Krugman: Taken for a Ride

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/19/opinion/19KRUG.html?hp

Excerpt:

Taken for a Ride
By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: March 19, 2004
"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." So George Bush declared on Sept. 20, 2001. But what was he saying? Surely he didn't mean that everyone was obliged to support all of his policies, that if you opposed him on anything you were aiding terrorists.

Now we know that he meant just that.

A year ago, President Bush, who had a global mandate to pursue the terrorists responsible for 9/11, went after someone else instead. Most Americans, I suspect, still don't realize how badly this apparent exploitation of the world's good will — and the subsequent failure to find weapons of mass destruction — damaged our credibility. They imagine that only the dastardly French, and now maybe the cowardly Spaniards, doubt our word. But yesterday, according to Agence France-Presse, the president of Poland — which has roughly 2,500 soldiers in Iraq — had this to say: "That they deceived us about the weapons of mass destruction, that's true. We were taken for a ride."
...

This week the Bush campaign unveiled an ad accusing John Kerry of, among other things, opposing increases in combat pay because he voted against an $87 billion appropriation for Iraq. Those who have followed this issue were astonished at the ad's sheer up-is-down-ism.

In fact, the Bush administration has done the very thing it falsely accuses Mr. Kerry of doing: it has tried repeatedly to slash combat pay and military benefits, provoking angry articles in The Army Times with headlines like "An Act of `Betrayal.' " Oh, and Mr. Kerry wasn't trying to block funds for Iraq — he was trying to force the administration, which had concealed the cost of the occupation until its tax cut was passed, to roll back part of the tax cut to cover the expense.

But the bigger point is this: in the Bush vision, it was never legitimate to challenge any piece of the administration's policy on Iraq. Before the war, it was your patriotic duty to trust the president's assertions about the case for war. Once we went in and those assertions proved utterly false, it became your patriotic duty to support the troops — a phrase that, to the administration, always means supporting the president. At no point has it been legitimate to hold Mr. Bush accountable. And that's the way he wants it.

definitely

for my repub father in law.

Kick for Krugman!

:kick:

I wonder: Did the president of Poland really say "We were taken for a ride" or was this the work of a translator fluent in American idioms? Either way it's refreshingly economical and quirkily undiplomatic. A tip of the snap-brimmed fedora to President Kwasniewski.

...to cover up its corruption and lack of legitimacy is what this potential dictatorship is all about. Goebbels couldn't do a better job.

and throw them out on their sorry butts?

get on cable TV and let people know what is really going on....there is no one on TV who has the facts....they all are lap dogs for Bush....it's sickening!