With the legacy media's obsession with Donald Trump, you may have missed a stunning admission by the White House about their bizarre non-strategy to defeat ISIS: Their policy is being dictated by Koranic prophecy.
I kid you not.
After President Obama's Oval Office statement about the San Bernardino terrorist attack, he was roundly criticized for continuing to push and defend his obviously failed light-touch "no boots on the ground" strategy.
The shocked reaction of, well, everyone, clearly indicated to Mr. Obama that everyone is out of step except him. He decided he would reveal to the great unwashed masses why it is so vital the United States not confront the terrorist caveman army directly: Because it would fulfill Koranic prophecy of a doomsday fight between "the Romans" and the defenders of Islam and the caliphate.
In other words, we are allowing a fantasy of an army of the insane to control American foreign policy.
Mr. Obama's feckless regime used its always trusty messenger, The New York Times, to explain the White House's Koranic strategy to the unsophisticated (i.e. the American people).
The Times breathlessly reveals to us that ISIS "bases its ideology on prophetic texts stating that Islam will be victorious after an apocalyptic battle to be set off once Western armies come to the region. Should that invasion happen, the Islamic State not only would be able to declare its prophecy fulfilled, but could also turn the occurrence into a new recruiting drive at the very moment the terrorist group appears to be losing volunteers."
The newspaper often used by the White House to distribute public relations narratives, then directly tells us, "It is partly that theory that President Obama referred to in his speech on Sunday ..."
Now all the bizarre nonsense spewing from Mr. Obama's henchmen and sycophants makes perfect sense, if you're being driven by Koranic prophecy, that is. We've been told for over a year now that we can't confront ISIS directly because ... that's what they want!
The singular talking point has been so absurdly pushed, the folks over at the online investigative magazine, Free Beacon, have produced a video titled, "The Islamic State Wants Us To Destroy It," within which they lampoon a litany of talking heads, politicians and academics moving the White House's narrative:
"Dozens of thought leaders familiar with the terrorist group say that its members yearn for the day that close air support from an A-10 Warthog cuts them in half while coalition soldiers storm Raqqa," notes the Beacon. "They are begging for U.S. troops on the ground," former Obama administration official Van Jones said. "That's what they want."
"The one thing ISIS wants the most: American boots on the ground," CNN anchor Fareed Zakaria said. "As long as we're relying on military force, this is the kind of terms [sic] that ISIS wants. This is what strengthens them," Institute for Policy Studies scholar Phyllis Bennis said. "More war is exactly what ISIS wants," Sen. Angus King, Maine independent, said.
In an apparent effort to reinforce the validity of what the savages think, The New York Times hammers home the value of the Obama approach by quoting a French academic, "I have said it repeatedly: Because of these prophecies, going in on the ground would be the worst trap to fall into. They want troops on the ground. Because they have already envisioned it," said Jean-Pierre Filiu, a professor of Middle East Studies at Sciences Po in Paris, and the author of "Apocalypse in Islam," one of the main scholarly texts exploring the scripture that the militants base their ideology on."
All of this becomes somewhat confusing. Mr. Obama, in virtually every speech including those after the massacres in Paris and San Bernardino, made it clear that ISIS is not Islamic. That what the terrorists do has nothing to do with Islam. Yet, in the next breath we are told that our policy in destroying the "nothing to do with Islam" savages is being controlled by Islamic prophecy.
Moreover, the racism embedded in this grotesque approach is striking. The Obama administration clearly believes that if you scratch the surface of every Muslim in the world you'll find a genocidal, child-killing savage fanatic ready to flood the Middle East to join in on the coming prophecy of doom.
The notion that we should concern ourselves with what the insane enemy thinks is obscene, as is this concept that the American military is somehow helpless in the face of an army of Charles Mansons. Mr. Obama may be awed when facing a cultic and corrupted view of the Koran, but our military is not.
This lack of confidence in the military by the current regime is not entirely surprising when the commander in chief is more sensitive to the beliefs of the Islamic terrorist enemy than he is the Constitution of the United States.
The best way to eliminate any sort of 'prophecy' that drives ISIS is to demonstrate its falsehood by destroying them quickly and without mercy. If there is no 'caliphate' with which to run to, the supposed hordes of 'volunteers' coming to ISIS' aid are welcome to join them in their graves.
That horde, as "prophesized," will not arrive as the fact of the matter is Muslims, like all other decent people around the world, understand who the enemy is and what's at stake. No, Mr. President, they are not all waiting to unleash their inner jihadi.
One only need to look to the 20th century for the precursor "religion" of monsters like ISIS - fascism - to debunk an ongoing and particular liberal prophecy. The left has always argued that America defending herself against totalitarians of the world will only cause more people to join the fight against her. It's the only way the left can survive, by convincing the decent to do nothing.
• Tammy Bruce is a radio talk show host.