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

Kevin Drum re latest Brooks column on Romney/Ryan medicare plan:

As near as I can tell, the truth is almost exactly the opposite of what Brooks has written. He may not be impressed with Obama's plan, but that's not a good excuse for so badly misrepresenting what Romney and Ryan would do.

x-post--great piece.

his defense is that his writing is a joke. impenetrable.

today's brooks' op-ed begins with "Let’s say you’re generally a moderate voter." and peaks with "The priority in this election is to get a leader who can get Medicare costs under control. Then we can argue about everything else."

The purpose of the Republican convention is to introduce America to the real Mitt Romney. Fortunately, I have spent hours researching this subject. I can provide you with the definitive biography and a unique look into the Byronic soul of the Republican nominee:

I actually found this column moderately funny (ducks):

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/28/opinion/brooks-the-real-romney.html?_r=1&hp

It is (ducks also). But is Brooks mocking us as well as Romney?

I don't know what to make of that tbh

Yeah that's the problem with Brooks. It should have a name, Brooksism or something -- that gutless, hide-the-ball kind of writing that makes you feel a little like you're talking to a narc.

seriously today's column is weird. i thought it was a media put-down - "see this is how the liberal media portrays poor mitt" - until the last line.

there are funny jokes in there - which is alarming enough - but yeah his motives for writing them is sort of inscrutable

http://www.mockpaperscissors.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/bobo-tongues-the-world-surreal-247x300.jpg

"heh heh heh"

motives = are

stupid verbs

I think it's all in the spirit of good-natured ribbing. These are pretty gentle zings - stuff that I'm sure Romney could chuckle over at a comedy roast. I think it fits pretty well with Brooks's attitude that Romney is a good candidate dogged by bad PR.

He's no Dave Barry, thank Heaven.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/opinion/brooks-thurston-howell-romney.html

what a tool...he didn't know this before the secret video? and he says at the end that he really thinks Willard is a good guy deep down? FU, Brooks

He was doing ok until this:

"Sure, there are some government programs that cultivate patterns of dependency in some people. I’d put federal disability payments and unemployment insurance in this category."

The vast, vast majority of people on unemployment do not want to be. They want a job.

It's interesting to see Brooks reach the point where he stops trying to bend over backwards to be the compassionate, moderate, open-minded conservative while still playing for team Republican and when he finally decides he has to cut Mitt loose.

those damn disabled people, always wanting a handout

Disability insurance is a source of moral hazard, dissuading the lame from healing thyselves.

It's interesting to see Brooks reach the point where he stops trying to bend over backwards to be the compassionate, moderate, open-minded conservative while still playing for team Republican and when he finally decides he has to cut Mitt loose.

― o. nate, Tuesday, September 18, 2012 4:32 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

hes allowed one of these heterodox columns every so often but really compassionate, moderate, open-minded conservative while still playing for team Republican or the more succinct republican apologist is his job he knows this and will carry on starting next column

I can't tell him and E.J. Dionne apart anymore :(

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/opinion/brooks-the-conservative-mind.html?hp

Where do these fantasies come from?

x-post--In print E.J. is much more liberal while on NPR he and Brooks try to make nice.

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/david-brooks-on-drugs-and-medicare

Dean Baker vs Brooks with a link to Brooks' piece yesterday on how the Romney Medicare proposal is better than the Dems because the Romney plan relies on the free market

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/11/todays-war-on-nate-silver-quiet-flows-the-don-edition.html

delong quoting someone else:

Brooks’ journalistic way of knowing

Ha.

I thought you were going to be mentioning Brooks' absurd reasoning behind his endorsement of Romney.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/opinion/brooks-the-upside-of-opportunism.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

if Romney wins, we’re more likely to get bipartisan reform. Romney is more of a flexible flip-flopper than Obama. He has more influence over the most intransigent element in the Washington equation House Republicans. He’s more likely to get big stuff done.

get big stuff done get big stuff done get big stuff done get big stuff done get big stuff done get big stuff done get big stuff done get big stuff done get big stuff done get big stuff done

if anything needs getting done, it's big stuff

America: who do you think u r?
Romney: mr. big stuff B-)

'I certainly wasn't wrong about it provoking smart ass jibes.'

http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2013/02/your-use-of-data-for-any-purpose-but-validating-david-brookss-lazy-intuitions-infuriates-david-brooks

On Brooks' attempt to argue with Nate Silver over baseball stats

Spectacular column.

its incomprehensible.

why isn't this guy recognized as the Murray Kempton of his generation

i think the nyt is just keeping him around now because it's rumored his head is filled with nougat and they're just waiting for the right moment to crack him open.

beautiful!

Was waiting for this to be posted. I don't remember if Taibbi made the point that marriage necessarily implies few of the constraints Brooks presumes it does.

incomprehensible yes and prematurely senile like kempton you bet and yet recognizable in the fog is a married-too-long middle age guy wondering about the "freedom" he was undoubtedly (in brooks case) too uptight to exercise/enjoy when he was single

haha m@rk: I was being sarcastic (I love Kempton).

me too and i shouldnt have been disrespectful but those last few years in the ny post he was the oracular rambler

and yet recognizable in the fog is a married-too-long middle age guy wondering about the "freedom" he was undoubtedly (in brooks case) too uptight to exercise/enjoy when he was single

This. If I was Mrs Brooks I would be making a bed for David on the sofa after reading his column.

I'd be strapping one on.

A decaying social fabric, especially among the less fortunate.

Taibbi rightly picked up on the stupidity and uselessness of this statement

"lack even the basic mental ingredients"

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/05/david_brooks_bigoted_rant/

Another blog re "mental equipment" phrase used twice by Brooks

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/david-brooks-is-racist-creep-by.html

Islamists might be determined enough to run effective opposition movements and committed enough to provide street-level social services. But they lack the mental equipment to govern.

A review of Charles Taylor's A Secular Age:

As someone who tries to report on the world of ideas, I’m going to try to summarize Taylor’s description of what it feels like to live in an age like ours, without, I hope, totally butchering it.

it gets better from there

i'll admit it, i look forward to David Brooks columns more than Krugman these days. i'm pretty sure he's some kind-of conceptual comedian like neil hamburger, and it just takes a while to get the joke.

I don't want to give David Brooks any credit, but when I read "seems to lack even the basic mental ingredients," I thought he was criticizing the Egyptian people's mentality, not their brainpower. Which is obviously still ignorant as hell but it's not on the level of saying Egyptians are cognitively inferior to Americans.