As a follow-up to last month's heated discussion of Bush-Machiavelli comparisons, I'm posting an excerpted interview transcript from Diane Sawyer's interview of George Bush last night.

In it, Bush is repeatedly asked to elaborate on the discrepancy between his pre-war assertions about Saddam's chemical and nuclear capabilities, and he repeatedly dodges the question. When directly asked whether attacking Iraq was justified based on the actual evidence, Bush asks if there's a difference between a power that wants weapons of mass destruction and a power that already has them, and says that post-9/11, both need to be dealt with. "The man is a danger, so we got rid of him." He repeatedly asserted that his actions were justified because "the world is better off because we got rid of him."

This, to me, is the ends justifying the means.

Let the railing begin.