David Brooks Admits: "I'm an Obama Sap"

For once that's not a made-up quote. He admits he's got a real blind spot when it comes to President Impeccably Creased Trousers.

I’m a sap, a specific kind of sap. I’m an Obama Sap.
When the president said the unemployed couldn’t wait 14 more months for help and we had to do something right away, I believed him. When administration officials called around saying that the possibility of a double-dip recession was horrifyingly real and that it would be irresponsible not to come up with a package that could pass right away, I believed them.
I liked Obama’s payroll tax cut ideas and urged Republicans to play along. But of course I’m a sap. When the president unveiled the second half of his stimulus it became clear that this package has nothing to do with helping people right away or averting a double dip. This is a campaign marker, not a jobs bill.
It recycles ideas that couldn’t get passed even when Democrats controlled Congress. In his remarks Monday the president didn’t try to win Republicans to even some parts of his measures. He repeated the populist cries that fire up liberals but are designed to enrage moderates and conservatives.

After hitting the specifics of Obama's non-proposal for a while, he concludes:

The president believes the press corps imposes a false equivalency on American politics. We assign equal blame to both parties for the dysfunctional politics when in reality the Republicans are more rigid and extreme. There’s a lot of truth to that, but at least Republicans respect Americans enough to tell us what they really think. The White House gives moderates little morsels of hope, and then rips them from our mouths. To be an Obama admirer is to toggle from being uplifted to feeling used.
The White House has decided to wage the campaign as fighting liberals. I guess I understand the choice, but I still believe in the governing style Obama talked about in 2008. I may be the last one. I’m a sap.

David Brooks is a very soft thinker. Although it's nice that he's writing something bad about Obama, this piece says a lot more about him than it does about his intended target.

Why was David Brooks so smitten with Obama? And why is he so disappointed with him now?

He was smitten by Obama's promise to "raise the tone" of debate, to make politics less of a dirty, populist affair and more of a high-minded exchange of wonkish ideas by the denatured, gray intellectual class. And he's disappointed because Obama is repudiating that promise, and unleashing his inner demagogue.

Is an "elevated tone" in politics desirable? I suppose. I wouldn't mind it. Eh, cancel that, I'd welcome it.

However, what priority should this be on anyone's list of wants?

Very high, as David Brooks seems to rank it? Or rather very low, given 1, substantive goals are much more important than what "tone" was employed to achieve those substantive ends, and 2, the "tone" in politics has generally never been terribly elevated so a pining for it is a quixotic self-delusion.

I wrote about this in the update to the Jon Stewart post, noting that this was a fairly trivial goal to dedicate oneself to.

Is it a decent goal? Sure, it's decent. Sure, as someone who is occasionally revolted by cheap demagoguery, I'd like to see less cheap demagoguery (unless I'm the one employing it and it seems effective). Sure, I'd like to see, say, FoxNews strive for a more elevated tone, more like the New York Sun than the New York Post. Sure, it would be nice if politicians spent more time on economic policy and detailed solutions than gotcha opposition research.

A decent goal, but how high exactly should that be on my list of priorities -- especially given, as I've said, that it's never going to happen?

For David Brooks, this abstract goal of having a less uncouth political class, filled with politicians who at least spoke more like himself, with the particular set of manners and restraint of declasse passion of the status-assured, educated old-money Anglo-Saxon aristocracy is of a higher priority than any tangible political policy goal.

Supposedly he's a "conservative," at least on fiscal matters, and ergo should have opposed Obama on those grounds. But for David Brooks, the idea of a man with an impeccably-creased trousers, who spoke with a Bluffer's Guide fluency about Reinhold Niebuhr, who would make our national dialogue possibly sound more like Firing Line than Crossfire, trumped all tangible political goals such as keeping government spending down and limiting government's expansion into new areas which it could screw up.

But no. For David Brooks, a sharp trouser crease trumped a sharp demarcation of the boundary of government intrusiveness.

Consider what this says about David Brooks.

What I mean is this: If this weak, vague, gauzy crap is your greatest concern, what does that say about you?

Well, it says you're a soft-thinker. But apart from such personal attacks, it also says that you're a member of the comfortable upper middle class with virtually no fear of economic dislocation. While you may have opinions about economics, you can afford to prioritize such matters below worries about "tone," because you are altogether immune from economic misery.

Your job is set, guaranteed for life (virtually), with few competitors for it. You're a one-man operation, an employee; your only interaction with the realities of business life is cashing a check, meeting with investment advisers, and occasionally pitching a book to a publisher.

You do not particularly fear a reduction of wages or an increase in taxes, because you're already making as much money as a writer could reasonably expect to make. Plus, there is not (yet) any way to tax the non-pecuniary benefits of your job -- influence, fame, respect, easiness of it all -- which far outstrip the pecuniary ones you have to give the government a piece of.

In short, you are someone whose interest in politics is chiefly a theoretical matter. You have no skin in the game. You can afford to be dispassionate about Obama's $500 billion cut to Medicaid, because in all likelihood you'll be an employed writer into your seventies and will have private insurance and even when retired will have enough money to opt out of the system. You can afford to have an intellectual's distance from Obama's choking regulatory overreach, because your only "business" is writing seven hundred words twice a week; you have no employees, no mandates, no regulations to comply with. You can gamely defend your cultural brother-from-another-mother Obama even as his policies do nothing to decrease (and probably in fact increase) grinding unemployment of levels of misery not seen since the Great Depression, since your job is effectively pink-slip-proof and even the friends you know who've lost their jobs are largely rich and therefore have plenty of cushion for three or four lean years.

In short, you can afford to give Obama a pass on all of his destructive policies, the policies which really hurt regular people who are not so fortunate as to have comfortable, bulletproof berths at the New York Times, and focus laser-like on childish frettings about "tone" and its alleged "elevation" because you're as removed from the vigor and scuffle of the scrum that is the working world as the palest, dottiest tenured professor.

I'll say one thing about union members -- at least they are fighting for something tangible and real. Money in pocket -- can't get much more tangible than that. I don't approve of their agenda of taking from everyone else so that they can have more, but I can at least accept that they're pushing for something real.

And David Brooks?

Still just pining for a president who speaks eloquently of great books and 60s French cinema in a practiced non-regional diction (or a regional diction, if that region is Andover, Massachusetts). The kind of man you'd like to share a ~~beer~~ port with.

Must be nice, to be so nicely ensconced in a cushy berth that you're liberated from all other, more tangible concerns of politics.

And I'm sure it is nice. I don't begrudge him that, exactly.

What I fault him for is his solipsism -- he is incapable of understanding that perhaps he should worry about the concerns of people less well-off a little more, and not agitate relentlessly for a "politics" which, to the extent I can understand it, consists chiefly of concerns about prep school manners.

Can David Brooks step far enough away from his own vantage point -- can he imagine, for a moment -- to realize that most businessmen are more sharply regulated, and are more harassed by the government, than he himself experiences, as part of the very tiny cadre of professional writers?

Does his politics take into account, at all, the notion of the greatest good for the greatest number (and least woe to the rest), or is it all about, and only about, making David Brook feel not-so-embarrassed or so much the outsider at Upper West Side dinner parties?

Politics is personal, the leftists used to say, but isn't this taking things quite too far?

Posted by: Ace at 02:28 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 I was sure that word started with an "F"

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at September 20, 2011 02:31 PM (ItDg4)

2

Italic html gone wild...

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 02:31 PM (rJVPU)

3 I love Obama "sap".

Posted by: David Brooks at September 20, 2011 02:32 PM (rm3WH)

4 There's a real slant here

Posted by: GMan at September 20, 2011 02:32 PM (sxq57)

5 What I fault him for is his solipsism -

Cripes now Iz gots to go google solipsism-

I think it's what happens to Chris Matthews...

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 02:33 PM (rJVPU)

6
I wonder if this change of heart has anything to do with Obama's falling poll numbers?
Pull up your panties, David. Get your purse and walk home. (quoting Ted C)

Posted by: theCork at September 20, 2011 02:33 PM (ia9oR)

7 This post seems...slanted. Somehow.

Posted by: Mister Christopher at September 20, 2011 02:33 PM (cjGZv)

8 Does this make Brooks a stumbling CF of a Miserable Failure?

Posted by: Vic at September 20, 2011 02:34 PM (M9Ie6)

9 Was Brooks always this pathetic? I remember when I had respect for him--he's kind of a mile marker on my road to conservatism.

Posted by: ParisParamus at September 20, 2011 02:34 PM (4jrqJ)

10 Awesome read. I need to keep a cache of fine cigars handy so I can read these slowly and savor them over the course of a good smoke.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 20, 2011 02:34 PM (/NnPf)

11 David Brooks isn't as stupid as I thought. But he is really, really slo-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-w.

Posted by: k8tbar at September 20, 2011 02:35 PM (+fXXA)

12 "cultural brother-from-another-mother Obama"

That's wacist!

Posted by: Uncledave at September 20, 2011 02:36 PM (nJ32z)

13 Ace - put in an italics close tag somewhere quick

Posted by: vinman at September 20, 2011 02:36 PM (nEvyg)

14 Comments start out with a threadwinner @ #1. Well done, (I'm guessing) sir.

Cordially...

Posted by: Rick at September 20, 2011 02:36 PM (HbWhE)

15 where's David Brooks to come on here and insult ace and commenters? I mean we just had that on the other thread

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 02:36 PM (yAor6)

16 Brilliant, Ace. Well done.

Well, apart from the loose shit with the italics.

Posted by: tsj017 at September 20, 2011 02:36 PM (4YUWF)

17 Solipsism syndrome
Solipsism syndrome is a dissociative mental state.[citation needed] It is only incidentally related to philosophical solipsism. Solipsists assert that the lack of ability to prove the existence of other minds does not, in itself, cause the psychiatric condition of detachment from reality. The feeling of detachment from reality is unrelated to the question of whether the common-sense universe exists or not.

Chris Matthews.

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 02:36 PM (rJVPU)

18 And the sap gets suh-macked down by the Ewok pimp-hand.

Posted by: right at September 20, 2011 02:37 PM (RzLbD)

19 as part of the very tiny cadre of professional writers?

HEELLLLPPPP MEEEEEE!

Posted by: Obligitory 'The Fly' Joke at September 20, 2011 02:37 PM (2PTT7)

20 He's tired of sucking Obama's sap.

Posted by: lorien1973 at September 20, 2011 02:37 PM (usXZy)

21 The only sad thing is so much fine snark has been wasted on such an insignificant cretin like David Brooks. She falls into that category, or should, of people whose opinions may and ought to be disregarded prima facie. No need to waste time even quoting these people. There must be some line where you have sacrificed all credibility, and that line was the crease in Dick's skirts.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure at September 20, 2011 02:38 PM (AZGON)

22
He was smitten by Obama's promise to "raise the tone" of debate, to make
politics less of a dirty, populist affair and more of a high-minded
exchange of wonkish ideas by the denatured, gray intellectual class.
And he's disappointed because Obama is repudiating that promise, and
unleashing his inner demagogue.
David Brooks is indeed a "soft-thinker", Ace. Obama has not once "raised the tone" of debate from the 2008 Presidential election to now and yet Brooks is only realizing this failing now? From "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun," to "I won", so on and so for nearly ad infinitum...
Please somebody enlighten me as to why anybody still listens to this fool.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at September 20, 2011 02:38 PM (9hSKh)

23
If you look up “Battered Woman” in the dictionary, you’ll see a picture of David Brooks.
And you just know that he would take his boyfriend, Barack, back in a heartbeat if he just told him that he is really going to change (and he MEANS it this time).
Pathetic….

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at September 20, 2011 02:38 PM (0xqzf)

24 "To be an Obama admirer is to toggle from being uplifted to feeling used."

u mad, bro?

Posted by: Dante at September 20, 2011 02:38 PM (ZacuO)

25 Who is worse, David Brooks or Chris Matthews? There is being blind-blind like Matthews is and then there's being willfully blind like David Brooks.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at September 20, 2011 02:39 PM (9hSKh)

26 I remember when I had respect for him--he's kind of a mile marker on my road to conservatism.

I mean this in the best possible way... you ought to check your map, and check it again.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure at September 20, 2011 02:39 PM (AZGON)

27 Brooksie must feel pretty secure as the token "conservative" at the house that Pinch is burning down. He should consult Arlen Specter on how fond people are of turncoats. Same with Nooner.

Posted by: Captain Hate at September 20, 2011 02:39 PM (7dMdC)

28 OK here is where you are wrong, Ace:

David Brooks is a very soft thinker.

Not when it comes to Obama...

turgid might be the word.

Man have you not read Brook's piece-

My Dinner with Barack.?

(something like that.)

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 02:40 PM (rJVPU)

29 I see our self-appointed betters in the so-called conservative media ( and damn if there ain't a ton of 'em) are beginning to position themselves for relevancy during the Perry administration. Like Granddad said, - Never underestimate what a man will do to keep a good-payin' job-

Posted by: dr kill at September 20, 2011 02:40 PM (le5qc)

30 If you look up “Battered Woman” in the dictionary, you’ll see a picture of David Brooks.

He used to be under the heading "sycophant" but was downgraded.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure at September 20, 2011 02:40 PM (AZGON)

31 >>>Was Brooks always this pathetic? I remember when I had respect for him--he's kind of a mile marker on my road to conservatism.

Meh. Even in the '90s when he was doing his fappishly-praised writing with the Weekly Standard, I found him to be immensely overrated. He was primarily concerned with cultural issues ("Bobos," etc.) that were simply uninteresting to me, and whatever policies he pushed outright seemed to be couched in flabby generalizations such that you detect the soft, plush *squish* of the wannabe New York moderate.

For all that Allahpundit likes to joke about being a Beta Male, David Brooks is the quintessential Beta Male, the Patient Zero of beta-ness.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:40 PM (kRtDX)

32 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

I hope David Brooks reads that and begins to assimilate that knowledge into his character.

Is an "elevated tone" in politics desirable? I suppose. I wouldn't mind it. Eh, cancel that, I'd welcome it.

No, it's not. Politics is dirty. Politics is about people's lives right now. When we move it to "wonkish discussions" we lose that immediacy.

A political environment which had converted solely to an "elevated tone" would be one in which there were (at best) two competing Aristocracies, like the Seelie and Unseelie Courts of Faery (though, presumably, less bloodthirsty).

The moment you let the People have a say in what is being done to us, the "tone" will become less elevated and more earthy- because most people don't think in the kinds of terms the wonks use.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at September 20, 2011 02:40 PM (8y9MW)

33
"Please somebody enlighten me as to why anybody still listens to this fool.

Posted by: Kratos"

The NYT says we should.

Posted by: right at September 20, 2011 02:41 PM (RzLbD)

34 Kratos that's a little like-

Who's worse- Peggy Noonan or MoDo?

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 02:41 PM (rJVPU)

35 For anyone saying Obama didn't raise the tone:

I agree, but this was already a long piece and I couldn't get to everything. I decided to just focus on what a trivial pursuit this was, and leave the "he's not even elevated" thing as assumed as true.

Posted by: ace at September 20, 2011 02:41 PM (nj1bB)

36 To be an Obama admirer is to toggle from being uplifted to feeling used.
Only because you are a fool David. The uplifting stuff is all hoopla and pablum. Nothing but political cotton candy . That you fall for it--repreatedly--only makes youmore of asucker.

Posted by: Kasper Hauser at September 20, 2011 02:41 PM (HqpV0)

37 Brooks can't get enough of the Obama Knob.

Posted by: toby928™ at September 20, 2011 02:42 PM (GTbGH)

38 Like Granddad said, - Never underestimate what a man will do to keep a good-payin' job-
and we just saw that

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 02:42 PM (yAor6)

39 Please somebody enlighten me as to why anybody still listens to this fool.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at September 20, 2011 02:38 PM (9hSKh)
There were a lot of people that claimed to be acolytes of WFB even though they weren't conservative but loved that he used big words.

Posted by: Captain Hate at September 20, 2011 02:42 PM (7dMdC)

40 words...so many words.

Brooks and company wanted obama because he would be a source of smug, clean natural smug.

Little did they realize that SCOAMF is just another dirty crazy producer, leaking highly dangerous carazy.

Posted by: joeindc44 at September 20, 2011 02:42 PM (QxSug)

41

That was a great piece Ace.

Posted by: Ben at September 20, 2011 02:42 PM (wuv1c)

42 White House gives moderates little morsels of hope, and then rips them from our mouths.

Yeah. If by "morsel of hope" you mean my cock; and if "rips them from our mouths" is the prelude to shooting in moderates' faces and using their hair to clean myself up, I think you've got me summed up pretty well.

Posted by: Long Obam Silver at September 20, 2011 02:43 PM (X8lKt)

43 I had a whole section envisioned about Obama being free to speak gauzily about hope and change because his surrogates and the media (but I repeat myself) undertook the to do the mean stuff for him, but again, it was already too long.

Posted by: ace at September 20, 2011 02:43 PM (nj1bB)

44
Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 02:40 PM (rJVPU)
Perry was in NYC today flexing his foriegn policy muscles. He had a meeting with Jewish leaders that is posted on Right Scoop.

Posted by: sonnyspats at September 20, 2011 02:44 PM (I/MzF)

45 I must add this gem from the HA comments, it's moron-worthy;

I’ve known that David Brooks has been a sap for years…
How does it feel to be a gift bag at your own pity party?

Khun Joe on September 20, 2011

Posted by: kbdabear at September 20, 2011 02:44 PM (Y+DPZ)

46 Is an "elevated tone" in politics desirable? I suppose. I wouldn't mind it. Eh, cancel that, I'd welcome it.
It may be "desirable" in that in a perfect world, it would be nice. But it is an infantile objective in that it will never exist in the real world and those who center their "political thinking" around a desire for it are simpletons. there has never been an "elevated tone" in politics going back as far as there has been politics and there never will be as long as human nature remains human nature. so the constant hand-wringing and crying about it is evidence of someone who has no serious thought to put forward and instead focuses on the aesthetics.
Unfortunately, the mushy middle falls for this kind of clap-trap and republicans also pander to it by claiming they will bring a "new tone" or "better tone" or other nonsense if elected. I'm not saying that everyone should sink to the lowest common denominator in political discourse, but the idea that any politician is going to "elevate the tone" or that such is even a good reason to vote for someone, is silly.
Moreover, currently in American politics, the call for an "elevated tone" isusually a call for conservatives to shut the hell up and do what their betters say. So when someone like Brooks says he wants an "elevated tone" what he means is he had hoped that Obama was such a good politician that the dirty, ignorant conservatives were forced offthe stage.

Posted by: Monkeytoe at September 20, 2011 02:44 PM (sOx93)

47 Brooks: We assign equal blame to both parties for the dysfunctional politics when in reality the Republicans are more rigid and extreme. There’s a lot of truth to that,

AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Wanker.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure at September 20, 2011 02:44 PM (AZGON)

48 >>>Who's worse- Peggy Noonan or MoDo?

I like Peggy Noonan, still. She's miles better than David Brooks. When she dumps on Obama (which, it's worth pointing out, she has been pretty much nonstop since mid-2009), it's actually quite rhetorically devastating. She twists the knife with far more panache than Brooks ever would or could, and it's more effective precisely because she brings that feminine "more in sorrow than in anger" tone to it that, when Brooks uses it as in this column, just makes him seem like an insufferable pussy.

I know it's not popular to defend Noonan around here, but I will. For better or for worse she does have her finger on the pulse of the mood of the country in a way that we hardcore partisans never really will.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:45 PM (kRtDX)

49 you're a member of the comfortable upper middle class with virtually no fear of economic dislocation.

This.

This is what makes rich people start thinking stupid shit. They have enough financial wherewithall to completely insulate themselves from whatever happens to the political/economic landscape. From that point on, fear of the unknown no longer stops them from doing certain things and they start to get retarded.

Posted by: EC at September 20, 2011 02:45 PM (GQ8sn)

50
I cringe when I see him in Friedman's "Free to Choose" series.

Posted by: Ben at September 20, 2011 02:45 PM (wuv1c)

51 Is an "elevated tone" in politics desirable? I suppose. I wouldn't mind it. Eh, cancel that, I'd welcome it.

This is the birthplace of "SCOAMF" and the pudding dip. You'd have no traffic if politics were "elevated".

Posted by: Ian S. at September 20, 2011 02:45 PM (tqwMN)

52 Like Granddad said, - Never underestimate what a man will do to keep a good-payin' job-

and we just saw that

I was going to use it on that nice Treacher boy, but he seems soooo smart and well-spoken. Are you sure he's not right?

Posted by: dr kill at September 20, 2011 02:45 PM (le5qc)

53 Who is worse, David Brooks or Chris Matthews?

Matthews has the excuse of being a drunk, so he's got that going for him.

Posted by: toby928™ at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (GTbGH)

54 Most swing voters don't care about details, so politicians are not rewarded for focusing on details. But the same voters are motivated by cheap rhetoric (see 200

so politicians are rewarded for it.

If the political class wanted a more rational, and less emotional, political debate they would have done the exact opposite of what they did in 2008, and had damned Obama for his specifics free politics.

So, sorry, I don't buy that many people in the media actually want dry rational discussions of the issues of the day.

They want a simple heroic liberal vs evil conservative story line. End of story.

Posted by: 18-1 at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (7BU4a)

55
or...

David Brooks Realizes Speeches Alone Do Not Make Good Policy

Posted by: soothsayer at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (sqkOB)

56 Brooks feels used by Obama? I feel like I've been used by Rodman, all getting my guts pushed up into the back of my head.

Posted by: The Economy at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (+lsX1)

57 I had a whole section envisioned about Obama being free to speak gauzily
about hope and change because his surrogates and the media (but I
repeat myself) undertook the to do the mean stuff for him, but again, it
was already too long.

How about a Part II, because this is great stuff.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (/NnPf)

58 Brooks probably believes that beauty contestants are really serious about wanting World Peace

Posted by: kbdabear at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (Y+DPZ)

59 Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:45 PM (kRtDX)
just to confirm, did Brooks and/or Noonan ever say they voted for Obama over Mac? Frum who's gone off the reservation even admits he voted for Mac.

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (yAor6)

60
or...

David Brooks Extracts Head From Ass, Sees Light

Posted by: soothsayer at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (sqkOB)

61 Is an "elevated tone" in politics desirable? I suppose.
When it doubt, take a metaphor literally.
On what would the discourse of politics be elevated above the loud and Axeâ„¢-smelling concerns of the uncreased rabble? A big-ass pyramid of the given.
Is the world the rabble have been until now given by the creased desirable? To them? This big-ass governmental pyramid of the done? Of the temporally (regarded as vertically, because progress) past dispute?
Brooks, e.g., though he occasionally makes noises to the contrary, thinks they shouldn't be allowed to ask, even via non-rabble proxy. Because rabble.
It's a thing. The thing.
Or it will be. Rabble-style.

Posted by: oblig. at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (xvZW9)

62 Is an "elevated tone" in politics desirable?

NO!

Politics is war.

It is about the power to control lives, it is worth fighting over.

It called fighting for your freedom, not giving it away.

Think about this if you give half your income to someone, you are half their slave. You work half your life for someone else to spend your earnings.

Posted by: Billy Bob, the guy who drinks in SC at September 20, 2011 02:47 PM (hXJOG)

63 >>>This is what makes rich people start thinking stupid shit. They have enough financial wherewithall to completely insulate themselves from whatever happens to the political/economic landscape. From that point on, fear of the unknown no longer stops them from doing certain things and they start to get retarded

Yeah, when you've got your stack it seems less important that the means by which others might get their stack be preserved.

In fact, when you think about it -- if one's goal isn't necessarily to be as rich as possible but MORE rich than one's rivals (which is actually most people's motivation), then one has an incentive to "pull up the ladders," if you will, to success.

Posted by: ace at September 20, 2011 02:47 PM (nj1bB)

64 David Brooks is a very soft thinker.

For a neuroscientist, David Brooks writings in that field are just as excruciating... let me tell you.

Posted by: TheInverseAgonist at September 20, 2011 02:47 PM (KaHVv)

65 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: steevy at September 20, 2011 02:47 PM (fyOgS)

66
David Brooks' Pinky-Finger-Sense is Tingling, Something is Amiss

Posted by: soothsayer at September 20, 2011 02:48 PM (sqkOB)

67 Plus, there is not (yet) any way to tax the non-pecuniary benefits of your job -- influence, fame, respect, easiness of it all -- which far outstrip the pecuniary ones you have to give the government a piece of.

I don't know about that--given that the price of getting and keeping that job is to do the bidding of your patrons, thus using that fame, influence, etc. on their behalf, I'd say he's already well paying that particular Teind. There's always a price when you sell your soul...

Posted by: DarkLord© sez Obama is a stuttering clusterf--- of a miserable failure
Oh, and F--- Nevada! at September 20, 2011 02:48 PM (GBXon)

68
I had a whole section envisioned about Obama being free to speak gauzily
about hope and change because his surrogates and the media (but I
repeat myself) undertook the to do the mean stuff for him, but again, it
was already too long.

Post a Son of Sap thread and throw that in.

Posted by: toby928™ at September 20, 2011 02:48 PM (GTbGH)

69 Posted by: Ian S. at September 20, 2011 02:45 PM (tqwMN)
sad thing is I agreed with him but he wanted to be a dick about it. ok that's all for now back to Brook's realization.

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 02:48 PM (yAor6)

70 This is Brooks, Dowd and pretty much every columnist for every single newspaper.

Posted by: Joffen at September 20, 2011 02:48 PM (EPcuy)

71 OH! Smerconish is still on the Obama bandwaggon no?

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 02:48 PM (yAor6)

72 the "tone" in politics has generally never been terribly elevated
Brooks has to listen to the screeching coming from MoDo's desk, so he'd disagree with that.

Posted by: Roy at September 20, 2011 02:48 PM (VndSC)

73 Yo Ace, you broke the page...italics are bleeding down all over the place!

Posted by: DavidW at September 20, 2011 02:49 PM (hAiC2)

74 David Brooks Extracts Head From Ass, Sees Light

Posted by: soothsayer at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (sqkOB)
Well, let's not go overboard here. For all we know this was a brief gasp for oxygen. We'll see if he's seen the light if he can ever bring himself to admit that Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.@62 Said what I did, but without the nifty pseudo-Celtic folk-lore reference.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at September 20, 2011 02:49 PM (8y9MW)

75 I know it's not popular to defend Noonan around
here, but I will. For better or for worse she does have her finger on
the pulse of the mood of the country up her ass poking for a clue in a way that we hardcore partisans
never really will.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:45 PM

FIFY

Posted by: The Fixer at September 20, 2011 02:49 PM (Y+DPZ)

76 Thank god. I was tired of getting stuff dribbled on me.

Posted by: David Brooks' Chin at September 20, 2011 02:49 PM (usXZy)

77 What is the difference between David Brooks and David Frum?

Frum is an irrelevant Canadian.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure at September 20, 2011 02:49 PM (AZGON)

78 >>>Who is worse, David Brooks or Chris Matthews?

Honestly, I'd take Matthews over Brooks without thinking twice. Matthews is a rude, (likely) drunk, partisan shill prone to outrageous rhetoric, but you know what? Every now and then he busts out with an absolutely shattering 'on-side' critique of Obama that hits far harder than anything Brooks would ever do. Deep down in his heart Matthews is still a old-time political operative: he is as partisan as can be, but he knows what works and what fails when it comes to politics and he can't help but call it out when it builds to a certain point.

I guess what I'm saying is that I really have nothing good to say about David Brooks.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:49 PM (kRtDX)

79 We assign equal blame to both parties for the dysfunctional politics
when in reality the Republicans are more rigid and extreme.

You know what else is rigid and extreme?

Pup-tent five!

Posted by: Barack "the Toddster" Obams at September 20, 2011 02:49 PM (QJmEe)

80 Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me every single time you open your mouth and promise pie in the sky? Well, I'm just a sap for a good lookin' guy in sharply creased pants.

Posted by: D. Brooks, fool for love at September 20, 2011 02:50 PM (263hv)

81 I heard about this site after Obama got elected so I missed everyone trying to get behind McCain. That must've sucked, huh? I can't imagine faking support for that guy, although I'm sure Palin made it much easier.

Posted by: Joffen at September 20, 2011 02:50 PM (EPcuy)

82 Funny, I never thought the fight for liberty was accomplished by men with their legs crossed at the knee and a good label drink in hand. Elevate the discourse? That immediately presupposes an "elite".

Posted by: dagny at September 20, 2011 02:50 PM (Cs8gh)

83 David Brooks is a very soft thinker.

Like marshmallow sauce, or kapok.

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 02:51 PM (AZGON)

84 Don't worry, if Brooks gets a choice between Perry and Obama, he'll be blowing The One every week.

Posted by: Billy Bob, the guy who drinks in SC at September 20, 2011 02:52 PM (hXJOG)

85 I know it's not popular to defend Noonan around
here, but I will. For better or for worse she does have her finger on
the pulse of the mood of the country in a way that we hardcore partisans
never really will.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:45 PM (kRtDX)
It's because her writing is as dumb as an uninformed voter is. She had two howlers in her most recent WSJ screed: That the SCoaMF never engages in snark (LOL) and that he sets a good example by having an intact family. Great insights, Nooner; now go back to your arthritis cure of gin and white raisins you got from Tereeeeeeesa Heinz Kerry and read your Mandingo books.

Posted by: Captain Hate at September 20, 2011 02:52 PM (7dMdC)

86 Brooks is that general in the bunker who looked at Hitler and Eva with their brains splattered on the walls and said "Hmm, maybe I was wrong about this guy"

Posted by: kbdabear at September 20, 2011 02:52 PM (Y+DPZ)

87 I find the von Clausewitz idea of war being an extension of politics to be useful here. If you can reverse the premise and say that politics is a reduced form of war where it is illegal to use violence it becomes a good reference. The chief goal of war is to win. Politicians use whatever *acceptable* strategy's let them win. And by acceptable, I mean any strategy they can get away with. So exactly on Ace's point, if folks actually affected by politics don't value comity over their own goals, the debate will reduce itself until it finds the equilibrium line of utter unacceptability, even to the partisan, to the point of being just short of literal war. That's how nature works. I do fear if the discourse devolves much further, we will be conducting politics by other means.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at September 20, 2011 02:52 PM (0q2P7)

88
The article was David Brook's audition for the position of President Romney's Press Secretary.

Whoring himself out early to beat the rush.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at September 20, 2011 02:52 PM (EeYDk)

89
David Brooks Extracts Head From Ass, Sees Light
Posted by: soothsayer at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM (sqkOB) Alas, no doubt the bright light will frighten the little twit, and like a groundhog predicting a longer winter he'll be shoving his head right back into that dark, warmburrow of ignorance.

Posted by: Reactionary at September 20, 2011 02:52 PM (xUM1Q)

90 David Brooks is what you get when you cross Kathleen Parker with Chaz.

Posted by: Roy at September 20, 2011 02:52 PM (VndSC)

91 I can't imagine faking support for that guy, although I'm sure Palin made it much easier.
I would have supported a feces-covered crack whore over Obama and I still would. So difficult? No. Unfortunate? Yes.

Posted by: dagny at September 20, 2011 02:52 PM (Cs8gh)

92 You perfectly described the "elitest" mind set,ace.

Posted by: steevy at September 20, 2011 02:52 PM (fyOgS)

93 Can you imagine the horrid look upon my face as I walked in the door to witness Muffy humping the little Ewok chew toy George Lucas had personally hand delivered?

I thought not.

Posted by: David Brooksie at September 20, 2011 02:53 PM (FabC8)

94 Posted by: Joffen at September 20, 2011 02:50 PM (EPcuy)
I kept reminding myself war Hero who took more torture so he wouldn't leave his men VS a guy who hung around w/ terrorists
wasn't so hard then
post-08 stock market crash it was a daily "how McCain is screwing up and how he can fix it" seminar up until Election night; frustrating to watch a campaign that bad

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 02:53 PM (yAor6)

95 But, there's NO BIAS in journalism!!!!!

Posted by: © Sponge at September 20, 2011 02:53 PM (UK9cE)

96 This is seriously good and thoughtful stuff Ace.

Posted by: Maltpointer at September 20, 2011 02:53 PM (/EsON)

97 @78

Right on target. Mathews still thinks he works for Tip O'Neil and can come to work drunk.

He would be fun to drink with, except he went to UNC.

Posted by: Billy Bob, the guy who drinks in SC at September 20, 2011 02:54 PM (hXJOG)

98 90

David Brooks is what you get when you cross Kathleen Parker with Chaz.

heh

Posted by: Jane D'oh at September 20, 2011 02:54 PM (UOM48)

99 There is a larger point: Brooksie is irrelevant. Her notoriety is owed to one thing only, which is the need of the urban Left to preen itself with an intellectually vacant vanity and pretend that they read conservative opinion. If Miss Davy were a Democrat she would have no job beyond second stringer at a free weekly in a college town.

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 02:54 PM (AZGON)

100 Fuck Brooks, I still have Kathleen Parker !!!!

Posted by: King Barry the Grownup at September 20, 2011 02:54 PM (Y+DPZ)

101
"Elevate the discourse" usually means your side is getting your asses kicked!!

Posted by: Honey Badger ben DOOM at September 20, 2011 02:55 PM (GvYeG)

102 unless I'm the one employing it and it seems effective

or funny

Has Brooks ever even had any tree sap on him?

Posted by: DaveA at September 20, 2011 02:55 PM (9c1gI)

103 56
Brooks feels used by Obama? I feel like I've been used by Rodman, all getting my guts pushed up into the back of my head.

Posted by: The Economy at September 20, 2011 02:46 PM

Is that you, Madonna?

Posted by: right at September 20, 2011 02:55 PM (RzLbD)

104 Goodpost, Ace.

Posted by: theCork at September 20, 2011 02:55 PM (ia9oR)

105 We should elevate the tone because my friends and I would like to feel a little less uncomfortable. And that is what is important in the economic environment.

Posted by: David Brooks at September 20, 2011 02:55 PM (/NnPf)

106 Said what I did, but without the nifty pseudo-Celtic folk-lore reference.

Look on the bright side, I just called the media fairies...

Posted by: DarkLord© sez Obama is a stuttering clusterf--- of a miserable failure
Oh, and F--- Nevada! at September 20, 2011 02:55 PM (GBXon)

107 You know what would be awesome? If the Republicans actually get to choose who speaks for 'our team' in the New Yawk Times. Not this SCOAMF knob-polishing, trouser crease sniffing douchbag.

Posted by: The Schwalbe : © at September 20, 2011 02:55 PM (UU0OF)

108 I'm really kinda glad I'm not Ace. I mean, I'd have to shoot myself if I had all that rattling around in my head today.......

Posted by: © Sponge at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (UK9cE)

109 The president We The People believe the press is acorpse.
Fixed.

Posted by: Lemon Kitten at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (0fzsA)

110 He would be fun to drink with, except he went to UNC.
Eww. Figures.

Posted by: dagny at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (Cs8gh)

111 Well I think what Ace wrote here could apply just as well to Noonan-

Your job is set, guaranteed for life (virtually), with few competitors for it. You're a one-man operation, an employee; your only interaction with the realities of business life is cashing a check, meeting with investment advisers, and occasionally pitching a book to a publisher.

You do not particularly fear a reduction of wages or an increase in taxes, because you're already making as much money as a writer could reasonably expect to make. Plus, there is not (yet) any way to tax the non-pecuniary benefits of your job -- influence, fame, respect, easiness of it all -- which far outstrip the pecuniary ones you have to give the government a piece of.

In short, you are someone whose interest in politics is chiefly a theoretical matter. You have no skin in the game. You can afford to be dispassionate about Obama's $500 billion cut to Medicaid, because in all likelihood you'll be an employed writer into your seventies and will have private insurance and even when retired will have enough money to opt out of the system. You can afford to have an intellectual's distance from Obama's choking regulatory overreach, because your only "business" is writing seven hundred words twice a week;

She has that complete air of the fainting couch about her.

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (rJVPU)

112 **Is an "elevated tone" in politics desirable? I suppose. I wouldn't mind it. Eh, cancel that, I'd welcome it.**

What a soft thinker this Brooks is, an elevated tone seems to mean assuming all facts are as the left imagines them to be. An elevated tone means taking Obama at face value that W.Buffet's secretary pays more taxes than him, an elevated tone is that of course MMGW is real. An elevated tone focuses on tardisil instead of Rev. Wright.

So, fuck this guy, if disagreeing with the smug-set's set of core beliefs is uncivil and under-elevated, then fine.

Posted by: joeindc44 at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (QxSug)

113 Yeah, when you've got your stack it seems less important that the means by which others might get their stack be preserved.Posted by: ace at September 20, 2011 02:47 PM (nj1bB)

To me, it's more of rich people (my definition above) removing a huge source of uncertainty and liability from their lives (money) and then occupying their minds with new agendas like politics. Once they overcome the burden of not having enough money stashed away to last them a lifetime, they start to get curious about other ideas. Some of them are benign, but most of them involve falling prey to really stupid shit (global warming, Obama, leftist goals, socialism, etc). They have more than enough money, and they want to get creative with their excess to try and support ideas that were proven bunk years ago.

Posted by: EC at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (GQ8sn)

114 Ace, you just have an irrational hatred of rich people. I know these people; they're friends of mine, and I'll tell you that they already give all their money to charity and are willing to pay more in taxes.

Posted by: Ben Stein at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (/NnPf)

115 Brooks is also Canadian dudes.

Posted by: ace at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (nj1bB)

116 Lots of play-pimpin' going on in the so-called Conservative media. They still don't understand that the era of plantation- politics is finished. We the slaves are free, and trust no one for content.
As for opinion, well, I cancelled my NYT subscription back around Abu Graib.

Posted by: dr kill at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (le5qc)

117 Noonan's the biggest airhead ever to appear in newspapers. Her columns are a relentless vomit stream of frantic psychobabble that say a lot more about her than they do about the American mood.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at September 20, 2011 02:56 PM (xgWpH)

118 >>>It's because her writing is as dumb as an uninformed voter is. She had
two howlers in her most recent WSJ screed: That the SCoaMF never
engages in snark (LOL) and that he sets a good example by having an
intact family. Great insights, Nooner; now go back to your arthritis
cure of gin and white raisins you got from Tereeeeeeesa Heinz Kerry and
read your Mandingo books.

She said something vaguely nice about Obama (yes, you know what? His family IS actually a decent role model for African-American community -- it doesn't make him a good president, but it's not like this ceases to exist) for the first time in literally TWO YEARS, in a column where she otherwise EXCORIATES him, and it's all that some of you assholes can fixate on. She's called him a pathetic loser (literally!) for years, in a column that genuinely affects and moves MSM opinion, and you ignore that.

Also, the racial-sex insult? Pretty fucking offensive, dude.

Seriously, stop letting hate run your life. But then again, your name IS "Captain Hate," so what am I even thinking?

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (kRtDX)

119 Honestly, Brooksie ought to plead with Dick Soetero for a job as Press Secretary Sycophant. She couldn't be worse than Carney, and could spend her days close to her unrequited love.

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (AZGON)

120 For the true believers of the SCFOAMF, it's a tough time. They've invested so much and it's all gonna end in tears. Their pain reminds me of my favorite college gf. She was beautiful, smart, funny, killer body and was everything I thought I wanted at the time. Except, except she slept with my "friends". You see, that was kind of a problem I couldn't over look, despite all the other great things about her.
So too, The SCFOAMF keeps "cheating" on the true believers. They want so much to love and believe. So very much. But the realization has to come. They've been taken in by a whore. Wait till they get to the anger phase of that realization. I will be enjoying it, believe me.

Posted by: Sgt. Fury at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (ONGHB)

121 Politics is personal, the leftists used to say, but isn't this taking things quite too far?

The leftists were right on that one (and, actually, it was said by a lot of people, including conservatives, because it's just a fact of nature. Like tides). David Brooks wasn't (isn't?) some "sap" who just became enamored of Barack Obama.

David Brooks saw in Obama what he wanted to see (as so many others did), and now invents reasons that he supported him (or still supports him, depending on which part of his bipolar cycle he's on).

The think about everyone who claims to want an "elevated tone" is that what they really want, deep down, is for us hicks to STFU and go away. They're embarrassed by our modes of speech, they're embarrassed by the fact we have calluses on our hands, and "farmers tans." (no, I don't have those things, I'm a cyber-hick. But I'm only one generation removed from real hicks) They think, like the European Aristocrats of whom they are the spiritual descendents, that people like us can't possibly understand high-minded things like economic policy (don't spend more than you make, and don't take so much from the People that they're effectively slaves of the state) or foreign policy (no better friend, no worse enemy).

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (8y9MW)

122 Our Miss Brooks is easy to understand: he's one of that crowd of elite East Coast preppies for whom politics is a delightful game, one they can manipulate with their erudition and loftily explain to their inferiors.

Sort of a liberal Ed "Poppin' Fresh" Morrissey but with impeccable tailoring and the right school tie.

Brooks figured out, early on, that tugging on the stuttering clusterf*** of a miserable failure's coattails would give him more cred with his peers, as they were sufficiently prescient to see that the time had come for President Historic First©.

We lesser folk from the hinterlands simply fail to appreciate his talent and perception. Just ask him.

Posted by: MrScribbler at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (YjjrR)

123 Whoa, Brooks is Canadian too?

There's something in the beer up north, I'm tellin' youse.

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (AZGON)

124 elevating the tone = assigning blame to others and making excuses for failure

Posted by: nerdygirl at September 20, 2011 02:58 PM (xrBtg)

125 And Chris Matthews got bit by a tse fly or came down with malaria....

Now David Frum...who was against abortion before he was for it-or whatever his gig is these days...

What the hell happened to that guy?

A complete about face.

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 02:59 PM (rJVPU)

126 For Sale: Styrofoam bust of Obama. Comes with its own Greek column for a pedestal. Just trying to de-clutter, I have too many of these. Your choice of chin-thrust angle.

Posted by: David Brooks at September 20, 2011 02:59 PM (FcR7P)

127 >>>Brooks is also Canadian dudes.

This explains so much.

No seriously, it does. Never trust a Canadian "conservative!"

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:59 PM (kRtDX)

128 For the record, though, rich folks aren't any more prone to believe stupid things than anyone else. They just have more opportunity to indulge their whims in that regard, and on a larger scale.

Posted by: DarkLord© sez Obama is a stuttering clusterf--- of a miserable failure
Oh, and F--- Nevada! at September 20, 2011 02:59 PM (GBXon)

129

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 20, 2011 02:59 PM (/NnPf)

130 Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 02:59 PM (rJVPU)
horrible election predictor too, claimed Obamacare would lead to a Dem wave in 2010

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 03:00 PM (yAor6)

131 Noonan said something so irritating last week that I promised myself that I wouldn't read her again. Now I don't even remember what it was. I do remember my vow. Same thing with Powerline. Forgot what they did to piss me off too. Oh well.

Posted by: dagny at September 20, 2011 03:00 PM (Cs8gh)

132 Brooks is a case study for why principles matter. If he were truly conservative, he would have never fallen for Obama's non-negro dialect, pant crease or sap. Personality and personalities come and go, but if conservative bedrock principles guide your decision making, you'll avoid making an absolute laughing-stock out of yourself and your supposed intellectual prowess.

As Ace effectively demonstrates, Brooks in more interested in having a man-crush than seeing small government conservative principles advance.

Even this article has a not-so-subtle undercurrent of "call me, Barack" wound throughout.

It's sad, really. And pathetic that Brooksie, KPark, CBuck, and that other broad I can't recall right now set aside supposed conservative principles to shill for a statist with nice manners.

Posted by: The Hammer at September 20, 2011 03:00 PM (7WMGf)

133 >>>No seriously, it does. Never trust a Canadian "conservative!"

You know who else is a Canadian conservative? Rachel Marsden.

So they're either unutterable squishes who inevitably move left, or they're crazy stalker SwimFan psychobitches.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 03:00 PM (kRtDX)

134 See, this is where Mike Tyson went wrong. If he were more clean and articulate, his comments about Palin would have been peachy.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at September 20, 2011 03:00 PM (ItDg4)

135 David Brooks, David Brock, David Frum...

I'm sensing a pattern here

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 03:01 PM (AZGON)

136 Wow, Ace, I must say I love the crease of your pants.

Which is to say: very nice takedown of Brooks. I'm going to steal many of the thoughts for later use.

Posted by: Greg Q at September 20, 2011 03:01 PM (/0a60)

137 Obama: Change only a sap could believe in!
Good 2012 slogan.

Posted by: Randy M at September 20, 2011 03:01 PM (vI8R6)

138 David Brooks' picture is in the dickshunary next to the word "irrelevant."

Posted by: Buddha at September 20, 2011 03:01 PM (Ehkdx)

139 @127: I don't know, Harper has been noticably to the right of Obama on several things. I'd trade straight up for a Canadian in that case.

And of course, there's Mark Steyn, Canada's second greatest export.

Posted by: Ian S. at September 20, 2011 03:02 PM (tqwMN)

140 Is an "elevated tone" in politics desirable? I suppose. I wouldn't mind it. Eh, cancel that, I'd welcome it.

It's the "elevated tone" that got this nation in the position it is now. It's what we've been getting for the last few decades. The biggestmanifestation of this isthe poison of political correctness. I'm ready for some mud wrestling in DC.

Posted by: Soona - Tearorrist at September 20, 2011 03:02 PM (L5wRj)

141 <i>See, this is where Mike Tyson went wrong. If he were more clean and
articulate, his comments about Palin would have been peachy.</i>

Of course... David Brooks ought to be Tyson's manager!

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 03:02 PM (AZGON)

142 >>>And of course, there's Mark Steyn, Canada's second greatest export.

Mark Steyn is the exception that proves the rule.

And by "proves" I mean "completely dismantles my theory."

(Although honestly he always sounded more British than Canadian to me.)

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 03:02 PM (kRtDX)

143 Brooks is to the left of Mike Medved, nuff said how "conservative" he is

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 03:03 PM (yAor6)

144 Noonan still thinks writing for Reagan is a life time pass with conservatives.

In her old age, she has just turned to mush.

I still do the old bitch. Old ginger might be fun.

Posted by: Billy Bob, the guy who drinks in SC at September 20, 2011 03:03 PM (hXJOG)

145 Speaking of elevating the tone, time to replay this.

Posted by: nerdygirl at September 20, 2011 03:03 PM (xrBtg)

146 Wait...Brooks is Canadian-so is the Frumster.

Being half Frenchy Canadian myself-you know what it could be?

The race issue-big time.

Canadians have this complete inferiority complex and where they like to lord it over Americans is-

1) Acid rain-which I think is over now.

2)Nuclear arms. (once had to go on a two week canoeing trip with these pikers at 10 years old and as the US military brat-had to defend nuclear armament and SDI for two solid weeks.-Mother of GAIA.)

3) Slavery-I'm just sayin'....

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 03:03 PM (rJVPU)

147 So too, The SCFOAMF keeps "cheating" on the true believers. They want so much to love and believe. So very much. But the realization has to come. They've been taken in by a whore. Wait till they get to the anger phase of that realization. I will be enjoying it, believe me.
Posted by: Sgt. Fury at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (ONGHB)
This will make the wailing and gnashing of teeth that happened in Madison, WI look like a church service. I too, can't wait.

Posted by: Roy at September 20, 2011 03:04 PM (VndSC)

148 The wrong Brooks killed himself.

Posted by: Red at September 20, 2011 03:04 PM (qxcKC)

149 Nice post, ace. Very well articulated argument.

Posted by: oleg at September 20, 2011 03:04 PM (tazG1)

150 Wait didn't Mark Steyn do some time in Aussieville?

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 03:04 PM (rJVPU)

151 The wrong Brooks killed himself.
Posted by: Red at September 20, 2011 03:04 PM (qxcKC)
not cool, too far

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 03:05 PM (yAor6)

152 Is an "elevated tone" in politics desirable? I suppose.
I don't think so. Say what you mean and mean what you say. "Nice" has nothing to do with it. That isn't to say you can't be nice, but that shouldn't be a political goal. For just a very brief instant, and an instant only, America may be ready for a truly honest President. I'd love to see at least an attempt. No one exists yet to take that mantle, but I'll be watching.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at September 20, 2011 03:05 PM (71LDo)

153 The Brits and the rest of the Euros had African slaves too,they just kept them in the colonies and ended it sooner than we did.

Posted by: steevy at September 20, 2011 03:05 PM (fyOgS)

154 Mark my words: Tomorrow Brooks will write - despite his shortcomings, Obama is still twice as smart as anyone the Republicans put forth as candidates, and I still love him...sharp crease and all.

Posted by: Living In The Bubble at September 20, 2011 03:06 PM (3S10h)

155 For the record, though, rich folks aren't any more prone to believe
stupid things than anyone else. They just have more opportunity to
indulge their whims in that regard, and on a larger scale.
Actually, I would argue that rich folks are less prone to believe stupid things- it's part of how they got rich. The problem is we never hear from those, and when we do its when they're doing something stupid- like Mark Cuban's TV Network airing that Truther movie on 9/11. That was stupid- but Cuban himself is (first and foremost) not a Truther and (secondly) actually fairly conservative. We don't hear about that, though, because whenever we hear about Mark Cuban, it's because of something "outrageous" he's done re: the Dallas Mavericks or because of some stupid move he's made regarding his tendency to want to make more money.

I'm sure there are hundreds of thousands of independently wealthy individuals (or those who are, like Brooks, relatively sheltered from the economy) who are conservative, but just keep their traps shut.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at September 20, 2011 03:06 PM (8y9MW)

156 Don't worry about the "elevated tone". That will be changed soon enough.

Posted by: Rick at September 20, 2011 03:06 PM (hXJOG)

157 Posted by: steevy at September 20, 2011 03:05 PM (fyOgS)
don't forget that little repeated fact that a good number of states didn't participate in it

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 03:06 PM (yAor6)

158 Oh no. Don't get me started on Medved, who is certain Obama loves this nation as much or more than you. Who knows Obama is brilliant but just can't understand why he does what he does. Who thought the best candidate in 2008 would have been Huckabee, and then McCain. I will lose my temper.

Seriously.

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 03:07 PM (AZGON)

159 Good photoshop idea -- Obama's copy of the The Bluffer's Guide to Being President.

I suck at pshop.

Posted by: Clubber Lang at September 20, 2011 03:07 PM (QcFbt)

160 Not reading all that, just taking my socks off.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at September 20, 2011 03:07 PM (lNGfM)

161 Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 03:07 PM (AZGON)
his debate analysis is annoying as fuck. He calls everyone but Mittens stupid and un-electable.

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 03:08 PM (yAor6)

162 I take issue with Brooks's assessment. I think he is an everyday, run of the mill, general purpose sap. Nothing more.
BTW.

Posted by: Flaccid Fred at September 20, 2011 03:08 PM (OlN4e)

163 Hello, my name is David and I'm a sap ..

Posted by: Saps Anonymous at September 20, 2011 03:08 PM (Y+DPZ)

164 the governing style Obama talked about in 2008
And there it is.
No substance or results. Style.
That kind of mindset is what got us into this mess and apparently Brooks can't seem to figure out where he went wrong. We of the great unwashed reactionary right had the problem pegged from the beginning.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at September 20, 2011 03:09 PM (B+qrE)

165 157 That too,right.

Posted by: steevy at September 20, 2011 03:09 PM (fyOgS)

166 Brooks, I hope the next president never invites you to the WH. Now, go to your NY Times bath house and blow your editor.

Posted by: observer at September 20, 2011 03:09 PM (7Ghpa)

167 For a little joy in your day, Fred Smith, head of Fed Ex is having a little fundraiser for Rick. A buddy of mine is flying him up in one of those awful corp jets that he owns. Will report how it went.

Posted by: Billy Bob, the guy who drinks in SC at September 20, 2011 03:09 PM (hXJOG)

168 David Brooks sits down to pee. Who cares what the effete little milksop mewls about?

Posted by: kathysaysso at September 20, 2011 03:10 PM (ZtwUX)

169 Soporific Jeebus on a straw mattress. Medved is pimping Romney? Does the prick think we have forgotten how he continually trashed Romney in the last campaign, with some very good reasons? Are his reasons now suddenly defunct? Dipshit.

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 03:11 PM (AZGON)

170 He wants us to be Thelma to the Democrats' Louise: in the end we drive off this fuckin' cliff together.

Posted by: Mark V. at September 20, 2011 03:12 PM (tFHJL)

171
And remember you can't spellsap without SCOAMF! Just type small.

Posted by: Dax at September 20, 2011 03:12 PM (GRJTc)

172 as part of the very tiny cadre of professional writers

if you keep peeing in the pool, they aren't going to let you in Ace, I think they learned their lesson with Capote.

Posted by: Jean at September 20, 2011 03:12 PM (WkuV6)

173 David Brooks is like a lot of Canadian sap, it tastes better after you boil it.

Posted by: Maple syrup at September 20, 2011 03:12 PM (hXJOG)

174 Fred Smith, head of Fed Ex is having a little fundraiser for Rick.
Fed Ex obviously just wants to undermine its most efficient competitor, the United States Postal Service.
Or something.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at September 20, 2011 03:12 PM (B+qrE)

175 For the record, though, rich folks aren't any more prone to believe
stupid things than anyone else. They just have more opportunity to
indulge their whims in that regard, and on a larger scale.

Put more simply, all leftist twaddle comes from well-off people with too much idle time.

Posted by: Ian S. at September 20, 2011 03:14 PM (tqwMN)

176 Krauthammer is my favorite sort of Canadian, American political writer.

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 03:14 PM (rJVPU)

177 David Brooks got Obama's sap all over him.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff, Underwear Blogger at September 20, 2011 03:15 PM (z/Mo8)

178 My first informed exposure to David Brooks was during the 2008 campaign. He became a non-person to me then and still is. I've never put forth any time to read anything he's written ever since.

Posted by: Soona - Tearorrist at September 20, 2011 03:15 PM (L5wRj)

179 @174

You know Fed Ex already has a partnership with the USPS, right?

I guess they will just pick up the pieces when USPS closes there doors. They are already flying most of USPS's mail.

Posted by: Billy Bob, the guy who drinks in SC at September 20, 2011 03:15 PM (hXJOG)

180 <i>David Brooks got Obama's sap all over him.</i>

And all this time I thought that bucket hanging from Brooks was a drool cup.

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 03:16 PM (AZGON)

181 Did anyone see Perry's speech in NY today? Thoughts?

Santorum called it "boilerplate" and...it was a little bit of that, however, IMO he seemed to be a much stronger speaker. Definitely want to see this at the debate Thursday.

Posted by: Joffen at September 20, 2011 03:16 PM (EPcuy)

182 54 Most swing voters don't care about details, so politicians are not rewarded for focusing on details.

I disagree. I think swing voters as a group are smarter than people who blindly pledge allegience toany single party. They're looking at details and current economics and choosing what they think is right for the current situation.
NON-voters or "occasional" voters would be the ones who don't care about details....

Posted by: MrObvious at September 20, 2011 03:16 PM (2uovW)

183 @180
man, html fail today

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 03:17 PM (AZGON)

184
This post is very good, if a bit long and italicized. Thanks Ace.
I think the topic, using the example of "love that crease" David Brooks, is relevent to a large chunk of the Obama voters out there...those who are swayed by either emotion (Hope, Change, stop the rising of the oceans) or the false comfort of the ivory tower intellect (East Coast, well-delivered words in speeches, academia). Both together make up the Cult of Personality of Obama. And as we see yet again in our history, a Cult of Personality (if not meeting an early tragic end) never has success meeting the expectations their followers have allowed themselves to anticipate.
I believe that what we're seeing in polls and approval ratings is the inevitable moment of realization that we are three years in, and expectations have met the harsh reality of results. Some...the most emotional/East Coast Progressive true believers (soft thinkers) will hold on a long time or even infinitely, as to not do so would be to deny their emotional and/or ideological foundations. Most will weigh promises and Hope to real world results, and notice the words do not match the actions, and they will move on to the next hope. I don't know if this happens drip by drip or by Ace's preference cascade, but it is and will continue to happen as long as Obama keeps being who he is.
The Right, by the way, isn't devoid of its own "soft thinkers". I personally think many of them have fallen for our own current Cult's of Personality...the Palins and Bachmanns of the party. Should one of them be elected, the reality of their results would surely be an inadaquate shock to the conservative utopian dreams of their true believers.
"To the Socialistsin allparties"

Posted by: MostlyRight at September 20, 2011 03:17 PM (ZG8Ti)

185 170
He wants us to be Thelma to the Democrats' Louise: in the end we drive off this fuckin' cliff together.

Posted by: Mark V. at September 20, 2011 03:12 PM

Well yeah, but we're holding hands.

Posted by: right at September 20, 2011 03:18 PM (RzLbD)

186 His family IS actually a decent role model for
African-American community

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (kRtDX)
LOL; how patronizing. I'm sure everybody was waiting for your and Nooner's blessing.

Posted by: Captain Hate at September 20, 2011 03:18 PM (7dMdC)

187 Ace, The only reason Brooks is distancing himself from SCOAMF is that the way things are looking now, the SCOAMF looks like a possible one termer. He's hedging his bets, that's all.

Posted by: Minnfidel at September 20, 2011 03:18 PM (Ez8xx)

188 And all this time I thought that bucket hanging from Brooks was a drool cup

Obama: "You want this sizzurp, baby? Then you got to TAP THIS."

Brooks: "UUUUUHHHHHNNNNNNHHHHH..."

Posted by: Empire of Jeff, Underwear Blogger at September 20, 2011 03:19 PM (z/Mo8)

189 Robert Brooks admits he faps to O-bah-muhh's biorythms.

Posted by: Long Dong Silver at September 20, 2011 03:20 PM (8cOwi)

190 I disagree. I think swing voters as a group are smarter than people who
blindly pledge allegience toany single party. They're looking at
details and current economics and choosing what they think is right for
the current situation.
I'm sorry, but I think you're wrong. Or, rather, that the "details" they want to hear are magical faery dust details about how it can all be made better- we can reduce taxes and increase spending. And unicorns. And rainbows.

The only thing that helps is that, every so often, we get a Carter, or an Obama to come along and prove the lies- and then, if we act properly, we'll get someone like Reagan who will begin the roll-back process. Not perfectly, not as quickly as we'd like, but a beginning all the same.

The we nominate George HW Bush because it's "his turn" and we blow it all up again...

But, if we get someone in the mold of Reagan, who will begin walking back the federal crap- and then we nominate someone who will actually continue that walk back- we might finally be able to convince the general electorate that it is ideas and details that matter- and that no one who promises unicorn farts and rainbow droppings is going to be able to deliver.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at September 20, 2011 03:21 PM (8y9MW)

191 1,540 words.

Just saying.

Posted by: As If! at September 20, 2011 03:21 PM (piMMO)

192 Brooks isn't a sap, he's a fucking idiot.

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at September 20, 2011 03:22 PM (1rHeD)

193 Anyone who didn't know what an incompetent parisian ass obama was and is can go fuck him or herself. I can't be any clearer than that. You weren't electing a first time dog catcher and taking a chance on a person you thought might have potential. You were electing the President of United States and Leader of the Free World. Shame on you and go fuck yourself. I hope I made myself clear enough?

Posted by: nevergiveup at September 20, 2011 03:22 PM (i6RpT)

194 David Brooks admits he wishes he could be Obama's boy-toy

Posted by: Jelly Bean Benitez at September 20, 2011 03:22 PM (8cOwi)

195 1,540 words.Just saying.

18,460 words short of a movie review.

Posted by: George Orwell at September 20, 2011 03:23 PM (AZGON)

196 Ace sure is a windy bastard with this one....

someone paying him by the word?

Posted by: redc1c4 at September 20, 2011 03:23 PM (d1FhN)

197 I disagree. I think swing voters as a group are smarter than people who blindly pledge allegience toany single party. They're looking at details and current economics and choosing what they think is right for the current situation.
NON-voters or "occasional" voters would be the ones who don't care about details....
Posted by: MrObvious at September 20, 2011 03:16 PM (2uovW)

You're accusing some folks of generalities by making a statement of generality. I call horseshit. I support the repubs because, for now, they are the home of conservatism. If that changes then I will change my view of the repub party.

Posted by: Soona - Tearorrist at September 20, 2011 03:23 PM (L5wRj)

198 perhaps he should worry about the concerns of people less well-off a
little more, and not agitate relentlessly for a "politics" which, to the
extent I can understand it, consists chiefly of concerns about prep
school manners.

And don't forget, the last 30 episodes of Blossom.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 20, 2011 03:23 PM (/NnPf)

199 His family IS actually a decent role model for African-American community

To be honest, we have no way of knowing if that's true. Everything else about the man is spun and managed, why not what we see of his family life? Only four people have the slightest clue what the truth is, and I'm opening the pool on which of the girls writes the tell-all first.

Posted by: DarkLord© sez Obama is a stuttering clusterf--- of a miserable failure
Oh, and F--- Nevada! at September 20, 2011 03:23 PM (GBXon)

200 nice post ...

Posted by: Honey Badger at September 20, 2011 03:23 PM (GvYeG)

201 Posted by: As If! at September 20, 2011 03:21 PM (piMMO)

That's nothing. Normal magazine rate is (last I recall) about 15 cents a word*, so he'd only get paid $231.00 for this. And it might be his only published article of the month.

*That could be way off- that's based on research my brother did something like 7 years ago

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at September 20, 2011 03:24 PM (8y9MW)

202 His family IS actually a decent role model for African-American community

Ha? He seems like nasty bastard to me.

Posted by: nevergiveup at September 20, 2011 03:24 PM (i6RpT)

203 It apparent that David never did his own laundry and ironing. If he did he'd know that the crease never stays perfect no matter how hard you try.

Posted by: mpfs, TPT at September 20, 2011 03:25 PM (iYbLN)

204 Is calling yourself a sap similar to saying, "My biggest flaw is that I just care too much" ?

Posted by: nerdygirl at September 20, 2011 03:25 PM (xrBtg)

205 The we nominate George HW Bush because it's "his turn" and we blow it all up again...

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther)

///
I agree that Herbert was not a good president and gave us the mother of all monstrosities (the ADA), but if you're VP for 2 successful terms, you probably should be P or you shouldn't have been VP. Frankly, I don't think he should have been VP.

Posted by: SFGoth at September 20, 2011 03:25 PM (dZ756)

206 It's the new Gilded Age, baby.

Posted by: Mark Twain at September 20, 2011 03:26 PM (/NnPf)

207 Positing a non-existent civility or "elevated tone" or claiming the MSM creates a "false equivalency" by "assigning equal blame" isn't "soft-thinking."

It's a LIE.

LIE.

LLLLLLIIIIIIEEEEEE.

Say it along with me, it's an easy, small word. It's not so hard to say.

LLLL-IIII-EEEE. LIE.

But if we don't CALL it a lie, every time they tell it, they get away with it because they get to tell the lie one more time than we call it a lie.

So call it a lie. Because it is a lie.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of Lonely Unicorns at September 20, 2011 03:26 PM (bxiXv)

208 It's more of that class warfare the Obama supporters are pushing. Brooks wants political debate couched in Ivy League sensibilities--you know, like at Princeton seminars where only polite and exceedingly whifty ideas are aired. That's just dandy if you're producing academic fluff, but it has no correlates in the real world . But Brooks and his cronies detest the real world-- it's so crass, after all.

Great post, Ace. I hate these poseurs.

Posted by: dulce at September 20, 2011 03:26 PM (ANcW5)

209 If this was posted yesterday, David Brooks would be admitting he likes the cut of O-bah-muhh's jib.

Posted by: Non-Somali Pirate at September 20, 2011 03:26 PM (8cOwi)

210 Brooks is also Canadian dudes.

Effin Frostbacks. We should have moat on the Northern Marches, filled with fire.

Posted by: toby928™ at September 20, 2011 03:26 PM (GTbGH)

211 Our Miss Brooks has had a terrible awakening. Ahhhh, too bad.

Suck it up and take a Zoloft like a normal person.

Posted by: mpfs, TPT at September 20, 2011 03:26 PM (iYbLN)

212 He hasn't changed one bit, nor has he finally seen the light, or become disilliusioned. He now knows that his God bleeds. And he's not the first to announce it. He's joining in with journolist 2.0.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 20, 2011 03:26 PM (6rX0K)

213 "The Emperor's New Clothes"

Read it Brooks. Easy read , almost like a child story.

Posted by: Temper Tantrum at September 20, 2011 03:28 PM (bAL0J)

214 When assholes like Brooks say they want civility, they want no such thing. What they want is to silence conservatives so that liberals can scream their obscene lies without fear of contradiction.

Posted by: Trimegistus at September 20, 2011 03:30 PM (Quhp9)

215 Swing voters that voted for Obama didn't want to pay attention.

Obama had four different positions on just about every important issue-*if* you were paying attention.

They literally wanted to be lied to.

And like Brooks they preferred the sleek facade.

They wanted Europeans to like us.

They bought into the styrofoam columns and the campaign speech in Germany.

They were fools.

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 03:30 PM (rJVPU)

216 18,460 words short of a movie review.

Jeff Goldstein over at Protein Wisdom used to (still does?) movie reviews in five words or less.

Posted by: As If! at September 20, 2011 03:30 PM (piMMO)

217 When you've lost David Brooks...well, you've lost David Brooks.

Posted by: Tony253 at September 20, 2011 03:32 PM (7my1f)

218 His family IS actually a decent role model for African-American community
Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (kRtDX)
Yes, every family should take separate planes on vacation.

Posted by: The Schwalbe : © at September 20, 2011 03:32 PM (UU0OF)

219 When you've lost T. Coddington Vorhees VII...

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at September 20, 2011 03:32 PM (PLvLS)

220 They're the spineless followers that want to be in with the-"cool kids" the media that is screeching at them daily about how they are a bunch of rubes.

There are some that just want to pick the *winner*-which is why the media helpfully polls the electorate to death.

Posted by: tasker at September 20, 2011 03:33 PM (rJVPU)

221
Nice piece, Ace. A hundred right-wing blogs will pick this up and predictably call Brooks a dupe, fool or worse, but you've gone a few layers deeper to what I'd agree is really wrong with Brooks and the whole Noonan/Parker/Frum crowd. They sound like they live on another planet most of the time because in many ways, they actually do.
Oddly enough, I never felt Buckley was part of that crowd, for all that he epitomized "PBS Conservatism" in his outward manner.Despite all that gentility, hecould stillact likebar-brawler when he needed to(as Gore Vidal discovered).

Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at September 20, 2011 03:34 PM (yK8YH)

222
>>"Noonan said something so irritating last week that I promised myself
that I wouldn't read her again. Now I don't even remember what it was. I
do remember my vow. Same thing with Powerline. Forgot what they did to
piss me off too. Oh well."

The Powerline guys declared themselves to be Rockerfeller Republicans a
couple of years ago. They thought McCain was a "great man". They're mostly
about adjusting their squishy right-liberalism to remain in favor with
whatever the current Washington D.C. Republican establishment is thinking at any given moment. They don't
call their blog "Powerline" for nothing.

Posted by: Commissioner Gordon at September 20, 2011 03:35 PM (L00d6)

223 OT from a link at Drudge..

Bibi speaks: "Tonight I am going to New York to speak at the General Assembly, meet
with (U.S. President Barack) Obama and with other leaders," Netanyahu
said. "I know the reception I received here is much warmer than the one I
will receive at the UN, and exactly because of that I think we should
go there and present our truth… of a people attacked over and over by
those opposed to their very existence. That is the most basic truth."

He's right. He won't receive a warm reception.

Posted by: As If! at September 20, 2011 03:35 PM (piMMO)

224 Can David Brooks step far enough away from his own vantage point -- can he imagine, for a moment -- to realize that most businessmen are more sharply regulated, and are more harassed by the government, than he himself experiences, as part of the very tiny cadre of professional writers?
======
This is a sad truth about the Corporate Media in general. With the exception of the clergy, there are no other professions with a "leave me the hell alone" clause built right into the Bill of Rights. So media folks rarely really get it.
To the Corporate Media, government is always that group of folks with a ready press release, some data they can copy and a spokesperson funded, waiting, and ready to feed them the info they need by their deadline.
The Corporate Media does not really understands government the way the rest of us do because they don't ever have to deal with actual bureaucracies in a real sense.

Posted by: jc at September 20, 2011 03:38 PM (i8c5b)

225
167.....For a little joy in your day, Fred Smith, head of Fed Ex is having a little fundraiser for Rick. A buddy of mine is flying him up in one of those awful corp jets that he owns. Will report how it went.
---------
Cool. Fed Ex is still a non-union shop, I think. Unlike UPS which is teamsters. ...So it would make sense that Fred Smith would be a Perry fan.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 20, 2011 03:38 PM (gZjpA)

226 He's right. He won't receive a warm reception.
Posted by: As If! at September 20, 2011 03:35 PM (piMMO)

He should have sent me. I'd set the UN and obama straight

Posted by: nevergiveup at September 20, 2011 03:39 PM (i6RpT)

227 #217, heh.

Posted by: rdbrewer at September 20, 2011 03:40 PM (/NnPf)

228 Cool. Fed Ex is still a non-union shop, I think. Unlike UPS which is
teamsters. ...So it would make sense that Fred Smith would be a Perry
fan.

I'm not going to go full transport tard on you but I will point out that FedEx is beginning to lose the union fight, court by court. They are not teamsters, presently, because they are regulated by the FAA, not the FMCSA, as is UPS. Their regulatory setup is is also under scrutiny.

FedEx and UPS are both outstanding American success stories and each is to be admired, but it is unfair to suggest that FedEx is more conservative or freedom loving than is UPS.

Posted by: As If! at September 20, 2011 03:42 PM (piMMO)

229 Brooks is just desperately trying to regain whatever credibility he once had....which was not that much to begin with.
Nice piece though, Mr. Ace.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 20, 2011 03:44 PM (gZjpA)

230 15
where's David Brooks to come on here and insult ace and commenters? I mean we just had that on the other thread

Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy) at September 20, 2011 02:36 PM (yAor6)

Didn't see any insults from Treacher. Snark, however, has long been his shtick. Easy, there.

Posted by: baldilocks at September 20, 2011 03:44 PM (T2/zQ)

231 Didn't see any insults from Treacher. Snark, however, has long been his shtick. Easy, there.

He didn't. It was all snark, and very tame at that.

There was nothing disrespectful about it.

Posted by: As If! at September 20, 2011 03:48 PM (piMMO)

232 That's not sap on your chin David.

Posted by: SCOAMF In Chief at September 20, 2011 03:53 PM (Ez8xx)

233 Also, the racial-sex insult? Pretty fucking offensive, dude.

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 20, 2011 02:57 PM (kRtDX)
Really? Was it as offensive as that Gawker Sarah Palin-Glen Rice stuff? Because that was extremely ugly and I don't recall you getting sand in your vag about that. Maybe you did and I just missed it but I'm taking an educated guess that you didn't. So fuck you and your faux outrage.

Posted by: Captain Hate at September 20, 2011 03:59 PM (7dMdC)

234 When it comes to all things Obama, David Brooks is the Crown Prince of Bukkake Journalism.

Posted by: No Whining at September 20, 2011 04:17 PM (HmCnI)

235 Shorter David Brooks: "I want to be dry raped in the turd hamper ... but onlyby a man with a British accent."

Posted by: Warden at September 20, 2011 04:18 PM (HzhBE)

236 This is the kind of thing that keeps me coming here first, last and in between all day. Your analysis of what is really going on, as usual,is spot on.

Posted by: Marco Polo at September 20, 2011 04:21 PM (Goj1Z)

237 And he makes 350 K a year, for the privilege.

Posted by: ian cormac at September 20, 2011 04:26 PM (eMSXN)

238 David Brooks is a German software company?

Posted by: Jamfish at September 20, 2011 04:33 PM (m4+Rq)

239 Can David Brooks step far enough away from his own vantage point -- can he imagine, for a moment -- to realize that most businessmen are more sharply regulated, and are more harassed by the government, than he himself experiences, as part of the very tiny cadre of professional writers?
Several years ago Brooks wrote a piece on "Red State America" - I think it was for the Atlantic, but can't remember for sure. So, in his research of this alien species, conservatus Americanus, to what remote destination did Mr. Brooks set out? All the way to Pennsylvania. Granted, he chose a red county within PA (I think he's from a fairly rural place in Western PA), but shouldn't some editor have stepped in and said "You kow, here's an idea, how 'bout taking a longer trip and really get out there to a red state"?
And in discussing the work life of RSA, he honed in on some guy who ran the payroll department for some mid-size company. I was suspicious that the guy even existed since it sounded exactly like the kind of job that would have been outsourced a decade or three before (David, there's this company called ADP. Look 'em up). About two pages into an article about the length of an Ace movie review I gave up.
In short: David Brooks is not very sharp.

Posted by: somebody else, not me at September 20, 2011 04:36 PM (7EV/g)

240 So Brooks is a phony for his incredibly biased and slanted reporting. Sounds familiar Ace.

Posted by: Molon Labe at September 20, 2011 04:37 PM (S7K8x)

241 All the "county rubes" told him so but he's too much of a snob to listen.

Just don't fuck it up next time - yeah, right.

Posted by: Dang at September 20, 2011 04:46 PM (TXKVh)

242 For someone calling himself "Molon Labe" you sure have a metric ton of butthurt.

Poor baby. Maybe you should stop posturing as some kind of Digital Spartan.

Posted by: ace at September 20, 2011 04:53 PM (nj1bB)

243 Oh I've got it -- Molon Labia.

That's nearer the truth.

Posted by: ace at September 20, 2011 04:54 PM (nj1bB)

244

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-US
JA
X-NONE

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

As a conservative, I must say that I do quite like the
cut of this Brooks fellow's jib.

Posted by: T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII at September 20, 2011 04:56 PM (hW3KZ)

245 159
Good photoshop idea -- Obama's copy of the The Bluffer's Guide to Being President.

I suck at pshop.

Posted by: Clubber Lang at September 20, 2011 03:07 PM (QcFbt)

Paging Johnny E. Paging Johnny E.Please pick up the white courtesy phone.

Posted by: jwm at September 20, 2011 05:00 PM (spEu4)

246 Amen, Ace. You should be Brooks psychologist.

Posted by: Mary at September 20, 2011 05:09 PM (t4WVf)

247 When you've lost Brooks, you've lost the MFM's top echelon's token pseudo-conservative.

Brooks is pro-SSM pro-abortion. I understand some libertarian arguments for those positions, but you'd have to be Queen Andrew Sullitan to make "conservative" arguments for those.

Posted by: Leo Ladenson at September 20, 2011 05:16 PM (mAm+G)

248 Brooks graduated from Radnor HS, not rural and not western PA. Its a Main Line suburb of Philadelphia.

Posted by: White RB at September 20, 2011 05:20 PM (LrLv1)

249 228.... @ As if!
But...don't the Teamsters support Dems pretty much exclusively? ...And Obama?

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 20, 2011 05:28 PM (gZjpA)

250 "Tone" is a red herring. What pundits like Brooks should concern themselves with is sophistry. Logical rhetorical fallacies (straw men, false choices, prevarication, doublespeak, all the bullshit O lards his speeches with), deployed in bad faith, in order to deceive. Bald-faced lies, chronic mendacity. That is a much graver, more dangerous corruption of language thought than coarseness of "tone", and should be much more offensive to people like Brooks who traffic in words ideas.

But no. That's why this isn't about discourse per se, even "tone." It's about socio-cultural signifiers, superficial markers of a certain class: Obama talks "like" Brooks and the people in his milieu, in the most superficial sense-- he can sound (to the lazy ear) like a culturally sophisticated, erudite, rhetorically grandiloquent academic. He uses the kinds of metaphors figures of speech that they're comfortable familiar with. He picked up one of the emblematic skills you learn in grad school: how to bullshit. How to inflate your speech with hot air.

But the degradation debasement of political discourse under the Obama administration is the worst I've experienced in my lifetime, the kind of thing that would have Orwell rolling in his grave. Of course the worst sophistry-- the most effectively deceitful-- would come swathed in a dulcet lofty-sounding baritone, as opposed to Elmer Gantry coarse folksiness. For Brooks to fret about "tone" when the integrity of political discourse has been butchered on a daily basis for 3 years now, is unpardonable.

Posted by: lael at September 20, 2011 05:36 PM (vuhBT)

251 Great Canadian conservative: David Warren.

Check him out at David Warren Online. Bookmark his page: he's good for regular reading.

He's in a league with Steyn. And, like Steyn, very pro-American.

Posted by: A Rogue Wave Called Bruce at September 20, 2011 06:00 PM (b5wyM)

252 Sullivan,the pink P-Town-Bob,must throw a whole bunch of hissy fits...

Posted by: Elize Nayden at September 20, 2011 07:31 PM (v49dF)

253 people had soft spot for hitler tooas long as they were not on the trains.

Posted by: pd at September 20, 2011 09:35 PM (mVdiW)

254 I have been quite impressive with your posts, keep up the great work.

Posted by: Happy Accidents Audio Book at September 20, 2011 09:49 PM (b8Hhg)

255 Fear not. Once Obama hears that he's "lost" David Brooks, he'll simply invite Brooksie into the Oval Office for another one-on-one interview. They'll sit down across from each other, and Obama will slowly uncross and then recross his legs in a deliberate, seductive fashion (think Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct), giving Brooksie a nice, full-frontal view of his impeccable trouser creases.
Brooksie will sigh, then smile dreamily and mumble: "Ah, how could I ever stay mad at you?" And the bromance will be back on.

Posted by: Major Kong at September 20, 2011 10:00 PM (B+qrE)

256 If anybody ever waves their left hand with thumb and index finger held together in my face, and I detect even a hint of sap on that hand, I will soooo rip their arm off and beat them with the sappy end.

Also, would somebody with energy to waste go back and look at old videos of The Won and see if there's not a progression of tension in that left hand over the past three years?

People, I sense weakness, yea even blood in the water here. But you'll never take advantage of it. You're all a bunch of pomo bobos. Except Ace, who is rumored to be sinister.

Posted by: Indigo Light Saber at September 20, 2011 10:03 PM (93bjw)

257 Sokath, his eyes opened ....

but I won't hold my breath. This IS David Brooks, after all.

Posted by: dissent555 at September 20, 2011 11:53 PM (yR6A1)

258 buy windows 7 cd key buy wedding dress CD Keys ARMA 2 CD Key Call of Duty CD Key Company of Heroes CD Key Command Conquer CD Key Dawn of War 2 CD Key Dead Space CD Key Fallout 3 CD Key Mass Effect 2 CD Key Silent Hunter 5 CD Key The Sims 3 CD Key GTA 4 CD Key NFS CD Key Titan Quest CD Key RUSE CD Key F1 2010 CD Key Two Worlds 2 CD Key Star Trek Online CD Key Spore CD Key Far Cry 3 CD Key Dungeons CD Key Dragon Age CD Key Divinity 2 CD Key Dead Space 2 CD Key Crysis 2 CD Key Cities XL 2011 CD Key HomeFront CD Key Shogun 2 Total War CD Key Fable 3 CD Key PES 2011 CD Key Duke Nukem Forever CD Key Dungeon Siege 3 CD Key FEAR 3 CD Key NBA 2K11 CD Key RIFT CD Key Red Faction: Armageddon CD Key Dead Island CD Key Driver San Francisco CD Key Deus Ex: Human Revolution CD Key F1 2011 CD Key From Dust CD Key Red Orchestra 2 CD Key Tropico 4 CD Key Might Magic Heroes 6 CD Key MineCraft CD Key Rage CD Key DCS A-10C Warthog CD Key

Posted by: dby54n4hflh at September 21, 2011 01:26 AM (jstK2)

259 Time to look up declasse in the dictionary. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

Posted by: Ampontan at September 21, 2011 02:47 AM (cwlTA)

260 Exactly! Excellent post.
David Brooks is emblematic of the the problem of an elite sinecured class insulated from the consequences of their thoughts. They are not necessarily stupid, but they are often foolish. They can afford to be.
It's a nice gig once you get it, because once you attain a certain level of name recognition your opinions are sought out and you're almost guaranteed a comfortable income.
A better example of this phenomenon might be Paul Krugman. Whatever his grasp of theoretical economics, he clearly has no common sense.

Posted by: kraki at September 21, 2011 08:19 AM (ylLDT)

261 Still a chance for Ace to replace Brooks. He's been auditioning for along time.

Posted by: Molon Labe at September 21, 2011 01:22 PM (S7K8x)

262 la beste l flv to dvd converter sd rip blu ray p ts
blu ray converter for iPad, iPhone, iPod, Gphone, Blackberry, blu ray maker PS3, Xbox,
PSP, Wii, DV, etc blu ray copy .

Video to ipad Converter is ipad video converter for iPad convert avi to iPad

Posted by: lusefer at September 22, 2011 12:23 AM (0f2eU)

263 Certainly which includes to your factors yet We differ having various other things, to sum up it’s a great document ! solar panel | shopping bag | corkscrew | induction lamp | magazine printing

Posted by: Jessica at September 22, 2011 04:10 AM (3Ycsq)

Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0428 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0189 seconds, 272 records returned.
Page size 155 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.