Via NRO, I’ve watched this twice and still can’t get my mind around it. His point is fair: ISIS savages are savage towards women in exactly the way you’d expect, which, one would think, would make this conflict of special interest to feminists. And yet, and yet, watching this guy of all people argue for intervention in this setting to this group is scrambling my brain. My pal Karl calls it a microcosm of the left’s response to the Syria conflict; I think it’s more a microcosm of the left’s response, or non-response, to war more broadly in the age of Obama. You’ve got Waffles, whose political career began as an anti-war advocate before Congress, making the case for humanitarian war to a group that itself got famous staging anti-war protests against the war in Iraq. And, oh yeah, by the way, he himself opposed that Iraq war — after voting for it — and ended up becoming the Democratic nominee because of it, only to fall short. But he landed on his feet when he became secretary of state for a guy who also opposed the Iraq war, notwithstanding the humanitarian arguments for it, and is … now ready to bomb both Iraq and Syria, just like he did Libya, partly on humanitarian grounds. And the great mass of Democratic voters is pretty much chill with all of this, no matter how twisty the pretzel gets. Even the ones who do oppose intervention against ISIS can’t be bothered to make up new “not in our name” signs and take a day off to protest. Everyone’s cool with what’s happening even though no one’s really consistent. Except, I guess, Code Pink.

North Korea’s terrible to women too, you know. Next?