John Boehner rolls out a bizarre new talking point:
“The world is starving for American leadership. But America has an anti-war president,” the Ohio Republican told reporters. “We have no strategy, overarching strategy, to deal with the growing terrorist threat. And it’s not just ISIS or Al-Qaeda or all of their affiliates. We’ve got a serious problem facing the world and America, by and large, is sitting on the sidelines.”
First of all, as that TPM piece says, Obama has done an awful lot of warring for a guy who’s anti-war. But second, and more importantly, isn’t it good to be “anti-war”? Don’t most people, except maybe psychopaths or something, generally agree that war should be avoided if at all possible? Shouldn’t we want our president to prefer not to do war all over the place, if it can be avoided?
To put it another way, what does it say about John Boehner that he thinks the description “anti-war” is some kind of insult?
