During the Florida Republican debate, Tim Russert asked the candidates if they were going to still argue for the war even though 60% of the people are against it.
The most cogent statement was from Giuliani when he pointed out that Hillary was for the war right up until a majority of the people turned against it. Of course he was trying to use his steadfastness for this midlife crisis war was a good thing.
McCain actually talked about “winning” versus “surrendering.” What exactly does “winning” mean John? What does “victory” look like? I honestly have no idea what it would look like in Iraq, and even less what a victory over global terrorism would. It’s a canard.
Romney tried to say that Iraq was a threat, and that war was worth it because of 9/11.
Huckabee implied the war was about 9/11 and even said that we still don’t know whether or not Saddam had WMDs. We do Huck.
I hate them all. Except for Ron Paul. He’s the only one that apparently still believes in causality.
No, I hate Ron Paul too, just not about the war.