Daniel Davies of Crooked Timber writes:
Posted by DeLong at August 29, 2004 02:56 PM | TrackBackThe Economist editorial on GWB was about as readable as a Socialist Workers' Party caucus statement, and presumably for exactly the same reason; it was drafted by a commitee of about eight, about three of whom were aware that what they were supporting was unsupportable. Clive Crook's response absolutely confirms me in this view...
So, where did the Crooked Timber article go?
Posted by: fatwhiteduke at August 30, 2004 01:18 PMWhat he said.
Posted by: Jonathan Goldberg at September 1, 2004 02:20 PM