Posted on 03/21/2013 12:04:24 PM PDT by neverdem
This week brought two milestones: It has been 10 years since the United States invaded Iraq, and three years since President Obama's health care legislation became law. It's fitting that the two events coincided, because it was the Iraq War that made the passage of Obamacare possible.
Ten years later, many supporters of the Iraq War spent this week either apologizing for or justifying their backing of the war. Personally, I supported the war at the time and the subsequent "surge" strategy, but in hindsight, given the absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, it's hard to see how the endeavor was worth the tremendous financial cost and American deaths involved.
As if that weren't enough, one of the realities that should tip the scales for pro-war conservatives is that the Iraq War paved the way for one of the most significant expansions of the federal government in U.S. history.
In 2004, with the memory of the defeat of the Clinton health care plan still fresh enough in people's minds, the idea of a Democratic president passing universal health care legislation would have seemed like a distant liberal fantasy. In fact, in the Democratic primary, even Howard Dean's health care proposal (that mostly built on existing government programs) was tame by today's standards.
But by 2006, with sectarian violence escalating in Iraq, President Bush's approval rating had cratered and Democrats were able to take over both chambers of Congress in an election that was largely a backlash against the war. Exit polls showed that 56 percent of Americans who voted in that year's midterm elections opposed the Iraq War -- and 80 percent of that group voted for Democrats.
Suddenly, there was a change in what seemed politically possible. In 2007, as the Democratic presidential primary season got under way, emboldened liberal activists were able to convince all of the top contenders to release universal health care plans.
The 2008 economic collapse may have given the final boost to Obama's candidacy, but Americans' disillusionment with the Iraq War created the foundation for his call for change. Though there was little in the way of policy differences between Obama and his rivals, led by Hillary Clinton, one of the most significant factors that set him apart was that he had opposed the Iraq War from the beginning. This allowed him to argue to voters that what he lacked in experience he made up for in judgment -- an argument that he'd continue to make in the general election against Republican Sen. John McCain.
On top of Obama's 2008 victory, congressional Democrats were able to build on their gains from 2006, so that once all the votes were counted (and Sen. Arlen Specter defected) they had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. It was only the lopsided nature of the majorities that allowed a plan as ambitious as Obamacare to become law.
In its first go-round, the health care law passed the House despite 39 Democratic "no" votes. There were 34 Democratic "no" votes in final passage. In the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid had to cut some ugly deals (such as the "Cornhusker kickback" on Medicaid) to clear the 60-vote threshold, with all Democrats and zero Republicans voting for the legislation.
It's quite possible that a Democrat still would have won the White House in 2008, even had the Iraq War never been fought. But that Democrat would not likely have been Obama, nor anyone nearly as liberal. And were it not for the war, no Democratic president would have come into office with as much political capital -- or with such large majorities in Congress -- as Obama did.
It's hard to see how Obamacare would have become law if Bush had never invaded Iraq. This is a bitter pill to swallow for those conservatives who supported the war and bitterly fought Obamacare.
Philip Klein (pklein@washingtonexaminer.com) is a senior editorial writer for The Washington Examiner. Follow him on Twitter at @philipaklein.
That’s a loose thought process. If not Iraq, the media would have gotten Bush another way. Iraq was 5-6 years old before Bush really lost his footing. Events like Katrina and Valerie Plame were the hot issues that got public opinion over the edge....’culture of corruption’, etc. that was the central them in 2006. Additionally, if health care wasn’t passed in 2010, it would have been at some point in the next decade when they had the opening.
I supported the Iraq war... I was wrong.
Just as Carter gave us Reagan, GWB gave us Obama.
The GOP lost the Congress in 2006 because of three corrupt Congressmen and a string of bad GOP Senate candidates.
That is one main reason why I don’t want Jeb Bush as President. Good God can you imagine how bad that President would be after Jeb? George HW Bush gave us Clinton and George W Bush gave us Obama.....Sheesh after Jeb it could be the chick from Mass...forgot her name.
The war was good right and productive. The refusal to defend it is a symptom conservative fickle defenses.
Couple that with the compliant media, and you got Obamacare. The Iraq War had little to do with it.
Yes we all know. All the evils of the world can be laid at the feet of Bush. This is axiomatic, we don’t need 2000 words of bs to repeat it.
Elizabeth Warren?
Similar to what is going on now with the "lets get government out of the marriage business" nonsense.
Got Toe Fungus? Bush’s Fault!
Thank you.
Too many Freepers are willing to capitulate.
I agree with you and I still support it today.
As far as I'm concerned, there was a bigger picture involved that has never been discussed and rightfully so.
We now have military bases and air strips established in Iraq which are likely abandoned right now, but readily accessible if the need arises. We also have approved air space over that country.
If and when a true war breaks out in the middle east, which I firmly believe will happen, Iraq and all we have built there will be an invaluable staging ground for whatever action is necessary on our part......
And Denny Hastert being out for himself, sending up budgets that were fat and GWB not have the conhones to veto one to send him a message..
Hastert was a hotter mess than anyone will admit here IMHO...
Oh yeah. That’s “her” name.
But leaving health care out of the picture, the GOP got into such straits because of the "double whammy." It wasn't just the economy (and the deficits and Katrina) that turned a lot of people against Bush. If the high-profile Obamacons of 2008 are any indication, Iraq was as important.
You could argue that Bush's listlessness and inability to speak up for his policies had more to do with the economic crisis, and that the slump was more important to the average citizen, but for some traditional Republican voters Iraq was where the disaffection started.
Nuts.
The Democrats, MSM Liars, Saddam Hussein, and the Communist Chinese were able to knock down Bush's credibility by playing "keep away" with the MSM's, which were moved by the Russians to Syria in a big airlift before allied forces crossed the berm.
Saddam destroyed the calutrons and other equipment from his nuclear development program, but kept that a state secret: He wanted the world to go on thinking he was working on bioweapons and nuclear weapons.
By not chasing the weapons into Syria and giving the Ba'athists a sanctuary in Syria, Bush gave the Ba'athists, Iranians, and Democrats a weapon to use against him: No WMD's (false) equals "Bush lied, people died." (When was the last time anyone said that to Walter Duranty and Izzy Stone and the rest of our Red Chorus in the 40's?)
Bush's advisors stopped one move short in the WMD chase, and so told the Syrians and Russians it was okay to hide Saddam's materials and equipment.
* * * * *
In Bush's second term, Bill Clinton, James Carville, La. Sen. Mary Landrieu, and Gov. Kathleen Blanco set a political snare for Bush by keeping FEMA out of Louisiana during "Katrina" using Blanco's constitutional power to exclude the Feds, and the MSM did their part by blaming Bush for what Blanco and Landreiu had done. Bush had asked Blanco to let FEMA set up shop days before Hurricane "Katrina" arrived; Blanco said no, on the advice of The Man Behind the Curtain, who was running his wife for President.
THAT is what happened to Bush's second term. Hurricane "Slick".
Which goes back to Karl Rove's constant advice to Bush, never to reply to critics. I don't know where Rove gets that, and some people on FR have begun to wonder if Rove isn't working for the destruction of the GOP. If he isn't some sort of closet case trying to destroy America, conservatism, morality, and the GOP in no particular order, to advance some secretly-hostile agenda. I don't blame them. How destructive could Rove's advice possibly be, and not make people wonder?
AND Bush 41 inflicted the Clinton(s) on us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.