Dissolve into Evergreens
This blog used to be about politics. Not so much anymore as I have worked through my fascination with that subject. It now seems appropriate that with a new president and the end of the Bush nightmare that I move on to new subjects that are more in line with my current interests. I may still occasionally express an opinion about political matters but for the most part I will be commenting on music, photography and personal observations. Thank you for reading.


Current Playlist

Top 100 in iTunes

juscuz's Last.fm Overall Artists 

Chart




Atom Site Feed

B4 d- t k s u- f i- o x-- e- l- c+

Blogarama


< ? Colorado Blogs # >

« - ? Blog Oklahoma * # + »
This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
6.04.2003
 
The Unofficial Paul Krugman Web Page
And the bald-faced misrepresentation of an elitist tax cut offering little or nothing to most Americans is only the latest in a long string of blatant misstatements. Misleading the public has been a consistent strategy for the Bush team on issues ranging from tax policy and Social Security reform to energy and the environment. So why should we give the administration the benefit of the doubt on foreign policy?


I feel for poor ol' Mr. Krugman, I'm sure there are things he would rather be doing than pointing out the obvious to a nation of people that are living in some sort of stupor. (yes, I'm serious here).

The reality that not only are people in the United States of America not shouting from the highest mountaintops for the head of Dubya, they are not even calling for an impeachment, and there is the real risk that this Whitehouse crook might get re-elected in 2004.

ok, think about this.. they LIED about the reason for war with Iraq. Sure they call it over-selling or some such nonsense. But how does anybody get past the admittance by Wolfowitz that invading Iraq was based on a bureaucratic pretense.

Q: Was that one of the arguments that was raised early on by you and others that Iraq actually does connect, not to connect the dots too much, but the relationship between Saudi Arabia, our troops being there, and bin Laden's rage about that, which he's built on so many years, also connects the World Trade Center attacks, that there's a logic of motive or something like that? Or does that read too much into --

Wolfowitz: No, I think it happens to be correct. The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason, but -- hold on one second --


Whoops! So now it seems that the reason for going to war wasn't so much about WMD as it was about strategic politics; giving us a place to move our troops to and position ourselves better in the Middle East. I can understand that (actually makes some kind of twisted sense), but when people were shouted down when they said that the real reasons for the war had little to do with imminent threat and more to do with politics then we have a problem.. because they were right after all. This war was sold on a false prettense.

multiple choice question: Which is a worse lie?

a) Lying about your sex life?
b) Claiming a country is a threat and starting a war?
c) a and b are morally equivalent



|

About Me

bruce
35 yr old
Married
Okie
Highlands Ranch
Denver
Colorado
Student
Recording Engineer
Gemini
Arrogant
Voted for Kerry
Voted for Obama
Scumbag
Narrow-minded
Liberal
Uncle
Smug
Hypocrite
Philosophical Type
Taken
Omicron Male
Feminist Friendly
22.3% Less Smart
Whacko
Rabbit



Any Box

email

Barack Obama Logo
Get Firefox!




Dissolve into Evergreens