Major gaffe: Clueless John Boehner says Iraq "small price to pay" if we're "able to stop Al Qaeda"

[flpoljunkie]

Okay, if this isn't portrayed as a major gaffe, with wall-to-wall condemnations from the pundits, it'll be stunning. (Editor's note: That was meant to be bitterly ironic.)

I've just received some advance excerpts of an interview CNN's Wolf Blitzer has done with GOP House leader John Boehner. It's set to air this afternoon. Take a look at this chunk:

BLITZER: How much longer will U.S. taxpayers have to shell out $2 billion a week or $3 billion a week as some now are suggesting the cost is going to endure? The loss in blood, the Americans who are killed every month, how much longer do you think this commitment, this military commitment is going to require?

BOEHNER: I think General Petraeus outlined it pretty clearly. We’re making success. We need to firm up those successes. We need to continue our effort here because, Wolf, long term, the investment that we’re making today will be a small price if we’re able to stop al Qaeda here, if we’re able to stabilize the Middle East, it’s not only going to be a small price for the near future, but think about the future for our kids and their kids.

Note that Boehner is specifically answering a question about troop deaths here -- which he calls a "small price," should we win the war.

This is an obvious point, but it bears making again, anyway: It's really uncanny how often those who aren't sacrificing anything for the Iraq war, aside for perhaps their health in the polls, are willing to...

(a) Describe the very real sacrifice being made by others as not being such a big deal

...while simultaneously...

(b) Describing the sacrifice others are making as their own.

Also, it bears pointing out that Boehner's overall thought here -- that we'll have made a small sacrifice "if we're able to stabilize the Middle East"-- is a pretty big "if." Of course, if you're not really sacrificing anything in the quest to realize this big "if," then there's not much to be lost in going for it even if it is a real long shot, now is there.

Video at link below:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/09/gop_leader_boeh.php

[Joe for Clark]

1. If he really thinks that - why isn't he enlisting??

Joe

[jmp]

11. War is for the poor. (nm)

...

[bluerum]

2. "Winning" a war against an idea. I like to win as much as the next guy,

but this is insane. We are NEVER going to stamp out an idea.

This is madness.

[MonkeyFunk]

3. Why would it be portrayed as a gaffe?

It's pretty much what the Republican rationale for the war has been all along.

[flpoljunkie]

5. Because we have not paid a "small price in Iraq"--either in lives or treasure. To say so, denigrates

the sacrifice of our soldiers--many who have paid the "ultimate price."

[MonkeyFunk]

9. "a small price to pay"

doesn't mean the price itself is small, but that it's small relative to the risk.

As disgusting as Boehner is, this won't bite him at all.

[Bitwit1234]

4. That is because his family is not in Iraq.

[muntrv]

6. Then enlist. It's a "small price."

[The Count]

7. Shrek's Lord Farquar: "Some of you are going to die, but that's a price I'm willing

to pay"

[Parche]

8. Pull A Boner

He needs to ............Move On........

[trof]

10. "We’re making success."?

Um.......:wtf:???????

[4_TN_TITANS]

12. What leaped out at me was

"we're making success"

Making up success in the form of reports from spineless shills...