have been entertaining myself this morning by reading what the Straits Times has to say about the primaries over here in the US - the goings-on of Kerry, Edwards, Bush and assorted other people who are now out of or on their way out of the fray, like Clark and Dean. while i'm sort of sorry that clark is out of the race -how cool it would be to have a President of the United States who was also once Supreme Allied Commander of NATO- at this point all i am concerned with is that the Dems don't shoot themselves in the foot and destroy the campaign of the man who can beat Bush because they can't decide who they should nominate for the job. argh. all we need is someone to beat Bush. in this case i'll take my chances with the devil i don't know, because the devil i do has done a terrible job, and will in all likelihood continue to do a terrible job if reelected for another four year term. the horror of it.
while waiting for november to arrive i shall continue to entertain myself by reading Krugman's Op-Ed pieces that appear in the NYTimes every wednesday and sunday, which these days invariably point out some shortcoming that Bush and/or his Administration possesses -- lying about WMDs, lying about tax cuts, lying about the cost to the taxpayer of the war in Iraq; or their simple inability to do math -- if income is far far less than expenditure, how the HELL do you expect to decrease the deficit? is the money-supply fairy supposed to come and deal with your crap, or is it a problem for the poor guy who will take office in 2008 -presumably that's the kind of timeline the White House would LIKE to be working with now- to deal with?
bah. today's Op-Ed in particular was entertainingly short and sharp. why the budget contains 27 glossy photos of Bush is a question for another day -- when i get over the horror of the idea of 27 glossy colour photos of Bush in Heroic Presidential Poses. if you have trouble accessing that link -it's to the NYTimes archive of his piece, try the Krugman Archive.
have a nice day. =)