yogurt, I think
― max buzzword (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 21:51 (twelve years ago) link
He is doing a little kid level response to the standard criticism of Murray's latest book
― curmudgeon, Tuesday, 14 February 2012 22:17 (twelve years ago) link
http://ussc.edu.au/blogs/David-Brooks-apparently-thinks-society-means-white-people
― jaymc, Wednesday, 15 February 2012 14:15 (twelve years ago) link
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/america-might-be-better-shape-david-brooks-thinks
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 15 February 2012 16:18 (twelve years ago) link
more like Roast in Piss
― happiness is the new productivity (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 15 February 2012 16:22 (twelve years ago) link
Please take a number, if you would like to be the next columnist/blogger/economist etc. to critique David Brooks' latest pronouncement:
Here's Dean Baker
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/david-brooks-denounces-economics-is-biology-next
Brooks also has an interesting theory on the loss of skills. He tells readers:
"The American social fabric is now so depleted that even if manufacturing jobs miraculously came back we still would not be producing enough stable, skilled workers to fill them."
Five years ago we had two million more people employed in manufacturing than we do today. Has the social fabric become so depleted in this period that these people or others could now not fill these jobs if they came back? If Brooks really thinks that the ill effects of unemployment are that extreme he should be screaming for more stimulus in every column.
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 15 February 2012 21:11 (twelve years ago) link
brooks recasts real world problems as a morality play in his role as conservative apologist: every david brooks column
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 15 February 2012 21:14 (twelve years ago) link
tho often i guess they are not so much real world problems as fake made up problems
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 15 February 2012 21:15 (twelve years ago) link
Today's helping, courtesy of a certain ilx alumnus: http://www.salon.com/2012/02/17/david_brooks_i_have_heard_of_jeremy_lin/singleton/
But even while grappling with the tension between religious values and contemporary cultural values, which is basically well within Brooks’ wheelhouse, he demonstrates a hilarious misunderstanding of sports, and what sports are “about,” because Mr. Brooks has been spending far too much time in his cloistered elite liberal media ivory tower munching on brie and arugula and not enough time among Real Americans in their “Sporting Taverns” watching “The Big Game” over a pint of mass-market domestic lager.
― Spleen of Hearts (kingfish), Friday, 17 February 2012 21:59 (twelve years ago) link
suspect beating up brooks when u need an easy column will outlast "analyzing" linsanity/linreality tbh
― the fading ghost of schadenfreude whiplash (Hunt3r), Friday, 17 February 2012 22:24 (twelve years ago) link
A few generations ago, teenagers went steady. But over the past decades, the dating relationship has been replaced by a more amorphous hook-up culture.
― curmudgeon, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 19:20 (twelve years ago) link
a few generations ago, it was legal to marry a 15 year old
― max buzzword (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 19:28 (twelve years ago) link
a few generations ago, interracial marriage was against the law
a few generations ago, bestiality was legal in Florida
― ENERGY FOOD (en i see kay), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 19:36 (twelve years ago) link
The half-century between 1912 and 1962 was a period of great wars and economic tumult but also of impressive social cohesion. Marriage rates were high. Community groups connected people across classIn the half-century between 1962 and the present, America has become more prosperous, peaceful and fair, but the social fabric has deteriorated. Social trust has plummeted. Society has segmented. The share of Americans born out of wedlock is now at 40 percent and rising.
In the half-century between 1962 and the present, America has become more prosperous, peaceful and fair, but the social fabric has deteriorated. Social trust has plummeted. Society has segmented. The share of Americans born out of wedlock is now at 40 percent and rising.
Ah, the good ol' days..... If only married people had kids, we could have impressive social cohesion and a strong social fabric like we did before 1961, when only men could get decent jobs and we kept those darned negroes out of our good schools, restaurants, and bus seats....
― everything else is secondary (Lee626), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 19:41 (twelve years ago) link
beyond self-parody at this point
― ploppawheelie V (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 22 February 2012 00:26 (twelve years ago) link
Can't be a coincidence that his name is *this* close to douche-hat: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/opinion/sunday/douthat-the-safe-legal-rare-illusion.html
― s.clover, Wednesday, 22 February 2012 00:42 (twelve years ago) link
First they went after the Rockefeller Republicans, but I was not a Rockefeller Republican. Then they went after the compassionate conservatives, but I was not a compassionate conservative. Then they went after the mainstream conservatives, and there was no one left to speak for me.
― iatee, Wednesday, 29 February 2012 15:58 (twelve years ago) link
Got pretty bummed because he's scheduled to speak at a conference I'll be attending next month, which meant I would have had to cover his talk for our org's magazine. Was dreading that. But turns out he's speaking at a luncheon during the conference, so I think I'm free of that burden!
― andrew m., Wednesday, 29 February 2012 16:12 (twelve years ago) link
does your org have a rule against reporting on luncheons?
― goole, Wednesday, 29 February 2012 16:13 (twelve years ago) link
one more liberal wanting a free ride!
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 29 February 2012 16:15 (twelve years ago) link
David Brooks making right-wingers angry:
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/02/28/is-david-brooks-comparing-the-tea-party-to-nazis/
I would also point out that the Rockefeller Republicans were losers and compassionate conservatism put us on the brink of financial ruin
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 29 February 2012 16:44 (twelve years ago) link
the last half of the sentence OTM
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 29 February 2012 16:46 (twelve years ago) link
Similar statements were made about Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, and John McCain.
maybe reagan but otherwise, no, child
― goole, Wednesday, 29 February 2012 16:49 (twelve years ago) link
well ok W in 04 too
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/is-david-brooks-teaching-humility-at-yale-the-most-pretentious-moment-in-history-20121219
― k3vin k., Thursday, 20 December 2012 22:24 (eleven years ago) link
https://docs.google.com/document/d/14zUrsmH6eO_i-arEN0zf1LwFID7SoyxkgAo36NUiHp0/pub
― iatee, Monday, 14 January 2013 23:38 (eleven years ago) link
The strategies covered here start from a similar premise—that human beings are blessed with many talents but are also burdened by sinfulness, ignorance and weakness, which is why I call on both parties for common sense solutions to our problems, the most notable of which is a cat o' nine tails.
― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 14 January 2013 23:39 (eleven years ago) link
We will pay special attention to those who attended elite prep schools and universities.
u don't say
― flopson, Monday, 14 January 2013 23:40 (eleven years ago) link
someone please call his office phone
― iatee, Monday, 14 January 2013 23:50 (eleven years ago) link
Modern societies have become economically and socially more unequal. We will explore status competition and the desire for social distinction—executives who feel unabashed when asking for lavish salaries. We will ask whether it is proper to put a Yale window sticker on the back of your car. We will look at codes of social modesty and ask whether modest people make better business leaders
― Mordy, Monday, 14 January 2013 23:53 (eleven years ago) link
"Students will be asked to grapple with the indictment of their generation made by Christian Smith, Alasdair Macintyre and Jean Twenge."
― Matt Armstrong, Monday, 14 January 2013 23:55 (eleven years ago) link
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/01/david-brooks-now-totally-pathological.html
More fun from Chait
― "It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Drunk!" (kingfish), Saturday, 19 January 2013 17:26 (eleven years ago) link
Brooks rose into prominence as a moderate Republican and has enjoyed immense success and prestige as a result. Psychologically, he could hurl himself from a moving car more easily than he could reject Republicanism, no matter how batshit crazy the party becomes.
― Aimless, Saturday, 19 January 2013 17:56 (eleven years ago) link
same with Frum at this point, imo. i realize he can't begin to approach the loathsomeness of Brooks, but his blog basically serves to titillate liberals (who the fuck else pays attention to him?) and provoke a chorus of 'i-told-you-so's'
except for his recent weird preoccupation with the evils of zomg marihuana and the fact that he can't get his mouth off Israel's dick for 5 seconds, i really don't understand how he's still able to call himself a Republican with a straight face.
i suppose renouncing Republicanism would damage his brand, his blog traffic would suffer and he wouldn't be one of cable news' 4 go-to guys who are "trying to save the party"
― Still S.M.D.H. ft. (will), Saturday, 19 January 2013 18:33 (eleven years ago) link
(re Frum on pot and Israel: i realize that neither of these positions would preclude one from being a card-carrying Dem)
― Still S.M.D.H. ft. (will), Saturday, 19 January 2013 18:35 (eleven years ago) link
I mind Frum far less than Brooks. At least Frum gives the impression that he has groggily awakened from a nightmare.
― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 19 January 2013 18:39 (eleven years ago) link
lol at "the chinese have no word for nerd"
― caek, Monday, 4 March 2013 00:31 (eleven years ago) link
clean hit:
David Brooks has an unparalleled ability to shape an intellectually interesting idea into the rhetorical arc of an 800-word op-ed piece. The trouble is, a central part of his genius is choosing the little factoids that perfectly illustrate his points. No doubt he's happy enough to use a true fact if the right one comes to hand, but whenever I've checked, the details have turned out to be somewhere between mischaracterized and invented.
― caek, Monday, 4 March 2013 00:33 (eleven years ago) link
Is it just me or is there a kind of critical mass of media/internet people piling on him now? I find the timing strange -- I didn't think his latest column was particularly more noteworthy than a lot of his other drivel.
― signed, J.P. Morgan CEO (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 18 December 2013 17:04 (ten years ago) link
I was a little bemused too when he was EVERYWHERE in my twitter feed night before last. I checked the brooks threads on here and saw only vague lol refs-- I'l be god damned if I'm giving that little psycho a click so I actually still haven't read the column in q.
― yes, i have seen the documentary (Jon Lewis), Wednesday, 18 December 2013 17:07 (ten years ago) link
h8 him so much
I think he may have struck a nerve with a lot of bloggers with that "thought leader" piece, since it seems to be satirizing a certain kind of aspiring intellectual not too dissimilar to many bloggers themselves. Yglesias was particularly harsh:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/12/17/david_brooks_scant_self_awareness_divorced_pundit_suddenly_not_so_worried.html
Basically accuses him of hypocrisy for his recent divorce.
― o. nate, Wednesday, 18 December 2013 17:10 (ten years ago) link
Pareene: http://www.salon.com/2013/12/18/hack_list_no_4_david_brooks/
― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 18 December 2013 17:13 (ten years ago) link
He's overdue for a flogging, I just don't know why it's happening now.
― signed, J.P. Morgan CEO (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 18 December 2013 17:20 (ten years ago) link
i wouldn't flog him with my little brother's lash
― yes, i have seen the documentary (Jon Lewis), Wednesday, 18 December 2013 17:22 (ten years ago) link
o nate otm
― flopson, Wednesday, 18 December 2013 17:23 (ten years ago) link
have remained blissfully ignorant of this whole kerfuffle so a little disappointed at the reasons for this thread revive
― Ayn Rand Akbar (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 18 December 2013 17:27 (ten years ago) link
Don't worry guys, with any luck Iraq will turn out like Rwanda!
― Οὖτις, Friday, 20 June 2014 20:28 (ten years ago) link
too late to neglect it into genocide
― Mordy, Friday, 20 June 2014 20:32 (ten years ago) link
My progressive readers are now thinking: Have you not been paying attention? Donald Trump has owned this party for years. If he told them to kill the immigration compromise because he needed a campaign issue, they were going to kill that proposal.
To which I respond: I don’t think you quite understand what just happened.
Do go on.
― Beyond Goo and Evol (President Keyes), Friday, 9 February 2024 17:05 (seven months ago) link
"Let me recount my dinner conversation with my wife, who I think, as I told her at the time, doesn't quite understand what just happened"
― Humanitarian Pause (Tracer Hand), Friday, 9 February 2024 17:37 (seven months ago) link
this man is a walking definition of fatuity
― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Friday, 9 February 2024 20:24 (seven months ago) link
They have to mouth the Trumpian prejudices to survive in this era, but somewhere deep inside, the party of Reagan still lives in their souls.
Uff da
― Rich E. (Eric H.), Friday, 9 February 2024 20:31 (seven months ago) link
it doesn't matter a damn what's deep inside their souls because they sold their souls to Trump and are no longer in possession of them
― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Friday, 9 February 2024 20:35 (seven months ago) link
"souls"
― poppers fueled buttsex crescendo (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 9 February 2024 20:57 (seven months ago) link
lol the party of Reagan is where the problems really started, asshole
― Surfin' burbbhrbhbbhbburbbb (sleeve), Friday, 9 February 2024 22:03 (seven months ago) link
when will this fucker really die, c'mon 2024
seriously, thread lets me down time and again
― mom tossed in kimchee (quincie), Friday, 9 February 2024 23:23 (seven months ago) link
LOL I know. Every damn time.
Seriously, "the party of Reagan." I spent the Reagan years protesting his illegal wars, go fuck yourself.
― immodesty blaise (jimbeaux), Friday, 9 February 2024 23:37 (seven months ago) link
Spouse suggested that I love to hate on DB the way I watched 60 Minutes to hate on Andy Rooney back in the day, but it is truly a different thing with me and Brooks
― mom tossed in kimchee (quincie), Saturday, 10 February 2024 03:52 (seven months ago) link
Ugh, he's definitely more smug than Rooney was. I haven't read him in awhile and then I saw this annoying bit--
Last fall I argued that Joe Biden was the Democratic Party’s strongest 2024 presidential nominee. I believed that for two reasons: He has been an effective president, and he is the Democrat most likely to appeal to working-class voters.
I still believe Biden is the party’s strongest candidate, but I’m getting more pessimistic about his chances of winning.
The first reason is not political rocket science: Voters prefer the Republicans on key issues like inflation and immigration. Most Donald Trump supporters I know aren’t swept up in his cult of personality; they vote for him because they are conservative types who like G.O.P. policies and think Trump is a more effective executive than Biden.
"Most Donald Trump supporters that I know" ...
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/24/opinion/thepoint?searchResultPosition=1#biden-poll-young-voters
― curmudgeon, Friday, 26 April 2024 00:33 (four months ago) link
and think Trump is a more effective executive than Biden.
Brooks is huffing something if he takes this at face value.
― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Friday, 26 April 2024 01:13 (four months ago) link
every single trump supporter david brooks knows supports trump because he'll lower their taxes and/or abandon all regulation of them or their businesses
that is what being 'effective' means
― mookieproof, Friday, 26 April 2024 02:12 (four months ago) link
yes, but that was amply covered by "prefer the Republicans on key issues". I perfectly understand that the the follow-on reference to "inflation and immigration" was just camouflage for lower business, personal, and capital gains taxes combined with reckless deregulation, both of which Trump leaves entirely to his minions in Congress to make happen. He has no interest in such petty details as writing and passing legislation. He just likes to sit in the big chair and give orders.
― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Friday, 26 April 2024 02:43 (four months ago) link
*reads* this guy is the most dangerous bastard in the public discourse because people don't realize or won't admit how motherfucking dishonest and/or deluded and stupid he is.
― schrodingers cat was always cool (Hunt3r), Friday, 26 April 2024 03:49 (four months ago) link