i do not see much paranoia in the reactions in this thread against this move on the part of the bush squad.
what i do see is an attempt to use tried and true conservative "argument" tactics, which tries to dismiss an uncomfortable interpretation of something done by a republican by labelling it pathological.
what seems to underpin these tactics in this case is the assumption that it makes sense to trust the bush administration.
why in gods name would anyone do that?
the reasons not to do so are legion: start with the arguments floated to justify the war and move in any direction...supporters of the administration might not enjoy the fact that there is every reason not to trust george w bush, but the fact remains that it is a perfectly reasonable position to adopt relative to an administration that has shown real contempt for the public, for the international community, and for existing law.
the paranoia talk does nothing in this context except perhaps to point to a certain level of hysteria amongst supporters of the war on this matter...hysteria that would probably be unnecessary if the arguments behind their positions were strong. so far, they are other than totally convincing.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
Last edited by roachboy; 01-02-2005 at 08:00 PM..
|