Okay, so it seems to me we have got a couple of different issues here that you brought up. The first question is, does it even make sense for us to do the ``what if'' question? If somebody does this, this, and this, well, we are not going to do that. What is that bias, you know, and is that really helpful? And particularly when these things tend to be nuanced the way they are phrased, it adds a lot of haze and uncertainty. But certainly answering that ``what if'' question probably doesn't make us a more secure country. But let's go to what I think is your second point.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker is discussing the implications of hypothetical scenarios in security discussions.
Share
More from W. Todd Akin
On rollcall No. 456, 457 and 458 I was delayed and unable to vote. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 456, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 457 and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 458. PERSONAL EXPLANATION
On rollcall Nos. 111 and 112, I was delayed and unable to vote. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on both. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Yoder). The gentleman from Utah is recognized for 1 hour.
On rollcall Nos. 75, 76 and 77, I was delayed and unable to vote. Had I been present I would have voted ``no'' on all three. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended. The…
On rollcall Nos. 371, 372, 373, 374 and 375 I was delayed and unable to vote. Had I been present I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 371, ``aye'' on rollcall No. 372, ``aye'' on rollcall No. 373, ``no'' on rollcall No. 374, and…





