Good morning, Breuk! I can understand why Schroeder felt concerned about Bush's religio-political motivations, too. I'm not troubled by the fact that Bush is a man of faith. Nearly all our presidents have been. What troubles me--and others who know the attitudes of some of the more primitive religiously driven types--is they often force-fit very complex matters like world politics into an overly simple black-and-white battle between good and evil. They see this good versus evil battle in nearly all aspects of life.

Problem is, the conflicts we face in war, world politics and modern life itself are far too complex to be reduced to two polar opposites like good (the side of God and Jesus) and evil (Satan's team, of course). Conscience versus will. Democracy versus tyranny. Elected leaders versus dictators. Judeo-Christianity versus Islam. Salt versus pepper. Chocolate versus vanilla. Looking at conflicts as only having two sides is a very myopic view. And I feel certain that that's part of Schroeder's concern with Bush's attitudes.

The situation in the Middle East is far more complex than good versus evil. And the fact that our president doesn't seem to comprehend the various subtleties at play gives me pause, too. Thanks for the story, Breuk!