Sunday, February 26, 2006
What we need now is another Cold War.
With all the attention this week on the potential UAE management of U.S. ports and the incipient civil war in Iraq, it sure would be nice for the administration to have another enemy to worry about. Someone to divert attention for a few news cycles from the global war on terrorism. Wait -- here's an idea:
Cheney is "skeptical" of Putin now? I don't think so. He's been fighting the Cold War since he was a graduate student. And Putin's government has been suppressing dissent for years -- worrying about it now smacks of closing the barn door after the horses have hit the state line.
What I don't understand is whom Peter Baker thinks he's fooling. Anyone with a second-grade education can read the first two sentences of this article and understand that the Vice President's office cooperated with Baker, at the very least. So why does Peter Baker tell us that the Administration is "quietly" exploring its policy options? In my world, "quiet" government
action is the sort that isn't leaked to appear on the front page of the Sunday papers. This tells me is that Peter Baker is more interested in carrying water for his sources in the Administration than in telling his readers what is going on. A reason not to pay for the Post.
The Bush administration is quietly exploring ways of recalibrating U.S. policy toward Russia in the face of growing concerns about the Kremlin's crackdown on internal dissent and pressure tactics towards its neighbors, according to senior officials and others briefed on the discussions.Peter Baker, "Russian Relations Under Scrutiny," Washington Post A1 (Feb. 26, 2006).
Vice President Cheney has grown increasingly skeptical of Russian President Vladimir Putin and shown interest in toughening the administration's approach. ...
Cheney is "skeptical" of Putin now? I don't think so. He's been fighting the Cold War since he was a graduate student. And Putin's government has been suppressing dissent for years -- worrying about it now smacks of closing the barn door after the horses have hit the state line.
What I don't understand is whom Peter Baker thinks he's fooling. Anyone with a second-grade education can read the first two sentences of this article and understand that the Vice President's office cooperated with Baker, at the very least. So why does Peter Baker tell us that the Administration is "quietly" exploring its policy options? In my world, "quiet" government
action is the sort that isn't leaked to appear on the front page of the Sunday papers. This tells me is that Peter Baker is more interested in carrying water for his sources in the Administration than in telling his readers what is going on. A reason not to pay for the Post.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]