[Previous entry: "Snowed in"] [Main Index] [Next entry: "A strange optimism"]
02/06/2003 Archived Entry: "Back to war"
On the Political Front:
The Libertarian Party's weekly press release is a good tho' brief analysis of Bush's faux tax cuts. Cato Institute provides a bit more detail on how Bush has proposed nearly $100 billion more in non-defense discretionary spending than Clinton. The upcoming war is not factored into this mad money-spending. And, yet, there are still people who argue that Republicans are for "small government."
Powell has made his case for war to the UN. Some initial reaction...Phyllis Bennis' "Powell's Dubious Case for War," Tim Reid's "Smudged by the Shadow of a Gun"...and, of course, a slump in the US dollar.
Meanwhile, along with the Bush administration explicitly including "the nuclear option" in its strategy, the Energy Department budget for 2004 proposes a 9 percent increase in nuclear weapons related funding, bringing spending to $6.4 billion. Weapons are made to be used. Just as the atomic bomb, originallyd eveloped to counter Hitler was used altho' Germany had ceased to be a threat, so too with the nuclear weapons be used if we invest too heavily in them, both financially and emotionally.
Those who wonder why the above stories do not receive more play in the popular media might be interested in Robert Jensen's excellent piece "DAN RATHER AND THE PROBLEM WITH PATRIOTISM: Steps toward the Redemption of American Journalism and Democracy."