Posted on 11/08/2004 12:22:51 PM PST by Moose4
What the hell is going on at the New York Times?
I expect the bias. I expect Paul Krugman’s distorted op-eds, and Maureen Dowd’s incoherent babbling. I expect the pro-Palestinian, anti-American articles that flow from the Old Grey Lady in a constant stream.
What I don’t expect to find is a thinly veiled cry for an “act of God” to remove President Bush from office—in an article that describes previous assassinations of US presidents as “acts of God.”
According to Dean E. Murphy, God sometimes steps in when Democrats have lost elections—by causing assassins to kill Republican presidents.
This article really crosses the line, in a way I have not seen before: Can History Save the Democrats?
A LITTLE more than a month before he was assassinated, Abraham Lincoln stood at the east portico of the Capitol and delivered his second inaugural address. It was a brief speech with a distinctly religious message: he twice cited biblical verses, and made a dozen references to God, most strikingly in assessing the opposing sides in the Civil War. ...
The address was roundly criticized in some newspapers for overstepping the bounds separating church and state. But Lincoln was using God to debunk government-by-God.
Now, with George W. Bush’s re-election, God and a newly triumphant Republican president are once again in the headlines. And there are signs that the present national divide, between the narrow but solid Republican majority and a Democratic party seemingly trapped in second place, may be hardening into a pattern that will persist for years to come.
Democrats, especially, are left to wonder: What will it take to break the pattern - an act of God?
In case you’ve missed Murphy’s point in this excerpt, he repeats it several times in the course of the article, concluding with this:
That Mr. Bush won by a relatively narrow margin matters little in a historical context, Professor Cain and others said. Lincoln, who oversaw the most radical political break in American history, was elected with just 39.8 percent of the popular vote in 1860.
Yet David R. Mayhew, a professor of political science at Yale, cautioned against reading too much into any of the numbers. Mr. Bush’s victory could be seen as extraordinary - the first time a president won re-election after failing to win the popular vote in his first term - or as commonplace, since two-thirds of presidents who have sought re-election have won.
“I think this is mostly an ebb-and-flow election,” Professor Mayhew said.
Professor Wilentz of Princeton said that even if the 2004 victory was an incremental one, that should not comfort the Democrats. He said Mr. Rove and Mr. Bush now have a chance to do what Hanna and McKinley never did: Lay the foundation for lasting Republican dominance.
“The Republicans are basically unchecked,” Professor Wilentz said. “There is no check in the federal government and no check in the world. They have an unfettered playing field.”
Until the next act of God, that is.
This is outrageous. How dare the New York Times publish something like this?
}:-)4
This is not the first time that the NY Times has called for the assassination of the President. Hopefully the Secret Service are on the case.
I assume the Secret Service is already looking into this....
Can't these people be tried for treason...during war time???
Two appallingly false statements, back to back.
That is one of my great fears, that the left's cyncial decision to turn against the war for purely political reasons and to use such way over the line rhetoric ("HE BETRAYED THIS COUNTRY!") will result in the attempted assassination of George W. Bush by one of the Kool Aid types like we see over at DU. They're even setting themselves up to morally defend it.
So many liberal news outlets to destroy - and at least four years to do it.
If I were David Brooks or Safire, I'd make a high-profile resignation based on this. He can work anywhere he wants. I'm not sure why he would want to be associated with this trash.
The Secret Service will not do anything about an idiot journalist.
Check out the graphic, too: an elephant standing triumphantly over a donkey, with an asteroid or meteor heading straight at the elephant's head!
also here:
Democrats Ponder Alternatives: Vote Suppression, Secession and Assassination
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1274483/posts
An act of God would not remove the president, it would be more likely an act of Satan whom the left worships sts
I wouldn't be outraged by this as it is a disingenuous article. The new dem. strategy is to create (as the columnist says) a 'schism within the ruling party."
Dems. will be pushing hard to create a wedge between the far right and moderate wings of the republican party. That's the only card they have left to play. Ignore them and they will go away.
More and more talk from the radical leftist fringe, which apparently now includes the NYT, is advocating violence. Numerous acts of vandalism, drive by shootings and burglaries plagued Republican offices during the election, not to mention the epidemic of political sign thefts. If we had an objective media, there might be a serious inquiry into just what the heck is going on in the dark recesses of the liberal mind. America was less than a century old when it had its first civil war-could it be happening again?
I wouldn't be outraged by this as it is a disingenuous article. The new dem. strategy is to create (as the columnist says) a 'schism within the ruling party."
Dems. will be pushing hard to create a wedge between the far right and moderate wings of the republican party. That's the only card they have left to play. Ignore them and they will go away.
This is definitely a threat against the Prez. Where in the Sam Hill are the Secret Service? What are they doing about this?
The address--unlike the Gettysburg Address--was recognized immediately as being an immortal contribution to the lexicon of American state documents, and this recognition was echoed throughout the world.
But Lincoln was using God to debunk government-by-God.
Good Lord, what rubbish. The parts in question are short enough to post, so let's just put 'em out and let sensible people decide for themselves:
Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."
Some of those comments are really funny.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=13507_NYT_Wishes_for_Act_of_God_to_Remove_Bush
Why don't these people just give it up? Life's too short for this kind of bitterness and nonsense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.