Rose still believes that Obama is a sensible moderate and pragmatic president.

As neo says, he has no clue – no clue about American perceptions beyond the urban Northeast, that is.

Pauline Kael (on Nixon???) redux. But he’s my litmus check on that sort of folk, the ruling class.

“… by law and policy, the principal casus belli for Operation Desert Fox in 1998 and Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003 wasn’t the intel as many believe, but actually Iraq’s noncompliance with the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” (UNSCR 1441) for disarmament mandated by UNSCR 687 (1991), ie, breach of ceasefire, that was confirmed by the UNSCOM and UNMOVIC inspections.”

Now you’re preaching to the choir.

That’s what I mean when I say that Rose plays a fool on TV.

I remember seeing him interview Thomas Sowell. It was like Sowell was teasing a five-year-old. Rose completely lacked a framework for understanding ideas that were so foreign to him.

He did a pretty damned good job of saying and inferring it is a, ya’know, nicer way. I support this young man for President. The Dems FEAR Marco like no other.

The Leftist allied to Islamic Jihad. The Hussein Regime intentionally sabotaged Iraq and Afghanistan, to fund ISIL and AQ in Libya and Syria.

This early evening, talk show host Hugh Hewitt touted a new guest from WaPo, opinion columnist Catherine Rampell, in part because of this (on the last debate).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lessons-learned/2015/10/29/7d23d98e-7e78-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html

Hugh explained that he had a tough time getting MSM guests to come forward and be honest about their leftist voting. Rampell
explained herself as “center-left,” hence she voted Obama twice.

At any rate, back to Rubio and Rampel. Hugh used Marco Rubio’s confrontation in Boulder on CNBC about Hillary.

Do you agree she lied? Rampell: I don’t know, I don’t think so…
or some such blatant denial

I soon lost interest and turned it off. Rampell’s reply reminded me that I no longer accept friendship from Democrats.

I used to, of course. But between Bush and Obama, Democrats started to consistently reject me as a new friend.

Therefore, I decided to return the favor with the last election, because I find few Leftist’s able to confront the reality of facts and the objective world. So, how can “we” be friends if their frame of reference rejects the world of facts that I accept as true? And their denial go so radically unpierced? (Obama’s a great president to them, not the failure and worst ever” we understand him to be.)

Rampell’s obvious denial of a factual lie by Hillary to further the narrative of the most crucial campaign to re-elect Obama? I can’t take such “people” seriously.

I think this was a conclusion I was led to by drsanity’s analysis of Leftist denial and psychosis…. Their inability to share the world of facts and discuss them sentiently and reasonable, for instance.

Speaking of which, the chief examples driving the Left bonkers are set to be revisited sooner than later…. through war and Islamic terrorism.

Item 1 – I watched Ann Patterson, Near East Assistant Secretary of State, give testimony before a Senate committee on Foreign Affairs, Wednesday (via C-Span).

She said three years ago she spent most her time on democracy promotion; now it’s counterterrorism. She was unprepared for this pivot, she explained.

Various Senator’s pushed her to anticipate whether more military assets and intervention were possibilities in the ME? She was game, but obviously politic and noncommittal. A General assisting her was more forthcoming, almost a cheerleader for prepping for engaging IS. It seems that in Washington, DC, the plate is set increase anti-IS activity, I concluded.

One Senator pushed her on the importance of meeting the War in Syria threat in general and ISIS in particular, because of the migrant crisis in Europe. Specifically, he asked, why aren’t the Europeans pushing for a root-cause solution to the Syrian war refugees overwhelming them?

Both Ann and the General went back and forth and couldn’t really answer. At the end, they booted the answer up to Sec of State Kerry and the meeting in Austria today, Friday. (The half day meeting lasted eight hours, by the way.)

The concern from Senator’s amounted almost to angst over the situation in Europe. Do they want the crisis to go on next summer? Throughout next year??? This cannot go on forever.

Item 2 – on PBS, Charlie Rose interview, Thursday night, there appeared an Admiral McCraven – ex-Navy SEAL, currently Chancellor for the University of Texas System – but more famous for commanding Special Ops during the Bin Laden raid.

I got sucked in to this interview with a veteran warrior, and listened to the hour long exchange.

McCraven minced no words: ISIS needs to be defeated now, soon as possible. Why do we have an interest? Cascade effects on friends and allies like Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, Turkey (currently being destabilized) and Europe – and ISIS metastasizing towards us in the US. Population movements are destabilizing the ME – and beyond.

In other words, the fear that the Jihad movement will go hot and global again makes resolving Syria and defeating ISIS the highest security priority today.

Item 3 – And now, Friday – Obama announces 50 special ops troops going after ISIS (advising roles, solely). And no, this isn’t an example of mission creep, he maintains.

I read all three Items as evidence of the certainty that the vector of escalation towards a War on Terror (II) is certain. Only the magnitude and timing is uncertain.

Together with the worries on the Right from debates and candidates, it may not be possible for Obama to kick the can down to the next presidency. I’m wondering if it isn’t the mounting humanitarian crisis in Europe that’s pushing Obama – or his cadre – into engaging the enemy?

What’s worries me is that he – as well as the Asst Sec Ann Patterson – is that they are playing for time: they believe Russia will have to become our anti-ISIS partner…after they get bloodied.

This may well be the case, but will certainly take a while and likely a long time. They are in gross denial that Putin’s interests come first and foremost: preserving his client state and keeping Asaad in power comes first!

Now, late news comes that in a meeting of Russia’s version of the Security Council, the Deputy PM there has floated the idea that Russia must resume Cold War Era civil defense training…because the US improves its weapons systems and therefore is a threat to them!

Cold War II is intensifying; GWOT II is beginning. How it play out it uncertain, but the direction towards war with ‘boots on the ground’ is clear.

The view from France (via France 24-TV in English) is still that the US has no will to do this. But US opinion on IS turned in august a year (or was it two) ago.

Who here doubts that 2017 will not see a more serious engagement in Syria and against ISIS if a Republican is elected President? Not I.

Another consequence: how the a Left in deep denial about Islam, Jihadism, and terrorism take this during the campaign over the next year? Deepening their collective denial?

Another thing that made it crystal clear from the start that Benghazi was a terrorist attack was they weaponry.

That one fact alone would have sealed it.