It is not surprising when Liberals take both sides of an argument. They see no problem with their inconsistency, especially in the area of politics. Many want to push their policies while not hurting others in their party. What this produces is illogical babbling where they tell us yes and no at the same time. This has shown to be the case in a recent interview with a top Democratic leader.
A top Democrat on Sunday criticized the pace of the Obama administration’s war against the Islamic State, saying the U.S. needs to “change the dynamic on the ground.”
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a top Democrat who has been critical of the administration’s policy, said he supports creating a no-fly or buffer zone — “something that can end the refugee flows, something that can give space and time to train up forces to take on ISIS.”
Though many would agree with Schiff, things have moved very slowly. Even some Republicans have called for no-fly zones over Syria. And we should not be shocked that Democrats are coming out to criticize the Presidents efforts against ISIS. But he changed his tune when confronted with Clinton’s comments on the war.
The Hill reports
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, says Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton was right to say the U.S. is
“where we need to be” in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
“Well, this was in the context of do we go after [Syrian President Bashar al-] Assad or do we go after ISIS – can we do both? And her answer was basically we need to do both, and now for the first time we have a political process at the United Nations that ought to bring about an end to both,” Schiff said on “Fox News Sunday.”
It seems impossible to be both moving too slowly and just where we need to be at the same time. This is comparable to a woman saying her husband was just the right height but too short. He cannot have it both ways.
Either the President has moved too slowly, or he has not. The problem for Schiff is that the President’s handling of the ISIS situation is going badly. The Democrats know that this fact is indisputable, yet they have a candidate who is clueless. She has come out in support of the current strategy, and they cannot do anything to make her look bad. So this has led to Schiff speaking out of both sides of his mouth.
President Obama has rejected implementing a no-fly zone near Syria, arguing that it would draw the U.S. into the regional conflict even more.
“I do think the administration ought to re-examine the idea of establishing safe zones,” Schiff reiterated on “Fox News Sunday.” “I think they ought to put that front and center in the U.N. negotiation, because I do think it has the potential of really changing the battlefield conditions and they have been stalemated for too long.”
Schiff also defended Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton’s comments Saturday night that the U.S. is “where we need to be” in the fight against ISIS.
So, how can both of these things be correct? Well, they cannot. If we are right where we need to be, then the President is right. We do not need to change the pace or set up no-fly zones. But, if Schiff and most of the rest of thinking America are right and things need to change then Clinton and Obama are wrong.
But both of these things cannot be true.