- Joined
- Sep 25, 2005
- Messages
- 15,675
- Reaction score
- 2,979
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Paul Krugman writes editorials in the New York Times. Yesterday, he wrote one where he talked about the status of issues one year ago and what we see now, i.e., how much things have changed since then. Here are my 3 favorites (which are consecutive in the article):
A year ago, Mr. Bush hadn't yet openly reneged on Scott McClellan's 2003 pledge that "if anyone in this administration was involved" in the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity, that person "would no longer be in this administration." Of course, some suspect that Mr. Bush has always known who was involved. (this is me, for verification of such statment, see http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030929-7.html, where McClellan stated, "He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct." Yeah right!)
A year ago, we didn't know that Mr. Bush was lying, or at least being deceptive, when he said at an April 2004 event promoting the Patriot Act that "a wiretap requires a court order. ...When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."
A year ago, most Americans thought Mr. Bush was honest.
A year ago, we didn't know for sure that almost all the politicians and pundits who thundered, during the Lewinsky affair, that even the president isn't above the law have changed their minds. But now we know when it comes to presidents who break the law, it's O.K. if you're a Republican.
http://select.nytimes.com/2005/12/3...rials and Op-Ed/Op-Ed/Columnists/Paul Krugman
A year ago, Mr. Bush hadn't yet openly reneged on Scott McClellan's 2003 pledge that "if anyone in this administration was involved" in the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity, that person "would no longer be in this administration." Of course, some suspect that Mr. Bush has always known who was involved. (this is me, for verification of such statment, see http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030929-7.html, where McClellan stated, "He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct." Yeah right!)
A year ago, we didn't know that Mr. Bush was lying, or at least being deceptive, when he said at an April 2004 event promoting the Patriot Act that "a wiretap requires a court order. ...When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."
A year ago, most Americans thought Mr. Bush was honest.
A year ago, we didn't know for sure that almost all the politicians and pundits who thundered, during the Lewinsky affair, that even the president isn't above the law have changed their minds. But now we know when it comes to presidents who break the law, it's O.K. if you're a Republican.
http://select.nytimes.com/2005/12/3...rials and Op-Ed/Op-Ed/Columnists/Paul Krugman
Last edited: