that did not end the war and that fact is what makes the debate so odd. several candidates are on defense over iraq. of course you know given the power of looking back and having that, of course, anybody would have made any different decisions. was it a mistake to go to war with iraq? it was not a mistake given the fact that what the president knew at the time she didn t say that. that s not the same question. while bush changed his stance within a week these explanations are still blurring the issues. there are actually three distinct questions on the iraq war. was it the right policy. was it required by the intel at the time. and did it make america safer? notice that two of those questions are just factual. what did the intel say and what were the results of regime change. there are objective answers here. and yet these are the questions top republicans are getting wrong. starting with the intel, it s not true that the information and intel proved hussein had wmds. the
obsessed with. the car represents freedom. it allows us to do what we want to do. i lived in suburban houston and wanted to go downtown houston, because our public transit infrastukt tour isn t great, it allowed me to get there. for a whole generation of people, whether they are in their 50s or 60s, allows you to choose the life you want to live. it s power if you want a powerful car or luxury if you want a luxury car. for my parents going to work both of my parents were work they would get the car and allowed them to have a good job and pick me up after school. alone time there is nothing more freeing than getting in the car with the windows down muse being blazing, coming from utah one of my favorite things of all time to do. it s interesting to thing about industries like moi motels and fast food and highways not existing if it weren t for cars. this show really explores that, gave us everything, it
it s important to point out that republicans have not won the popular vote other than one time since 1988. this would be big for them in 2016. so do you see this as a good sign or is it because there are so many people running there s a candidate for everybody? you know i guess the one silver lining being out of power for eight years, it gives it gives your players a chance to train up for big leagues. suddenly come 2008 you had a very strong democratic presidential primary field and hillary clinton was the favorite and barack obama was this underdog who came out of nowhere. below them there were a ton of candidates. chris dodd don t forget chris dodd. never. there were a lot of candidates the democrats would have been happy with if hillary clinton or barack obama or john edwards had not made it that s where republicans are now i think. i want to ask about an issue vexing hillary clinton a little
republicans in. they are trying to preserve as much leeway as possible to more far back to the center as they can after the primary. they don t want to satisfy anything too declare tif about a future pathway to citizenship. she adopted a position that sort of closed it off to them and said we can t talk about legal status. that s second rate status. you have to talk about a pathway to citizenship and you can t talk about shutting down a president obama s executive orders only when a new bill passes because you ll have power to turn those off on day one when you become president. so she s trying to close the door when they try to leave it fairly wide open to walk through after the primary. i think there s something similar going on here. where not only does this demonstrate her genuine concern to the issue but raises a question what do we want dreamers to do in our society. and when hillary clinton can go and say not only do i do i
discredited claims but independent analysts suggested otherwise at the time. and while politicians in both parties did back the war, many didn t and were skeptical of the intel. senator kennedy stressed at the time it didn t show iraq was an imminentproliferateor of wmds. it s false to blame our intelligence analysts for a war of choice. that gets the facts backwards. then there are the facts of regime changes itself. over a decade later, we can compare the impacts in iraq before and after hussein. removing him led to more attacks on us more lawless turf that incubated groups like al qaeda and isis and required a longer presence than when hussein stayed in power after the first gulf war. those are the costs and results. they are worse than what america faced during hussein s regime. and yet on this factual question, these candidates are reverting become to war apologists insisting it s better