Buy WILLisms XML Feed Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM June 20, 2005 5:36 AM Oct. 31, 2005 12:41 AM Nov. 23, 2005 3:28 PM Nov. 30, 2005 1:33 PM May 12, 2006 6:15 PM Oct. 17, 2006 12:30 AM Dec. 13, 2006 1:01 PM Dec. 18, 2006 6:37 PM Dec. 21, 2006 12:31 PM Dec. 22, 2006 10:22 PM July 25, 2007 4:32 PM May 28, 2008 11:12 PM June 9, 2008 12:25 PM Blogroll Me! July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 March 13, 2008 Due: July 29, 2008 Mar. 14, 2006 Apr. 4, 2008 May 19, 2007 July 9, 2006 July 14, 2006 Powered by Movable Type 3.17 Site Design by Sekimori WILLisms.com June 2008 Book of the Month (certified classy): The WILLisms.com Gift Shop:
This Week's Carnival of Revolutions:
Carnival Home Base:
|
« Wednesday Caption Contest: Part 128. | WILLisms.com | Quotational Therapy: Part 142 -- Hillary Clinton, Panderer, Flip-Flopper. » Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 473 -- Misremembering Past Opinions.The Disingenuous Anti-War Movement- Since late 2003 or so, there has been a concerted effort to re-write the history of the beginning of the Iraq war. The leader of the effort, Howard Dean, as Governor of Vermont, very well may have been against the invasion all along. John Kerry and John Edwards, however, were in the Senate. And they not only voted to go to war, they spoke about Saddam Hussein, his desire for weapons of mass destruction, his perpetration of genocide, and so forth. They were on board. In the 2004 campaign, however, Johns Kerry and Edwards somehow got away with making the claim that it was all Bush's fault. He misled them. Never mind that-- as Senators-- they had access to intelligence reports detailing the Iraqi threat. Never mind that the most prominent Democrats in America believed Saddam Hussein was a menace who intended to acquire and use weapons of mass destruction. Never mind that WMD were only the secondary part of the seven-part case for war. Never mind any of that. Voters saw through the Kerry Edwards claims in 2004. The 2004 election , however, bought Bush about a year to fix Iraq. By late 2005, when American casualties continued and chaos seemed indefinite, the anti-war movement started to go much more mainstream. Something else happened heading into the 2006 midterms. More and more people began misremembering their own support for invasion. Gary C. Jacobson, of the University of California (San Diego), published an article in the Spring of 2007, analyzing what happened in the 2006 elections. Although the article made a slight splash for its hit on Fox News viewers (asserting they were essentially uninformed religious zealots) and Republicans in general, I found this bit of information very interesting (.pdf): ![]() Misremembering. Interestingly, 9 percent MORE Republicans in 2006 recalled supporting the war in 2003 than actually did, while 8 percent fewer independents and 25 percent fewer Democrats remembered correctly. As far as WMD are concerned, this is where a stunning 46 percent of Democrats misremembered. Now, remember, these data are pre-surge. With some very real progress in Iraq these days, one would have to assume that some of the misremembering would shift back a bit. When there is success, people don't want to be seen as having doubted. See the Republican candidates' debate arguments over who was really more for "the surge" earlier than anyone else for evidence of this. Back to this data, though. In 2003, I supported the invasion, felt like coalition forces would uncover something at least marginally worthy of the label "WMD" in the first few weeks of the war, and was pretty darn sure that Saddam Hussein was not personally responsible for 9/11. What bothers me, though, is the rampant misremembering. It's just too convenient. It's far too simple for people to absolve themselves of responsibility by claiming, falsely, that they were against the war all along. Or, maybe they correctly recall being against the war, but they erroneously recall believing Iraq was totally WMD-free. Not only that, but anyone who actually believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction was and is some sort of idiot. I see it all the time in real life, not just on debate stages featuring Democrats. The history of the Iraq war is still being written. And rewritten. As far as I am concerned, people can misremember all they want to the extent that we win this thing, but if that misremembering leads to a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq, just as tangible progress is seemingly being achieved there, it will be shameful and dangerous. And when Iraq becomes a haven for terrorists much like Afghanistan was before 2001, many of those same misrememberers will assuredly further misremember and whine that we didn't finish the job like we should have. People, you're on record. It's fine to change your mind about the war, but don't act like you didn't flip-flop. Maybe, like John McCain, you can successfully claim that you supported the war but opposed Rumsfeld and the Bush administration's execution of it. Okay, that flows, logically. That lets us win. That doesn't make you so intellectually and emotionally vested in failure. If, however, the singular goal is a premature evacuation from Iraq for the sake of cleansing your guilty conscience ("oh, dear, how could I have ever supported war"), I might suggest hypnotherapy or pills or something else that doesn't harm the future security and stability of the United States.
Previous Trivia Tidbit: Stocks Go Down When Congress Meets. Posted by Will Franklin · 11 January 2008 11:43 AM Comments |