Rand Paul: No One Who Voted For Iraq War Should Go On Sunday Shows
Credit: Gage Skidmore
May 19, 2015

Rand Paul is a crafty badger, but he's still a lying liar all the same. In his required-if-you're-running-for-President book, he holds himself out as one who is more qualified because he wasn't a Senator when the Iraq war was voted on and probably would have voted against it anyway. After all, he follows in Daddy Ron's footsteps in more ways than one.

So when Rand Paul criticizes the Sunday shows for inviting guests who supported the Iraq war, that's a play for Democratic votes, particularly when he singles out only one Democrat who hasn't appeared on any Sunday shows.


Republican Sen. Rand Paul writes in his forthcoming book that it is troublesome that those who planned the Iraq War are still invited on Sunday morning political talk shows to give their opinions.

“Let’s take for example the war in Iraq,” writes Paul. “Unlike Mrs. Clinton, had I been senator at the time of the Iraq War, I would have never voted for it, and it troubles me that we were sold the war on false pretense.”

“It’s also bothersome that the mainstream media continues to invite the architects of the Iraq invasion on to share their opinions on Sunday morning shows,” he adds. “History has already begun to harshly judge those who made this country’s decisions after 9/11.”

It bothers me that the mainstream media continues to invite the architects of the Iraq invasion on too, but let's not be singling out Secretary Clinton. Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham own their dunce caps on that vote, too, alongside the entire Republican party who stood by their men and pounded the drums for war.

Paul Krugman:

This was, in short, a war the White House wanted, and all of the supposed mistakes that, as Jeb puts it, “were made” by someone unnamed actually flowed from this underlying desire. Did the intelligence agencies wrongly conclude that Iraq had chemical weapons and a nuclear program? That’s because they were under intense pressure to justify the war. Did prewar assessments vastly understate the difficulty and cost of occupation? That’s because the war party didn’t want to hear anything that might raise doubts about the rush to invade. Indeed, the Army’s chief of staff was effectively fired for questioning claims that the occupation phase would be cheap and easy.

Why did they want a war? That’s a harder question to answer. Some of the warmongers believed that deploying shock and awe in Iraq would enhance American power and influence around the world. Some saw Iraq as a sort of pilot project, preparation for a series of regime changes. And it’s hard to avoid the suspicion that there was a strong element of wagging the dog, of using military triumph to strengthen the Republican brand at home.

Whatever the precise motives, the result was a very dark chapter in American history. Once again: We were lied into war.

I really dislike the weaselly way Rand Paul hijacks the areas where Barack Obama succeeded in 2008 and 2012 to pretend he gives a damn. Yes, I believe he probably wouldn't authorize the invasion of Iraq. I also believe he'd turn the USA into a wholly owned subsidiary of Koch Industries and the John Birch Society. One does not justify a vote for the other.

Can you help us out?

For 18 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit, but now Facebook is drowning us in an ocean of right wing lies. Please give a one-time or recurring donation, or buy a year's subscription for an ad-free experience. Thank you.


We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.