 |
Friday, March 14, 2003 |
More Wholesome Reading
Since I did the service of passing along someone else's reading recommendations earlier today, let me add a few of my own. Keep in mind that we have it on no less authority than that of the Wall Street Journal that anyone opposing the Bush agenda is a wooly-headed America-hating Hollywood bimbo idiot dupe. Nevertheless, you might want to check out, just for laughs:
- Paul Krugman is in especially excellent form today. A tasty bit: "Consider the debacle of recent diplomacy — a debacle brought on by awesome arrogance and a vastly inflated sense of self-importance."
- Billionaire George Soros, renowned enemy of capitalism, opines in the Straits Times, "The Bush administration believes that international relations are relations of power; legality and legitimacy are mere decorations" and goes on to compare the fleeting moment of American supremacy with a stock bubble that becomes more dangerous the farther it floats from a grounding in reality.
- Mike Lind, quoting Tallyrand, describes Bush's policy as "worse than a crime - it is a mistake." Goddamned moralistic peacenik!
- Over at Reason Online, whose motto is "free minds, free markets," Tim Cavanaugh asks "How do you explain the difference between 41st president's remarkable success in coalition building and the 43rd president's notable failure?"
- And here's a group of commies for you - CIA agents, protesting that the Administration is distorting intelligence reports to push its ideological agenda.
2:24:31 PM
|
|
Stars and Gripes
"Hollywood celebs aren't anti-war, they just hate the President," says the Wall Street Journal. Discuss. (Link courtesy of our good friend Duffy). In the spirit of his request, I will reserve my own comments until later.
Update:
OK, 12 hours is long enough. If anyone wants the full story and debate behind this link, it's here. (along with comments to the original post, which apparently got nuked when I edited this)
10:50:38 AM
|
|
Globalhead
Some comments on a recent post raised interesting questions about the nature and purpose of global economic institutions like the World Bank. Specifically, do the “rationalizations behind the World Bank reek of White Man’s burden?” My response posted here.
7:52:58 AM
|
|
 |
© Copyright 2006 Rob Salkowitz.
Last update: 11/28/2006; 6:35:50 PM.
Emphasis Added Theme designed by Andrew Lueck and Rob Salkowitz. |
|