Obama and war hawks on #ISIS vs reality-based Democrats

In light of the brutal murder of James Foley by the Islamic State in Iraq (portions of) and Syria (the semi-failed state of), US President Barack Obama is now hinting at upping involvement in Iraq.

A bit more detail here; the administration is saying troops are a possibility. "Under 300" sounds not too bad, right? But, in reality, it sounds like the "drip, drip, drip" of how we sent more and more to Vietnam.

And pressure to keep escalating that drip, drip, drip is certainly possible. It's very possible when you've got warhawk nuts like Sen. John McCain (R-Airplane Crashes) egging you on, along with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-I Might Be Gay).

Fortunately, at least one House Democrat, and one with a bit of say-so in matters, is saying "hold on":

“We shouldn’t allow this horrible act to provoke us into doing things that are counterproductive,” said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, on CNN’s "New Day." “There’s nothing ISIS would like more than having us reintroduce ground troops into Iraq, for example.”
 He said the U.S. “had to know that when we get involved with airstrikes, that ISIS is going to strike back at us in any way they can.”

Couldn't have said it better myself.

As for the ISIS brutality level? We're just upset because they might cut off oil, and because we've officially labeled them terrorists. That's in contradistinction to our ally in the War on Terra against Afghanstan, Islam Karimov, president of Uzbekhistan, who has boiled alive political opponents.

On the other hand, if you take Rick Perry seriously (and why?) ISIS has already crossed the border. As in the US border. Last I heard, Perry was sending the National Guard to the Travis County DA's office.