R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: How David Brooks "Thinks"  (Read 545 times)

mgod

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4020
How David Brooks "Thinks"
« on: January 18, 2008, 12:15:13 pm »

From a friend, sent to the NY Times:

To the editor:

David Brooks glowingly describes the three GOP front runners as "a pastor, a businessman and a war hero," calling them "the three most evocative Republican leadership models," and the Democratic front runners as "a daughter of the feminist movement, a beneficiary of the civil rights movement and a self-styled proletarian," calling them " powerful Democratic categories."

What Brooks is really saying is:  the Democratic field is "composed of two entitlement beneficiaries and a hypocrite."

That's about as fair as describing the GOP field as a Gomer Pyle-like anti-science religious fanatic, a greedy businessman and cultist, and a bad pilot (after all, George McGovern was a war hero too, but he didn't get shot down).

Chelsea Clinton may be a "daughter of the feminist movement," but  Hillary? She was on the front lines in the 1960s and she is a Yale Law school graduate and an  attorney. Clarence Thomas may have been a beneficiary of the civil rights movement, but Obama? Unlike Thomas, he was clearly smart enough to reach Harvard on his own. As for calling Edwards a "self-styled proletarian," what would Brooks call a horse-fearing child of blue-blood privilege and a  Yale legacy student  who buys a dusty "ranch" in Crawford, affects a drawl and arranges brush-clearing photo ops? Probably "an evocative Republican leadership model."


Sincerely,

Michael
Wyckoff, NJ"
Logged
"There IS no Coolometer." - Larry Janus

Jay Kadis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2165
Re: How David Brooks "Thinks"
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2008, 03:00:16 pm »

I have a witty comment about David Brooks, but decided not to share it and thereby pay him any more attention.
Pages: [1]   Go Up