and Kurds, ISIS would fade away. I don’t think that’s the case. ISIS is much more malignant than al Qaeda and has bigger ambitions. Anyone who can’t see that picture is, IMO, naé¯ve.

There are Sunnis in Iraq who are not supporters of ISIS, but Maliki has cut them out of the picture. Note that the Kurds, who are Sunnis, have not been getting the arms and ammo that Shia groups have gotten. That’s one reason why things are so bad around Irbil. The Kurds will fight, but they need beans and bullets. We could supply them, and provide air cover. But we won’t. He’s waiting for Maliki to “do the right thing.”

Obama has this idea that these poor, backward countries/terror groups are no threat to us. After all, we have the “Golden Fleece” (Our economy) and that makes us untouchable. Back in March President Obama acknowledged that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea would be difficult to reverse, but he dismissed Russia as a “regional power” that did not pose a leading security threat to the United States. The fact that they have nukes with ICBMs that can deliver them does not seem to bother him. He’s got it all figured out. We’re in the very best of hands.

I make a point much like that in this post, written after the one we’re commenting on.

To Obama, what’s happening with Iraq falls under “ending the war”.

There’s a “larger crisis” in Iraq? What did Obama say that is? If he’s implying that ISIS is ultimately just regular ol’ Sunni-Shia conflict, that matches the lead rationalization for non-intervention.