I don't always read, much less like, David Brooks, the would-be centrist conservative who op-eds for the NY Times.
How do I know he's a would-be centrist-conservative? Because he longs for the kind of Republican Party that will never be again, where people could be both — relatively speaking, of course — sane and Republican. No more: Trump has put an end to that. Brooks knows it. Trump scares him the hell out of him, too.
That's how you tell the diff between a liberal and a conservative; the latter, they don't much reconsider.
So who can trust Brooks about much of anything?
But when he writes the following in his recent piece http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/opinion/religions-wicked-neighbor.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
I agree, almost completely. He writes:
Most world leaders talk about Islamist terror, but Obama apparently thinks that if he uses the phrase “Islamic radicalism” the rest of us will be too dim to be able to distinguish between the terrorists and the millions of good-hearted Muslims who want only to live in fellowship and peace.
Worst of all, his decision to dance around an unpleasant reality is part of the enveloping cloud of political correctness that drives people to Donald Trump.
This is fine except for its stepping over one essential: Obama et al refuse to attach terrorism to any kind of Islam because this is America, and if you notice the dark side of one religion you allow for suspicion of them all, all, in this country, meaning above all, Christianity.
Which is beyond reproach.
We don't attack religion in this country. It's not done. We revere it. Don't know if we worship God, or the infinite or anything of any size or genuine consquence; I suspect we, collectively, worship worshipping.
Me, I worship not.
It's not that God is not great, it's more that God, in the sense of God, is not.
Go ahead, call me a secularist.
I can live with that.