This Isn't America

New York Times ^ | March 30, 2004 | PAUL KRUGMAN

[liberallarry]

Last week an opinion piece in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz about the killing of Sheik Ahmed Yassin said, "This isn't America; the government did not invent intelligence material nor exaggerate the description of the threat to justify their attack."

So even in Israel, George Bush's America has become a byword for deception and abuse of power. And the administration's reaction to Richard Clarke's "Against All Enemies" provides more evidence of something rotten in the state of our government.

The truth is that among experts, what Mr. Clarke says about Mr. Bush's terrorism policy isn't controversial. The facts that terrorism was placed on the back burner before 9/11 and that Mr. Bush blamed Iraq despite the lack of evidence are confirmed by many sources — including "Bush at War," by Bob Woodward.

[liberallarry]

Krugman is the loyal opposition at it's best...although partisan supporters of the Bush administration regard him as the Great Satan. He should be required reading for anyone with any pretense to political savvy.

[prion]

I don't read Krugman's columns until Donald Luskin has had a chance to debunk them. That stuff is toxic without the antidote.

[TheBigB]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Oh that's a good one. Krugman is a paid DNC hack, nothing more.

Try a little truth, LL: http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_luskin/luskin032003.asp

[ladtx]

So even in Israel, George Bush's America has become a byword for deception and abuse of power.

Krugman's comments almost always border on the hysterical. He can't be seen as the loyal opposition until he learns and practices critical thinking skills.

[Adrastus]

I take exception to the use of the word "loyal."

[Redcoat LI]

Required reading for the required Krugman reading.
http://www.poorandstupid.com/

[Redcoat LI]

You cannot hide from the Truth squad,Krugman!

[SolutionsOnly]

that picture is not Paul Krugman

[Belisaurius]

liberallarry needs to guess again. There are some folks you could classify as the "loyal opposition". Paul Krugman ain't one of them. He's like Noam Chomski, but without the puckish sense of humor. :)

You've read one Krugman article, you've read them all. He follows a simple formula: Any problem, anytime, anywhere...it's Bush's fault.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

Last week an opinion piece in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz about the killing of Sheik Ahmed Yassin said, "This isn't America; the government did not invent intelligence material nor exaggerate the description of the threat to justify their attack."

That's not America either. Sorry, that's as far as I got.

[Tolik]

He quotes Haaretz which is far left paper, and this far-left opinion becomes in his words an Israeli opinion. It is logical fallacy. All proof built on the wrong premise is wrong too.

[jpl]

So that other perjuring weasel John Dean is coming out with a book declaring that Bush threatens the existence of our very Democracy itself? These irrelevant losers are all screaming at each other in their own little echo chamber.

[liberallarry]

Luskin is a tire-biter, nothing more. Ever time I've checked it was he who was wrong - not Krugman.

It takes more than opposition to current government policies to justify charges of disloyalty. Do you have anything more? Nor do I find Krugman lacking in reasoning or research abilities, or hysterical. He's simply highly partisan...and upfront about it.

None of the above means that I agree with Krugman all the time, or most of the time, or this time. :)

I think the admininistration did exagerate the immediacy of the threat of WMD (although Bush covered his rear) and the official connections between Saddam and Osama...and I think they were right to do so.

I think the attack on Iraq - far from being a distraction in the war on terror - was the right move. I think so because I believe a large part of the Arab world and Arab culture generate and support terrorism and overturning rogue or opposition states is the right strategy.

I think the Bush administration is vulnerable on its domestic economic policies but Greenspan supports them and Greenspan is very difficult to refute.

I agree that the Administration is vulnerable to charges of too much secrecy and abuse of power.

And so on.

[Redcoat LI]

that picture is not Paul Krugman

I know.

[TheBigB]

That pic is Don Luskin.

[Redcoat LI]

Sorry, we forgot about the Doctrine of Liberal Infallibility.

[Redcoat LI]

That pic is Don Luskin.

Krugman accused Luskin of "stalking" him,so here he is.

[MEG33]

Just announced ..Condi will testify under oath in public,the President and VP in front of the full commission instead of just the Chairman and V Chairman.Congress agrees not to consider it a precedent.

[Redcoat LI]

This is Paul Krugman

[prion]

Ever time I've checked it was he who was wrong - not Krugman.

Every time? Like when Krugman left words out of quotations to shift their meaning, or compared tax cuts to job creation using a scale of one year for the former and ten for the latter?