The Democrats' terror compassion gap

It’s gotten so bad that even the reliably liberal and pro-Obama Piers Morgan is writing that Donald Trump’s plan for a temporary ban on Muslim immigration is dumb, but Obama’s do-nothing approach is even dumber. Morgan writes: “The reason Trump’s new, stunningly divisive message is resonating with so many Americans is that none of his opponents seems to have a clue how better to deal with this deadly threat, especially President Obama. … As Obama is seen to be fiddling while Rome burns, Trump is seen, whether you agree with him or not, to at least have an understanding of the immediacy and scale of the threat and a clear determination to try and deal with it. … [Obama] sounded utterly devoid of any real new ideas on how to tackle ISIS, whose military and economic power strengthens every day. He spoke in weary tones of how we were going to beat them but nobody listening to him could have felt remotely convinced that he has a clue how this will actually happen. His current strategy clearly isn’t working, yet all he promises is more of the same. Obama’s whole attitude to ISIS has always been breathtakingly complacent, and now this casual approach has come back to haunt him.”

Yes. When we talk about “compassion” in American politics, it usually involves some sort of scheme to give poor people money. But compassion ultimately comes down to caring what happens to people, and when Obama acts as if he doesn’t take the threat of Islamic terrorism in America seriously, he’s sending a signal that he doesn’t care what happens to Americans who might be victims of terrorism or even about Americans who are worried about becoming victims.