1 post tagged “dan froomkin”
This is from Dan Froomkin's blog at the Washington Post going over Bush's latest poll results (among other things). Look at the end of page 1:
"...a majority of Americans now believe the Bush administration knowingly misled the American people in building its case for war against Saddam Hussein: 58 percent vs. 36 percent who believe it didn't."
Popular opinion doesn't make it true, but I'm wondering what "knowingly misled" means here. What does it mean to you? Did the Administration want a war with all the trimmings no matter what the reasons? Why would they want that? Or perhaps they thought going to war was the right thing and didn't question the evidence because it pointed them in the right direction (evidence about WMD's for example)? If you think you've got keys in your pocket do you look anyway before you close the door behind you? I know going to war requires more evidence and thought than a set of house keys but "knowingly misled" almost seems a little much. An idiot and a bastard are not usually the same thing.
Do you feel "misled?" Do you feel there was an intention to mislead? Or was it a case of "shoot first and ask questions later?" Both are bad but not equally. Or are they?
