The chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee says President Barack Obama might be taking too long to respond to the growing threat from Islamic militants in Iraq and Syria. 
 
 “I’ve learned one thing about this president, and that is he’s very cautious. Maybe, in this instance, too cautious,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said in an interview aired Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” 
 
 Feinstein said she agrees with an op-ed by Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina over the weekend in The New York Times calling for an immediate military plan to confront the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. 
 
 ISIL’s goal, she said, is to take the Iraqi capital of Baghdad and attack the American Embassy there. 
 
 Though Obama was widely criticized last week for saying the White House didn’t have a strategy for dealing with ISIL, Feinstein said the Pentagon and State Department have been planning for some time. And, she said, she hopes those plans will “coalesce” into a strategy that a coalition of allies can use to confront the militant group. 
 
 Feinstein did praise Obama for including the new Iraqi government in the planning. 
 
 “What I understand he is trying to do is give an opportunity for this new Iraqi government … to make a move that offers an alternative to the Sunni people in [the] country,” she said. 
 
 Read more about: Barack Obama, Iraq, Dianne Feinstein, Syria ||||| Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, on Sunday defended President Barack Obama’s much-criticized Thursday remark that when it comes to taking on the Islamic State extremist group in Syria, “We don’t have a strategy yet.” 
 
 
 
 Appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union,” the Maryland congressman said the Obama administration is working to develop a plan and that “when the time is right, we will do what we have to do.” 
 
 
 
 Ruppersberger said dealing with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL, in Syria was very different than dealing with the group in Iraq, where “the government wants us to come in.” Syria, he said, has sophisticated air defense systems, and the United States has limited intelligence about potential targets in the war-ravaged country. 
 
 
 
 “It’s extremely urgent, but you just don’t rush in because the media’s talking about it,” Ruppersberger said. “We will do what we have to do to protect us from ISIS,” he said, using another acronym for the group. 
 
 
 
 Meanwhile, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, an Iraq War veteran, said the United States should have started working much earlier to stop ISIL and knocked the president for his "strategy" remark. 
 
 
 
 “I think it’s unfortunate that he used the term, we have no strategy in Syria,” the Illinois Republican said. 
 
 Read more about: Barack Obama, Iraq, Syria, Dutch Ruppersberger ||||| Sen. Lindsey Graham on Sunday implored President Barack Obama to be honest to Americans about the threat facing the United States from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. 
 
 And Graham repeatedly pressed the president during the interview with Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday" to take more action to protect American interests. 
 
 "If he does not go on the offensive against ISIS, ISIL, whatever you want guys want to call it, they are coming here. This is just not about Baghdad. This is just not about Syria. And if we do get attacked, then he will have committed a blunder for the ages," the South Carolina Republican said. 
 
 "When I look at the map ... I think of the United States. I think of an American city in flames because of the terrorists' ability to operate in Syria and Iraq," said Graham, who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee. The director of national security, the FBI director, the director of Homeland Security and others have repeatedly told the president of the threat, he said. 
 
 "So, Mr. President, you have never once spoken directly to the American people about the threat we face from Syria, now Iraq. What is your strategy to stop these people from attacking the homeland?" Graham asked. "They have expressed a desire to do so." 
 
 Asked about the president's strategy of limited strikes on ISIL mortars and convoys, the senator said the president needs to do more. 
 
 "He's trying to avoid a bad news story on his watch," Graham said, noting numerous threats from ISIL to the homeland. "We have to have a sustained air campaign. We need to go on offense. There is no force within the U.S. or the Middle East that can neutralize or destroy ISIS without at least American air power." 
 
 Read more about: Iraq, Lindsey Graham, Chris Wallace, ISIL ||||| President Barack Obama’s address detailing the White House’s plan to combat the terrorist threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant received mixed reviews on Capitol Hill on Wednesday evening as lawmakers prepare to potentially give the president new authorities to strike against the militant group in Syria. 
 
 The speech was immediately criticized by some of Obama’s fiercest foreign policy opponents. Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz dubbed the speech “fundamentally unserious” on Fox News. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), using another acronym for ISIL, said on CNN that “the president really doesn’t have a grasp for how serious the threat from ISIS is.” 
 
 Text Size - 
 
 + 
 
 reset 
 
 “The president’s plan will likely be insufficient to destroy ISIS, which is the world’s largest, richest terrorist army,” McCain said in a subsequent statement with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). 
 
 (Full text, video of Obama's speech) 
 
 Senate Democrats praised the speech as a good approach to tackling the growing strength of ISIL in Iraq. 
 
 Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Obama’s plan was a “forceful strategy.” 
 
 “The president tonight laid out a forceful strategy to safeguard our security and that of our allies by rolling back and eventually destroying a brutal extremist group,” the Michigan Democrat said. “The president’s strategy calls for a broad coalition to support Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds and religious minorities as they come together to fight a common enemy.” 
 
 House and Senate leaders will reconvene Thursday to chart a path forward for legislation giving Obama authority under the Authorization for Use of Military Force. House Republicans are weighing attaching the measure to a continuing resolution to fund the government. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is waiting for the House to move before deciding on the Senate’s path forward. 
 
 (Also on POLITICO: Obama: U.S. chasing ISIL 'wherever they exist') 
 
 Reid said Wednesday evening that hearings on the proposal will commence next week. 
 
 “The one element of the strategy outlined by the president tonight that requires immediate congressional action is granting his administration the authority to equip and train Syrian troops to fight ISIS,” he said. “I believe that Republicans and Democrats in Congress will come together in the week ahead in a strong show of support to grant the president this critical authority.” 
 
 Obama detailed a four-part strategy to weaken and eventually “degrade, and ultimately destroy” ISIL, which has been terrorizing Iraqi citizens and has beheaded two American journalists. The effort, Obama said, will include training Iraqi security forces and moderate Syrian rebels — a move the administration has avoided since the outbreak of the civil conflict in Syria two years ago. 
 
 “Our objective is clear: We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy,” Obama said during the prime-time address. 
 
 “We must strengthen the opposition as the best counterweight to extremists like ISIL, while pursuing the political solution necessary to solve Syria’s crisis once and for all.” 
 
 Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said his panel will move to draft a resolution giving Obama the congressional authority to wage a “prolonged military campaign.” 
 
 “President Obama showed important leadership in laying out an initial plan to confront the threat from ISIL before this barbaric group has the ability to execute a large-scale attack against U.S. interests at home or abroad,” he said. 
 
 Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), an outspoken anti-war advocate, said Obama’s polices need to be swiftly put to a congressional vote for authorization. 
 
 “The Constitution requires Congress to vote on the use of military force. This is not about this president. This is about any president and any Congress,” she said. 
 
 Independent Sen. Angus King of Maine said he supports a vote to institute a limited authority for U.S. action in the region and called Obama’s speech “strong.” 
 
 “He did what he had to do,” King said. 
 
 Across the Capitol, House Republicans were generally supportive of Obama’s strategy but broadly called for more specific details on the extent of U.S. involvement in the volatile region. Speaker John Boehner said he supports the plan to train Iraqi forces and Syrian rebels but is concerned that process could take years to implement. 
 
 “A speech is not the same thing as a strategy, however. While the president presented a compelling case for action, many questions remain about the way in which the president intends to act,” the Ohio Republican said. 
 
 Boehner has been part of a cadre of senior lawmakers who met with Obama and received classified briefings from the administration this week on the White House’s strategy to combat the Sunni militant group. 
 
 House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said Republicans still “require a level of commitment to this fight against terrorism not yet seen by this president.” 
 
 “We must recognize ISIL is but a symptom of a broader terrorist threat that has been ignored for too long by this administration,” the California Republican said. “Preventing the next 9/11 requires us to confront the reality that Al Qaeda has metastasized, and that radical terrorists operating out of sanctuaries in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and elsewhere pose a growing threat to the United States must be destroyed.” 
 
 House Republicans will hold an early morning conference meeting Thursday. 
 
 The chamber’s top Democrat, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, praised Obama for establishing a coalition to combat ISIL. 
 
 “I commend the president for his persistent, strong leadership in establishing a government of reconciliation in Iraq, and in his diplomatic efforts to have coordination among of our NATO allies and regional powers,” the Californian said. “Working with a broad coalition of partners and without using U.S. combat forces on the ground, we will lead a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy to dismantle the threat ISIS poses to the region and the United States.” 
 
 Obama’s proposals were panned by two Senate Democrats in tough reelection races who are eager to put distance between themselves and Obama. 
 
 “I will not give this president — or any other president — a blank check to begin another land war in Iraq,” said Colorado Sen. Mark Udall, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “As we have seen in the past, American boots on the ground cannot stamp out an extreme ideology, and the Iraqis must take responsibility for defending their own people.” 
 
 Alaska Sen. Mark Begich said he opposes Obama’s plan to arm Syrian rebels, saying, “The U.S. can’t continue to foot the bill of Middle East conflicts.”
– Republicans were today again busily piling on President Obama's strategy—or lack thereof—against Islamic State militants, but this week they were joined by a pretty prominent Democrat: Dianne Feinstein. "I’ve learned one thing about this president, and that is he’s very cautious," said the Senate Intel Committee chair, adding that, "maybe, in this instance, too cautious." Feinstein said she agreed with John McCain and Lindsey Graham's op-ed this weekend calling for military action, reports Politico, adding that she hopes the Pentagon and State Department can "coalesce" their planning into a single strategy to take on ISIS. Elsewhere on your Sunday dial: Mike Rogers: "This is an opportunity for the president to bring the country together so that we understand this ‘don’t-do-stupid-stuff’ policy isn’t working. If you have your own European allies saying, ‘Maybe the United States isn’t a leader on this issue,’ that’s a problem for us." John McCain: The Arizonan wants "additional US troops" to fight ISIS, and says Obama is "either in denial or overwhelmed. This is a direct threat to the United States of America. It may be one of the biggest we’ve ever faced." Dutch Ruppersberger: Referencing the White House's lack of ISIS strategy, the Maryland Democrat said, "It’s extremely urgent, but you just don’t rush in because the media’s talking about it. We will do what we have to do to protect us from ISIS."