When a position that the right holds is discussed such as the authorization for war your contention is that it is above board and “they signed their names and are accountable” which I agree with. I wish more of them would have had backbone who didn’t agree with it at that time.
But, to discount that the climate wasn’t capitalized on at that time by the right, to push what I feel was a dishonorable agenda, and deceptively manipulated isn’t being honest. It may not have been behavior that you can hold someone accountable for, but it was in my opinion dishonorable and not what I would expect from a leader of the United States.
Last thing, you are very good at rationalizing for the right and coming up with all kinds of logic for showing why your position is correct. But, you are good at that and could rationalize just as well for the non war believers if you chose to do that. You get what I mean? Like a lawyer who could pick either side to argue and win either side he chose regardless of which was right or wrong, just because he was good at coming up with talking points and logic to bolster his case.