Would You Vote to Authorize the Iraq War?

The MSMers, true to form, are asking all the GOP candidates this question. They haven’t quite got around to asking Hillary, even though she’s the only candidate on either side who did, indeed, vote for the Iraq War. As to why they are asking the question: battle space preparation. They know the Democrats can’t realistically run on Obama’s record, so might as well try to get the issue being Bush, again.

The question is phrased along the lines of, “knowing what we now know, would you have authorized the Iraq war?”. All of the GOP candidates are answering it wrong – mostly by trying to answer it. The proper response to the question is to dismiss it as absurd – because it is absurd. It would be like Asking FDR in the run up to the 1944 election, “knowing what you now know, would you have allowed the Navy to kick it on Sundays rather than having at least half the fleet at sea at any given time?”. Of course the answer is, “I would have had the fleet at battle stations at all times!”. But its a stupid question, all the same. When the decision to invade Iraq was made, we didn’t know what we now know – and a good deal of what we now know is only known because we invaded Iraq. Had we decided not to invade Iraq, a whole series of different issues would confront us today.

The proper way to respond to the question is to state that one doesn’t know what decision he or she would have made at the time, not being privy to every bit of information provided to the President who made the actual decision, with the full support of the American people and the Congress, including Hillary Clinton…but that if any decision comes up about whether or not to use force, it will be made with all due care. To answer “yes” makes you look thick headed, to answer “no” is to presume to impossible knowledge…and to, incidentally, insult every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine who served in Iraq…and especially those who were killed or wounded. It is telling them that their sacrifice was in vain.

Republicans really got to get smart about this – the MSM is going to do nothing but try to destroy Republicans. Every question should be taken in that sense – what bad answer is the MSM trying to get out of me? Will what I say make me look bad to LIV? As 90% of MSM questions are absurd, partisan hackery, the best response is to be dismissive of 90% of their questions and just use any opportunity to speak as a chance to condemn Obama and the eventual Democrat nominee for their 8 years of failure…and then move immediately into talking points about how you’re doing to fix the failures. Don’t play the MSM game – the are just Democrats with by lines and they are out to get you.

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “Would You Vote to Authorize the Iraq War?

  1. Retired Spook May 14, 2015 / 9:39 am

    It’s more than a little disturbing that no candidates for national office seem to be able to say in response to gotcha questions, “I’m not trying to be evasive, but until such time as we develop a functional crystal ball, the premise of your question is ludicrous.”

    • M. Noonan May 14, 2015 / 11:29 pm

      It is only now, after it was revealed that Stephanopolous gave $75,000 to the Clinton slush fund, that some GOPers are saying he shouldn’t moderate a GOP debate! That is how incredibly stupid these people are, at times. You’d think they would have learned their lesson after McCain’s campaign set up Palin on Couric’s show in 2008…

      If we are to have debate moderators, we’ve got Hannity, Levin, Hewitt…Rush, if he could be talked into doing it. And we insist upon an MSMer, go with Jake Tapper, who is at least an honest man. Unless and until the Democrats have a debate moderated by Hannity, no GOPer should enter a debate moderated by 99.9% of the MSMers out there.

      • tiredoflibbs May 15, 2015 / 7:10 am

        You’re right Mark. “Journalists” are getting harder to find. Most are now mouthpieces and operatives for the Democrats. Stephanopolous gets credits for cornering Romney on birth control and perpetuated the “war on women” lis. Most “journalists” are nothing more than hit men and women against non-progressives.

      • M. Noonan May 15, 2015 / 9:43 pm

        Here’s the hackery writ large – a reporter for the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative outfit, finds out about the Stephanopoulos donations to the Clinton slush fund and then asked ABC for comment, which is normal journalist practice…always give the person you’re about to expose a chance to put their two cents in. This is why you’ll see stories saying that “so and so was contacted, but did not respond”. ABC says they’ll get right back to the Free Beacon reporter will something about it all…but before they do that, one of their senior employees – who used to be Hillary’s press flack when she was First Lady! – leaks the story to the liberal Politico which then dresses up the story as Stephanopoulos is voluntarily disclosing the information out of an abundance of honesty…no mention that the only reason he fessed up to a friendly outfit was because he was about to be exposed in a major news story…10 minutes after Politico’s attempted white-wash is published, ABC gives a comment to the Free Beacon reporter!

      • Retired Spook May 15, 2015 / 7:38 am

        go with Jake Tapper, who is at least an honest man.

        I’m hoping honesty is going to be a main topic of discussion in this election cycle. I would go with someone who I only agree with half the time if I sense he/she has a high level of integrity vs. someone I agree with most of the time who I know is a liar. This is where I think Hilary is going to run into some real headwinds, even in her own party. She’ll still fool a lot of LIV’s, but she possesses a rather rare, even in politics, trait of being both incredibly dishonest and incredibly incompetent. Not a good combination for someone who wants to be the leader of the Free World, and there’s such a wealth of known facts about her, there certainly shouldn’t be any need for her opponent to make anything up. The truth is about as bad as it gets.

      • M. Noonan May 15, 2015 / 9:45 pm

        If honesty is on the line in 2016, Hillary will be crushed in an epic defeat…but, the MSM will do all in its power (helped by mindless GOP Establishment types) to keep honesty off the table.

      • j6206 May 15, 2015 / 4:02 pm

        Roger Ailes, was a GOP operative who worked for both Nixon and H W Bush. Now he runs the news org you guys watch. What GS did is nothing.

      • M. Noonan May 15, 2015 / 9:38 pm

        But he’s not working for Nixon, now…nor is it likely that he’s in a position to burnish Nixon’s chances in the 2016 campaign given that, you know, Nixon has been dead since 1994…and H.W. Bush is 90.

        That you refuse to see the obvious partisan hackery in having a Clinton loyalist report the news when Clinton political fortunes are at stake is just bizarre.

      • Cluster May 16, 2015 / 8:47 am

        One other glaring distinction would be to point out that Ailes never put himself in front of the camera and posed as a “journalist”. And I wouldn’t advise any liberal to engage in a conversation about “journalists” unethical ties to politics, because that is a debate they will surely lose.

      • dbschmidt May 15, 2015 / 7:52 pm

        Stephanopolous was and is not a journalist. He was and is a partisan hack brought into the Clinton camp to keep women from coming forward among other things. He is no more a “Journalist” than The “Honorable Reverend” Al Sharpton.

  2. dbschmidt May 15, 2015 / 8:11 pm

    With the attention span of the average American (LIV: 8 sec) now falling below that of a goldfish (9 sec.)–in combination with a built-in deficit in the electoral college–I worry. But I also worry that many of the candidates are answering questions they should turn on the “journalists.” That was one thing I liked about Newt.

    Monday morning quarterbacking is a distraction and/or an opportunity for a gotcha. On my local MSM news this evening–time was made for how “bad” everything is for Jeb Bush to include the flub on Megyn Kelly and today’s “hit” was that Rove was still sitting on the sidelines. No time to mention how one of their own has been a hack job for Dems.

    Then again, IMHO, if anyone asked me (if I were running) about . My patent response would be (to steal a bit of Hillary) “What difference does my opinion on make? I, as President, do not make laws–that is the job of the legislative branch of government. You do understand how our government works with the three separate but equal branches of government?

    If they act like children–treat them like children.

Comments are closed.