« TAP touts Kos endorsement | Main | Jerry Bowyer's misleading media bias claim »

April 25, 2007

Comments

Surely you jest. Paul Krugman is "the one exception to the rule" in "revers[ing] the direction of the treason rhetoric"? Don't you remember the widespread accusations on the left that revelation of Valerie Plame's identity was an act of treason? You can Google it.

The first three examples all seem to support your argument, but I can't agree with you on the last two. Giuliani did make an outrageous comment recently that if a Dem were elected in 2008, another 9/11 would be likely, but this quote doesn't make the same treasonous accusations as Limbaugh and Delay. Since when is defense necessarily a bad strategy? I don't know if that's the best characterization of the Dems' plan...I don't even know if we can say the Dems have a plan regarding the GWOT...Anyhow, as for the last quote, I think Krugman is making a completely valid if not necessary point. Sometimes, a state's strategy for dealing with a threat might very well be more harmful to national interest than the threat itself. The failure to realize this possibility may indeed pose a "clear and present danger to national security." I don't think Bush's failures add up to treason, however, (nor does Krugman's rhetoric) since that would imply that every bad foreign policy decision a president makes would amount to treason.

Haven't accusations of treason been a pretty consistent tool of outland Republicans for forever? Or at least from prior to McCarthy onwards? This is a basic campaign staple for them, no? It's a bit ironic coming from a party that finds its strongest support in the CSA South, but it doesn't seem novel.

Dude, can you get a quote where a "Democrat" (in this case a former member of the Reagan Administration, Krugman, Council of Economic Advisers) actually accuses someone of "treason" and not, instead, being a "clear and present danger."

I realize you sometimes aren't too bright, we all have off days, but, like, Republican Krugman (the counterpoint) didn't actually accuse anyone of "treason".

And thus, phyrric balance is achieved.

Actually, Lettuce,
Krugman is a registered Democrat.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagena
=article&node=&contentId=A25169-2003Jan21&notFound=true

Please don't make judgements about people's intelligence when you, yourself, can't even get all the facts straight.

The comments to this entry are closed.