Two Nations Under God

NY Times ^ | 11/4/04 | Thomas Friedman

[mabelkitty]

I often begin writing columns by interviewing myself IT'S ALL ABOUT MEE!!!! See ya in 2006.

[Question Liberal Authority]

Well, at least he's not bitter.

[Paul Atreides]

I often begin writing columns by interviewing myself.

I bet that's not all he does himself.

[Darkwolf377]

The MSM seem unaware that when their boy Billy won by 43% and 49% they never, ever talked this way about "division".

[Max Combined]

Boring!

[Paul Atreides]

It is the way in which he and they have used that religious energy to promote divisions and intolerance at home and abroad.

The left is just seething over the fact that Christians are allowed to vote.

[M-cubed]

Wow!..where to start!

[Batrachian]

"Is it a country that does not intrude into people's sexual preferences and the marriage unions they want to make? Is it a country that allows a woman to have control over her body? Is it a country where the line between church and state bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers should be inviolate? Is it a country where religion doesn't trump science? And, most important, is it a country whose president mobilizes its deep moral energies to unite us - instead of dividing us from one another and from the world?"

No, no, no and no.

You got that? Now get your whiny liberal ass on that plane to Paris before I get mad.

[hlmencken3]

Actually, just ONE of two nations is "under G-d". The other is careful to keep G-d out.

[wizardoz]

... we disagree on what America is.

He's beginning to catch on.

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

We can write books about how fringe these Marxists are.

But in the end, it still boils down to one word:

Clueless.

Blue America didn't learn a lesson after 2000. Blue America didn't learn a lesson after 2002. Blue America will not change one thing after 2004. Oh, wait! They will change! Yes, they will seek advice from even more radical extremists from the left so they can be "better prepared" to fight Red America in 2008. Clueless!

[mtngrl@vrwc]

What an idiot Thomas Friedman is! Good read.

[bigbob]

Indeed. When you compare Bush's first term with the 8 years of Bill "Searching for a Legacy" Clinton, this is laughable. President Bush has laid out a challenge for his second term and based on past performance, he'll do what he says.

[11th_VA]

But what troubled me yesterday was my feeling that this election was tipped because of an outpouring of support for George Bush by people who don't just favor different policies than I do - they favor a whole different kind of America.

This from the party that constantly sceams "EVERY VOTE MUST BE COUNTED" (as long as it's a RAT vote?)

[Redcoat LI]

I bet that's not all he does himself.

You had to go there.

To make the mental picture even more disturbing,all the Libs. at the New York Times have one "thing" on their mind now.

[so_real]

We don't just disagree on what America should be doing; we disagree on what America is.

Finally! It sinks in!

[digger48]

Am I in a parallel universe?

[speedy]

How much fun would it be to have been hanging out inside the NY Times newsroom the past few days? They're each taking their turns with primal screams.

[PLK]

Is it a country that does not intrude into people's sexual preferences and the marriage unions they want to make? Is it a country that allows a woman to have control over her body? Is it a country where the line between church and state bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers should be inviolate? Is it a country where religion doesn't trump science? And, most important, is it a country whose president mobilizes its deep moral energies to unite us - instead of dividing us from one another and from the world?

The most striking thing about this commentary from a liberal, those folks who claim an understanding of the "complex," is the simplistic, immature, concrete nature of the thinking on display here.

I don't subscribe to or read the NYT, but am astounded at the level of simplistic logic displayed in this piece.