BloggeRhythms

Countless articles, TV reports and analysis, along with talking-heads and experts of every stripe are continually dissecting the incumbent.’s plans for dealing with the situations in Iraq and Syria wrought by ISIS.

 

However, after reviewing significant numbers of opinions, none that I’ve seen yet mention the roots of the problem, which seem to me to be very clear. Because, it appears obvious that the first, and most important question, to ask should have been where in the world anyone with an iota of intelligence imagine that the knowledge, experience or capability would come from for a political hack from Chicago to handle an international threat like this one?

 

Furthermore, not only is situational understanding missing completely, decisions are being made from a totally political perspective alone. Despite significant disagreement from seasoned advisors far more capable and first-hand familiar with what should be done, how, when, and where.

 

While Desert Storm had a coalition of 35 nations we now have 13. Showing how much international credibility and trust has been lost under this administration with it's lack of leadership.

 

According to Anne Bernard and David R. Kirkpatrick of the New York Times on Thursday, “[E]ven those most supportive of the [air] strikes — members of the American-vetted groups that stand to gain new aid to fight ISIS — complained that the United States had abetted the extremists’ rise by failing to help other insurgents earlier. They said the United States was attacking ISIS now only because the group threatened it as well as the broader world.

 

They said that they welcomed new American aid, but that it remained to be seen whether it would improve on smaller efforts in recent years that have failed to produce a unified, effective or consistently moderate opposition force.”

Consequently, even the nation’s staunches allies, including the UK, Germany and Turkey, are concocting all kind of stories about why they choose not to join in the fight at this time. But, their reasons are still quite obvious, being based on a pattern of falsities wherein only appeasing his voter-base matters at all to POTUS. Therefore, when and where he backs down later, they don’t want to be left holding the bag all alone. 

Along the same lines of political hackery, dailycaller.com reports that former speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, made “dramatic, incongruous statements on “Real Time with Bill Maher,” on Friday.”

On the one hand, she claimed that Democrats are not “fear-mongers;” while on the other, she believes civilization is doomed if Republicans take control of the Senate from Democrats in November.

When asked her about recent polling showing that the GOP is likely to take over the upper chamber and considering the gridlock in Washington, why it matters that Democrats keep control, she answered, “It would be very important for the Democrats to retain control of the Senate. Civilization as we know it today would be in jeopardy if the Republicans win the Senate.”

Now, fully realizing it was Pelosi who said it, and Bill Maher who asked the question, it would still be expected that the host would ask her what she meant. Because her comment was so far beyond rational intelligence, it was totally, unequivocally ridiculous and quite childish.

Nonetheless, the show moved on without further comment about the issue at all.

So, here we have today, two of the Democrat party’s prime leaders, the POTUS and former speaker of the House. And while the nation faces incredibly dangerous threats here and abroad, it’s being led by two of the most unqualified, political slugs that ever existed.

That's it for today folks.

Adios