Susan Rice Does Her Typical, Goofy, Sunday Morning Thing...

Doesn't she ever get tired of her boss making her look like a fool? It seems not since she went out on the Sunday morning news circuit to talk about how great the air campaign against ISIS is going. Please - no one believes it. Not even she believes what she's saying.

Rice told NBC's "Meet The Press" Sunday that the Obama administration was not going to re-evaluate their strategy to "degrade and destroy" ISIS despite its recent territorial gains.

“This is very early days of the strategy. The strategy is very clear. We’ll do what we can from the air. We will support the Iraqi security forces, the Kurds, and ultimately over time, the moderate opposition in Syria to be able to control territory and take the fight to ISIL,” Rice said.

I guess watching the imminent fall of Komani and the soon to fall Baghdad just doesn't seem to be a problem for the Obama administration. Has he thought, I wonder, to get all of the Americans out of Baghdad before that happens? Can you say Saigon redux?

Ms. Rice, conveniently or cleverly, apparently doesn't watch the news. 

“There has been no recommendation from the American military commanders, either on the ground or here in Washington, that the United States put any ground combat forces into Iraq. That has not come up the chain to anyone at the White House and I don’t anticipate that it will,” Rice said. “The president has been very plain that this is not a campaign that requires, or even would benefit from, American ground troops in combat again.”

Really? Perhaps she should have been watching another channel, where the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Major General Martin Dempsey, was saying just the opposite.

Asked by ABC's Martha Raddatz “Would we be more effective against ISIS if we had U.S. troops on the ground spotting targets," General Dempsey replied “Yeah. There will be circumstances when the answer to that question will likely be yes, but I haven’t encountered one right now.”

“Mosul will likely be the decisive battle in the ground campaign at some point in the future," Dempsey continued. "When the Iraqi Security Forces are ready to go back on the offensive. My instinct at this point is that that will require a different kind of advising and assisting because of the complexity of that fight."

Apparently oblivious to what General Dempsey was saying on the other channel, Susan Rice doubled down on her position. “Our efforts have various, different lines of effort, as we call them. On the one hand, we’re trying to build up the capacity of the Iraqis, which means the Iraqi army, the Kurds – the Peshmerga inside of Iraq… we’re building up that capacity and we have seen some success in that regard. On the Syrian side, we also have a longer-term challenge of supporting the moderate opposition, and giving them, while they have great will, greater capacity to fight Assad and to fight ISIL.” So, this is going to take time,” Rice continued. “Our air campaign is off to a strong start… it can’t be judged by merely what happens in one particular town or in one particular region.”

So far the air campaign has saved one dam and one group of people on a mountain top. I'm pretty sure the Kurds aren't impressed by the support they've received. Kobani is nearly gone. Baghdad airport is in grave danger right now, with the city not far behind. If President Obama's stated goal of air strikes is "not designed to prevent ISIS from gaining more territory," what is it's purpose? If ISIS is allowed to conquer city after city and mile after mile of Iraq and Syria - how is it that we're "degrading and destroying" them? They don't seem to be getting the message.

Every day I'm more astounded that there are people in this country who still believe President Obama is doing a good job. When you ask them why they think that what you normally get are liberal talking points - mostly blaming the Republicans and/or George W. Bush. Sadly, some people actually believe those talking points regardless of the mountain of evidence to the contrary.

"The people spoke in 2012 and elected President Obama to a second term." I've heard that more than once. Yet they don't have much else to say and Obama's poll numbers tell the truth. He has some of the lowest poll numbers in history for a second term President halfway through.

I look forward to the November elections. Americans have said they are going to send a message to the President and give the House and Senate to the Republicans. And while that will be a good thing let's not forget what happened in 2010 and 2012. Republicans, inspired by the Tea Party, took control of the House. Then, in 2012, Republican voters stayed home because they did not like the Republican candidate and Obama won again. Great message there. "We'll vote against you - unless we don't like our own candidate."

If Republicans stay home in 2016 because the Republican candidate is not their choice, and the Democrat wins, then they - the ones who didn't vote - deserve what they get. The rest of us don't deserve it but we'll have to live with it. You'd think they'd have learned in 2012...