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

its what the new york (mfn) times puts him forward as

but i mean hes the voice as reason in that he behaves like a nice reasonable young man, no one listens to what he says was my original point

hes a placeholder

i mostly feel bad for people who are having things explained to them for the first time by david brooks

imagine his son

Kid probably just packs another bowl.

kid is doomed what with divorced parents decaying moral fabric etc

Sure he'll get a nice inheritance though unless dad blows all the money on hookers/blow or leaves it to child from new marriage to twenty something model type.

thats what i wld do

Sure he'll get a nice inheritance though

how wealthy is a david brooks???

expert guess his estate is somewhere in the eight figures

multiple best sellers, paid speaking gigs etc

http://www.esquire.com/cm/esquire/images/IS/esq-david-brooks-new-york-times-102910-xlg.jpg

"son, homeless people taste best barbecued, not fried"

"how wealthy is a david brooks???"

Uh I'm guessing insanely wealthy.

he chills w the koch bros at conservative functions and thinks "i am not rich"

I mean not CEO of Fortune 500 company wealthy, but lagoon's estimates seem right to me.

I think that's what conservatives put him forward as, but I don't know of any liberals who buy it.

I know at least one self-described liberal who does. o_O

some middle aged whites listen to him on npr and think "hmm, he's not shouting or firing a pistol in the air...let's give him a chance."

exactly

"how wealthy is a david brooks???"

Top 5% of workers.

ha

krugsy bogues isn't letting this one go

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/18/the-myth-of-the-deserving-rich/?_php=true&_type=blogs&module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body&_r=0

man god bless krugman going over the same exact arguments over & over again for 5 years now

i am pretty sure i have read that exact krugman post maybe 20 times at this point. it's still otm and it's still important and needs to be said. but i don't know how he has the patience. not just the column but on his blog, too.

Have you seen him on Sunday talk shows? Each time he edges closer to the point at which he wraps his expensive scarf around Mary Matalin's throat every time she condescends to call him 'professor.'

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/02/way-we-live-now-by-david-brooks.html

utter destruction

Wow, congrats on the byline to ILX's own Jody Beth Rosen!

lolololol That's the other Jody Rosen. ikr?

sorry it never gets old to me

or at least it seemed like it had been long enough

holy shit

i have stared into the sun

IIRC, the other Jody Rosen has posted on ILM a couple of times.

there is only one jody rosen lets be real folks

this charade, long enough

what about joe d. rosen? what about jo diro-sen?

same, same

http://www.wbur.org/npr/273133838/week-in-politics-jobs-numbers-and-cbo-report

BLOCK: But David, hasn't the underpinning of the Republican thinking looking forward been we need to reach out to Hispanic voters? We have seen what's happened to us in past elections, and we recognize that we have a problem there.

BROOKS: This is the problem with democracy. If we had a party run by elites, which it should be, they would be far-seeing, they would know what's in the long-term interest of their party, and they would push through change against a minority group, the Tea Party, which doesn't see it that way. But the minority group now has veto power, and so the establishment of the party really has limited control to do what I think most people would agree is in the long-term interest of the party as a whole.

This is the problem with democracy. If we had a party run by elites, which it should be

This is the problem with democracy. If we had a party run by elites, which it should be

This is the problem with democracy. If we had a party run by elites, which it should be

oh yeah I cited that bit in the OTHER David Brooks thread. I heard it live yesterday and nearly drove off the road.

David Brooks of the elite claims his rightful place beside the throne.

...like Salacious Crumb.

Women, meanwhile, have different tastes at different times in their cycles. During ovulation, according to some research, they prefer ruggedly handsome and risky men, while at other times they are more drawn to pleasant-looking, nice men. When men look at pictures of naked women, their startle response to loud noises diminishes. It seems that the dopamine surge mutes the prefrontal cortex, and they become less alert to danger and risk.

really wish the times titled that piece "let's talk about gender baby"

Women, meanwhile, have different tastes at different times in their cycles. During ovulation, according to some research, they prefer ruggedly handsome and risky men, while at other times they are more drawn to pleasant-looking, nice men. When men look at pictures of naked women, their startle response to loud noises diminishes. It seems that the dopamine surge mutes the prefrontal cortex, and they become less alert to danger and risk.When men look at pictures of naked women, their startle response to loud noises diminishes. It seems that the dopamine surge mutes the prefrontal cortex, and they become less alert to danger and risk. I know this because I was caught looking at porn while writing this column.

arrghh copy and paste errors in my clever joke

lol I was just gonna make the same joke

probably has something to do with you guys being hormonally in sync

Babies are deep

more like babies are DERP