I always knew David Brooks was an asshole ....

if

We didn’t give it up for the obvious health reasons: that it is addictive in about one in six teenagers; that smoking and driving is a good way to get yourself killed

seems like an extremely inefficient way to get yourself killed

Vape Dad followed you

#bless

"that smoking and driving is a good way to get yourself killed"

Yeah is it really? I can think of better ways...

hasn't worked for me yet, I must be doing it wrong

Lol of course David Brooks went to Radnor High

I mean, Radnor High School, but he also went there High

Rich suburban motherfucker. I'm gonnna take a shit in his barbeque grill

everyone is so jacked up on triple espressos all the time, bring on the Weed Era, imo.

someday we will find the perfect chemical balance

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/01/03/ruth_marcus_davis_brooks_and_reefer_madness.html

And Ruth Marcus too

Charles Pierce:

There is one sure way for posterity to consider you a fuddy-duddy. That is to use the word "fuddy-duddy" twice in two sentences in the beginning of a column about how pot is bad for the nation. Far better when confessing your early days as the world's most boring stoner to take the Brooks route, whereby one puts aside childish things (such as the bong shaped like Edmund Burke's head) and moves on to loftier pursuits.

Read more: Ruth Marcus David Books Marijuana Column - Two Dopes - Esquire
Follow us: @Esquiremag on Twitter | Esquire on Facebook
Visit us at Esquire.com

"In healthy societies, government wants to subtly tip the scale to favor temperate, prudent, self-governing citizenship. In those societies, government subtly encourages the highest pleasures, like enjoying the arts or being in nature, and discourages lesser pleasures, like being stoned."

subtly imprisoning its citizens so that david brooks will go outside and take a walk

and as for you weigel you srsly cant light a joint thats how casual a stoner you are oh my

imprisoning citizens so david brooks will self govern himself

"government subtly encourages the highest pleasures, like enjoying the arts or being in nature, and discourages lesser pleasures, like being stoned."

government should encourage the highest highest pleasures of enjoying the arts or being in nature while being stoned.

win win

government should encourage the highest pleasures of throwing David Brooks off a bridge

while high

twinkies

Getting stoned "is not a lot of fun" and has "serious brain effects" on children, according to Brooks on NPR five seconds ago.

"i mean, look how i turned out..."

David Brooks not immediately getting his face laughed at by the host and on the hour by each newsreader is one of the reasons I stopped listening to NPR

only on once a week

Still too much

the bong shaped like Edmund Burke's head

ok, lol

<3 u charles pierce

posted this in the other thread, grudging goldberg otm

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-03/i-like-david-brooks-have-smoked-marijuana.html

the first half of the brooks column actually wasn't horrible imo lol

Paul Krugman is off today.

this was a pretty cruel joke by the NYT editors tho, touché

Another mandatory feature of the marijuana-themed column is the Current Use Statement, because it is morally acceptable to have been a stupid kid, but it is apparently less acceptable to be a stupid adult. So: I haven’t touched marijuana in 25 years.

Who will be the most surprising pundit to weigh in w/ their current epic marijuana use? Krauthammer?

Read

I don’t drink alcohol very much at all, because I don’t like it -- what it does to me, and what it does to society.

the fuck outta here with this hit

*shit

all these pundits pop mad pills #knowledge

http://twitter.com/leyawn/status/419133339828629504/photo/1

I don't mean to ask the stupid obvious question here, but what exactly has marijuana done to 'society'?

its a lesser pleasure

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/counter_narrative/2014/01/david_brooks_smoking_pot_should_black_kids_pay_for_his_pothead_sins.html

He needs to have a couple beers and relax

lol

The emergence of boutique hotels reflects a broader trend toward a more experientially rich commercial world.

It seems as if there is an endless supply of middle-class consumers who have boutique identities and aspirations, especially among people in their 20s. Consumers now use hotels differently. They bring their laptops down to the lobby rather than working in their rooms. Fewer people bother to unpack their bags. Therefore, room desks and closets are less important, but having a happening lobby scene is more important. People need a civic space where they can have their contiguous but individualized iPad experiences.

Boutique hotels are, on one level, kind of ridiculous. They are almost invariably too dark throughout, making it hard to read. The bed is often too low. The bathroom door is sometimes a flimsy sliding shutter, sacrificing privacy for style.

But they do exemplify a shift in the consumer market, which you might call the shift from the lima bean economy to the edamame economy

Ha ha. I saw that headline but have not yet forced myself to read the column.

This was kinda funny:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2014/01/03/ruth-marcus-and-david-brooks-smoke-pot-a-play-in-one-act/

^^ world needed these insights

david brooks reminds me of that quote from good morning america: "You are in more dire need of a blow job than any white man in history"

A basic rule of happiness is don’t buy things; buy experiences.

this might be the paradigmatic Brooks column

did anything prompt this column? did dave leave the house or something?

he left his Manhattan penethouse, crossed the street, entered boutique hotel lobby, ordered gimlet.

Consumers have been educated by the market and now the median level of cultural competence is much higher.

well thank god