« It's the thought that counts . . . | Main | School District May Ban Christmas and Halloween to Accommodate Muslims »

9/11? What's 9/11?

As you may very well know, dear reader, The New York Times, in its indefatigable wisdom, has decided to abandon its stupid "Times Select" program, which stopped the non-subscribing riff-raff from accessing the Gray Lady's opinion columns. As a result, even the poorest amongst us can revel in the collective sagacity of Maureen Dowd and Bob Herbert. Oh, and they say nothing good in life is free!

Accordingly, dear reader, it is with great excitement that we, the crack young staff of "The Hatemonger's Quarterly," turned to today's op-ed page of the Times on-line, to see what sort of e-genius our parsimony was previously forcing us to miss. And we were not disappointed.

Some fellow named Thomas Friedman, who, strangely enough, appears to believe that the earth is flat, penned a column deliciously entitled "9/11 Is Over." As a chronological statement, that isn't exactly news. As insight into the ostrich-esque predilections of the American Left, however, it's a real doozy.

Here, for example, are a few of Mr. Friedman's sentiments:

Times columnists are not allowed to endorse candidates, but there's no rule against saying who will not get my vote: I will not vote for any candidate running on 9/11. We don't need another president of 9/11. We need a president for 9/12. I will only vote for the 9/12 candidate.

What does that mean? This: 9/11 has made us stupid. I honor, and weep for, all those murdered on that day. But our reaction to 9/11 -- mine included -- has knocked America completely out of balance, and it is time to get things right again.

It is not that I thought we had new enemies that day and now I don't. Yes, in the wake of 9/11, we need new precautions, new barriers. But we also need our old habits and sense of openness. For me, the candidate of 9/12 is the one who will not only understand who our enemies are, but who we are....

We can't afford to keep being this stupid! We have got to get our groove back. We need a president who will unite us around a common purpose, not a common enemy. Al Qaeda is about 9/11. We are about 9/12, we are about the Fourth of July -- which is why I hope that anyone who runs on the 9/11 platform gets trounced.

Ah, yes: "Al Qaeda is about 9/11. We are about 9/12." Let's just forget about nasty old Osama bin Laden, can't we? Also, why not drop this whole business about illegal immigration? Oh, and concern for the economy--let's just drop that, eh? And, while we're at it, how about we bury our heads in the sand?

Mr. Friedman may say he wants the country to be "about 9/12," as he mellifluously puts it. But, in reality, he pines for the country to return to 9/10. Our liberal friends wish that Islamofascism would just disappear--or, failing that, that we pretend that it disappeared. If only the world worked like that.

(Note: The crack young staff normally "weblog" over at "The Hatemonger's Quarterly," where they are currently supporting presidential candidates who'll pretend that the Cold War never took place.)


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/24463.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 9/11? What's 9/11?:

Comments (36)

Yes, he erred; he pines for... (Below threshold)
kim:

Yes, he erred; he pines for the 9/10 world. So do I.
============================

How much longer do we have ... (Below threshold)
nikkolai:

How much longer do we have to put up with the New York Times?

Pinch has marginalized it. ... (Below threshold)
kim:

Pinch has marginalized it. Murdock moves in.
===========================================

It's WaPo vs WaSJo, now.<br... (Below threshold)
kim:

It's WaPo vs WaSJo, now.
========================

How much longer do... (Below threshold)
How much longer do we have to put up with the New York Times?

I shorted NYT stock at Investopedia in August of 2006 for around $22.00. Now the stock is at $19.76. The dip since about July is amazing.

Watch out for White Knights... (Below threshold)
kim:

Watch out for White Knights or insiders going private.
======================

There are times that I feel... (Below threshold)
DaveD:

There are times that I feel certain individuals are trying to make me (a white American male) feel responsible for slavery that once existed in the United States. Can I have the pleasure of calling a time out on that issue also?

Other than free health care... (Below threshold)
Aog Author Profile Page:

Other than free health care for Cubans, I couldn't find any other description of what a "9/12" policy would mean. Somehow, that doesn't strike me as a winning platform.

More from the NEW YORK SLIM... (Below threshold)
Spurwing Plover:

More from the NEW YORK SLIMES what else can you ever expect from this left-wing rag

First, it was the reappeara... (Below threshold)
Dusty:

First, it was the reappearance of Hebert's self-plagarizing one-notes. Now, it's Friedman back to telling everyone who doesn't see what he sees that they're stupid.

I pine for the days of Times Select.

in reality, he pines for... (Below threshold)
alacrityfitzhugh:

in reality, he pines for the country to return to 9/10. And I suppose late in 1941, there were those who wished it were December 6th again, but wishing doesn't make it so.
Just another indication that the head in the sand Democrats cannot be trusted with our national security.

A reminder:The Presi... (Below threshold)
Robert:

A reminder:
The President of the United States on 9/11/2001 did not think it was important enough to have a commission look into what happened on that day (as opposed to having a commission look into how the space shuttle blew-up, for instance).
He acquiesced after the American people demanded it (because he doesn't pay attention to polls, and he's soooo resolute--as far as you've been told).
Yet he underfunded the commission, stonewalled it, and named Condi Rice his Secretary of State after she blatantly lied to it's members.
Now some of you "9/11 truthers" out there may think it was because he had something to hide, but I don't think so (although I'm open to hearing proof if you have it). He obviously didn't think 9/11 was a big deal.

So, if the President of the United States on the morning of 9/11/2001 didn't think it was that big of a deal to look into how it happened, why should anyone else?

Note: My heart still goes out to those who had friends and family members die in the attacks, just as it does to those with friends and family members who have died in other ways and on other days.

Warning,We have "My ... (Below threshold)
SarahConnor2:

Warning,
We have "My Pet Goat" rants on the horizon.

Maybe he knew Gorelick woul... (Below threshold)
kim:

Maybe he knew Gorelick would conspire to deceive the Commission, and Berger would steal documents and lie to them.
===========================

The President of the Uni... (Below threshold)
alacrityfitzhugh:

The President of the United States...did not think it was important enough to have a commission look into what happened
A commission! A commission! My kingdom for a commission! /sarcasm

Could someone remind me if ... (Below threshold)
alacrityfitzhugh:

Could someone remind me if Lincoln held a " Fort Sumter Grievance Commission? Or if Roosevelt held a "Pearl Harbor: 'Why do they hate us so?' Commission"? I can't remember any
and I thought I was a student of history?

Robert is now whining about... (Below threshold)
SPQR:

Robert is now whining about the President "stonewalling" the 9/11 Commission?

Is this troll conscious of what a job beclowning himself he is doing?

That 9/11 Commission would be the one that had Jamie Goreleck as a commissioner. That had Sandy "the Pants" Berger destroying documents to conceal President Clinton's knowledge and actions.

We need smarter trolls, this batch is stale and incompetent.

"Let's just forget about... (Below threshold)
ChildrenS Do Learn:

"Let's just forget about nasty old Osama bin Laden, can't we?" HMQ

Why not?

The Chimp has forgotten that UBL was wanted, as he said, "dead or alive." Maybe if someone would toss the Chimp another banana, he'd get back to work on that.

And on cue we have the stal... (Below threshold)
SarahConnor2:

And on cue we have the stale and always concrete argument that the main goal was to get Bin Laden. We need some trolls capable of adult reasoning. But then would they be trolls? And by the way, the plural for child is children, not childrens.

Boy do you people whine whe... (Below threshold)
Robert:

Boy do you people whine when the truth hits you between the eyes (but you're not a bunch of babies, as far as you know).

So why the Commission on the Space Shuttle explosion?

Feynman you ain't, Robert.<... (Below threshold)
kim:

Feynman you ain't, Robert.
=========================

So why the Commission on... (Below threshold)
alacrityfitzhugh:

So why the Commission on the Space Shuttle explosion? Because the last time we looked, it was an accident and not an attack by a foreign power!

Your original assertion (which I'm sure, with your ADD you've forgotten by now!)
So, if the President of the United States on the morning of 9/11/2001 didn't think it was that big of a deal to look into how it happened, why should anyone else? "didn't think it was that big of a deal"...so he mobilized our armed forces and liberated Afghanistan and Iraq and didn't sit around navel gazing with Jamie (I built the wall that obstructed our intelligence agencies) Gorelick! Yeah! He must not have thought it was "that big of a deal"!

"And by the way, the plu... (Below threshold)
ChildrenS Do Learn:

"And by the way, the plural for child is children, not childrens." SarahConnor2

Sarah, tell that to your imbecillic Chimp, or did you miss his latest profound statement?

alac,Nice try.... (Below threshold)
Robert:

alac,
Nice try.
Which "foreign power" attacked us on 9/11?
The Republic of Osama Bin Laden?

You write "liberating Iraq" as if that had ANYTHING to do with 9/11.

I haven't seen people run this quickly to their RNC Talking Points since Petraeus when he spoke to Congress earlier this month.

Which "foreign power" at... (Below threshold)
alacrityfitzhugh:

Which "foreign power" attacked us on 9/11?
al Qaeda...it ain't the Boy Scouts, moron!

Sarah, tell that to your im... (Below threshold)
SarahConnor2:

Sarah, tell that to your imbecillic Chimp, or did you miss his latest profound statement?

Boy, they're running the troll playbook today. We now go into full Chimp mode.

I guess I missed the "latest profound statement" because I was too busy running the cash from Halliburton over to the top secret vast right wing conspiracy office where the latest cover-up of how the Bush and Cheney personally snuck into the WTC every night for months planting explosives to produce a controlled detonation. We also have to cover up that in fact Cheney cloned himself in 1960 and there were four of him on the grassy knoll in Dallas.

Did I cover everything or did I leave something out?

Nice Saddam connection to t... (Below threshold)
kim:

Nice Saddam connection to the first Trade Center bombings, though, Robert. Are you trying to suggest that Saddam was not an evil man, worth tremendous sacrifice to be rid of? How odd.
===================

Are you a democrat or an... (Below threshold)
RobLACal:

Are you a democrat or an American is the question that needs to be asked in this Country. Democrat is the word that should have been buried not nigger. Democrat is much offensive by far.

" Are you trying to sugg... (Below threshold)
ChildrenS Do Learn:

" Are you trying to suggest that Saddam was not an evil man, worth tremendous sacrifice to be rid of?" kim

And what has been your "tremendous sacrifice," apart from composing asinine fortune kookie quips while posturing as the amazing delphic Analcle of Wizbang?

Let's just forget about ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Let's just forget about nasty old Osama bin Laden, can't we?

Umm, that was George "I don't really think about him very much" Bush.

Also, why not drop this whole business about illegal immigration?

That was Bush too.

And, while we're at it, how about we bury our heads in the sand?

Bush again. You seem confused today.

Mr. Friedman may say he wants the country to be "about 9/12," as he mellifluously puts it. But, in reality, he pines for the country to return to 9/10.

Nice logical argument there. Let me try... you say that you want America to be strong, but in reality, you want dogs to be allowed to drive cars. Hey, it works!

And on cue we have the s... (Below threshold)
Brian:

And on cue we have the stale and always concrete argument that the main goal was to get Bin Laden.

We do? Where? Please be concrete.

"Let's just forget about na... (Below threshold)
RobLACal:

"Let's just forget about nasty old Osama bin Laden, can't we?"

Clinton knew exactly where he was at all times and did absolutely nothing.

Nobody knows exactly where he is right now however thousands of his underlies are dead , dead , dead.

I'll bet there is a 10 to 1 ratio dead terrorist to Clinton getting a Lewinsky. Maybe even 100 to 1.

President Bush is without a doubt better for this Country than Clinton ever was. That's why you losers continue to try and "Clintonize" HIM. Give it up.


"I will only vote for th... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

"I will only vote for the 9/12 candidate."

He suggests a "day after" solution to counter what happened on 9/11, which is not adequate.

"What does that mean? This: 9/11 has made us stupid."

If 9/11 has made us "stupid", what is the real point of a "9/12" candidate? Yesterday's news.

He does get this right: "we are about the Fourth of July"

Yet, he's assuming that with what we know now, there will be a 9/11 platform. He would like us to just remain stupid about yesterday's news so we can help this article grow wings. Anthem generalizations.

It is indeed a sacrifice to... (Below threshold)
kim:

It is indeed a sacrifice to so incite the madness of a moonbat. Your barking is disturbing the peace, and not alerting the populace. Your robotic ritual chant would be disturbing if it weren't the spasms of sickened fingers manipulating a sock puppet. Coward.
=======================================

Sorry kim. I never liked S... (Below threshold)
Robert:

Sorry kim. I never liked Saddam.
Perhaps you have me confused with Dick Cheney, whose company was doing business with him in throughout the 1990s.

And if posting on a blog is your "tremendous sacrifice", then I'm glad you were honest enough to sign your latest post "Coward".
That's the kind of honesty I would never hve expected from the Right.


Robert, even your snark is ... (Below threshold)
kim:

Robert, even your snark is stupid. Whatever you get, you are over paid.
===========================




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy