The obligatory “David Brooks really impressed with Obama’s pants” post

posted at 9:37 pm on August 31, 2009 by Allahpundit

If it’s not Frum and Bruce Bartlett demanding greater outreach from Republicans while sneering at them at every turn, it’s Brooks breaking his arms patting himself on the back for being an intellectual … who happens to find political portent in how well Barack Obama irons his pants.

It’s hard out here for a RINO apologist, my friends.

“I don’t want to sound like I’m bragging,” Brooks recently told me, “but usually when I talk to senators, while they may know a policy area better than me, they generally don’t know political philosophy better than me. I got the sense he knew both better than me.”

That first encounter is still vivid in Brooks’s mind. “I remember distinctly an image of–we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant,” Brooks says, “and I’m thinking, a) he’s going to be president and b) he’ll be a very good president.” In the fall of 2006, two days after Obama’s The Audacity of Hope hit bookstores, Brooks published a glowing Times column. The headline was “Run, Barack, Run.”…

“Obama sees himself as a Burkean,” Brooks says. “He sees his view of the world as a view that understands complexity and the organic nature of change.” Moreover, after the Bush years, Brooks seems relieved to have an intellectual in the White House again. “I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us,” he explains. “Of recent presidents, Clinton could sort of talk like us, but Obama is definitely–you could see him as a New Republic writer. He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics. I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room. So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up.”

As much as I hate the fetishization of populism, it’d be hard to find a more loathsome expression of intellectual elitism than “I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us,” especially given the extent to which people like Brooks and Frum disdain the “one of us” appeal that inspires so many of Palin’s fans. For Brooks, it seems, it all depends on who “us” is. Also, did I misread that last paragraph or is he suggesting that the main reason he wants Obama to succeed is to vindicate governance by the smart set? I know he gets off on Ivy League pedigrees but I didn’t suspect until now that he was treating Hopenchange as some sort of field test of his theory that postgrads should rightly run the world.

As for “the organic nature of change,” he’s talking about a guy who wanted a health-care bill forced through Congress before anyone had a chance this month to read it (viva intellectualism) and whose entire political strategy seems aimed at cramming as many statist programs as possible down America’s throat before the country inevitably vomits up 50 or so Democratic seats in the House. Organic. Exit question: Er, didn’t this “bromance” actually end six months ago? Quote: “Those of us who consider ourselves moderates — moderate-conservative, in my case — are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Dude’s a bigger fag than I am…

D2Boston on August 31, 2009 at 9:38 PM

“So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t f— this up.”

Davey’s mother needs to get some soap.

KingGold on August 31, 2009 at 9:40 PM

“I don’t want to sound like I’m bragging,” Brooks recently told me, “but usually when I talk to senators, while they may know a policy area better than me, they generally don’t know political philosophy better than me. I got the sense he knew both better than me.”

I know grammar better than you.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 9:40 PM

“Obama sees himself as a Burkean,” Brooks says.

You just have to laugh out loud, don’t you?

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 9:42 PM

Number one, I cannot imagine Obama ever ironing anything. David Brooks is a total putz. Brooks was a complete loser to have fallen for Obama’s line.

TXMomof3 on August 31, 2009 at 9:42 PM

What erudition! “f### things up.” David must love Patty Blagojevich.

Ted Torgerson on August 31, 2009 at 9:42 PM

What a freak.

LASue on August 31, 2009 at 9:42 PM

Moreover, after the Bush years, Brooks seems relieved to have an intellectual in the White House again.

Intellectual and intelligence are not the same thing.

BadgerHawk on August 31, 2009 at 9:43 PM

He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics. I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room. So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up.”

One more thing: If he’s so wonderful, how could Obama possibly f*ck it up?

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 9:44 PM

the other mccain had some fun with this, too.

http://rsmccain.blogspot.com/2009/08/not-onion-satire.html

he’s on a vendetta against brooks and this is the latest installment.

homesickamerican on August 31, 2009 at 9:44 PM

What’s in the water at the NYT?

jukin on August 31, 2009 at 9:45 PM

David Brooks = HOMO

barrythrowslikeagirl on August 31, 2009 at 9:46 PM

All this smart talk makes me sick! Time to dumb things down a bit! Bring it down to the level of the common man! I know! What about the obligatory “Disney Buys Marvel: Spider-Man Now Spider-Beta-Male” post?! Now THAT’S what all the freaks and geeks are complaining about! Unless Obama is revealed to wear Spidey underroos. @_@

Orange Doorhinge on August 31, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Intellectual and intelligence are not the same thing.

BadgerHawk on August 31, 2009 at 9:43 PM

To follow up, what category does thinking someone will “be a very good President” based off their pant crease put one in?

BadgerHawk on August 31, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Ewwwwww! Please spare the public from your man-love fantasy Frum! It’s sad these intellectual elitist have to be so blatant about their homsexual fantasies for their dear leader.

ObamatheMessiah on August 31, 2009 at 9:46 PM

“So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t f— this up.”

Davey’s mother needs to get some soap.

KingGold on August 31, 2009 at 9:40 PM

Goliath is shocked I tell you, shocked!

Jeff from WI on August 31, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Well,if Brooks doesn`t make a move soon,
Chris ‘The Tingle’ will beat him to it,
ahem!!(Sarc).

canopfor on August 31, 2009 at 9:47 PM

David Brooks – Another elitist “educated” beyond his intelligence. Why does anyone listen to this guy?

ROCnPhilly on August 31, 2009 at 9:48 PM

Whoa, AP!

I believe you are reading Brooks all wrong…which surprises me. And a person isn’t a “RINO apologist” by defending more mods like Brooks…He’s not my favorite by any means, but he often does speak truth.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 9:48 PM

“I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us…”

Most of us don’t talk with our mouths full.

SouthernGent on August 31, 2009 at 9:48 PM

I don’t know if Brooks was anti-Palin because her clothes weren’t better pressed or because he was afraid she’s so hot she’d turn his boyfriends straight.

bw222 on August 31, 2009 at 9:48 PM

Where do they dig these so called “men” up. If it isn’t Matthews with his legs, it’s this piece of human dung giving us his best “LIGHT IN THE LOAFERS” MAN LOVE ROUTINE. Truly sickening.

Jeff from WI on August 31, 2009 at 9:49 PM

You can have your intellectual elitism… I’ll take my common sense.

mjbrooks3 on August 31, 2009 at 9:49 PM

“I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room. So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up.”

Too late. Way too late.

I went to name-brand schools, as did a lot of my friends, and I could theoretically throw around crap like Brooks, but it really makes me sick that Ivy League grads think they’re in a class by themselves. I do my job quite well, but my “pedigree” doesn’t make me a better person, and it sure as hell doesn’t make be able to lead this country. Grow up, Brooks!

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on August 31, 2009 at 9:49 PM

“I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us…”

Most of us don’t talk with our mouths full.

SouthernGent on August 31, 2009 at 9:48 P

The question we don’t want answered…full of WHAT?

Jeff from WI on August 31, 2009 at 9:49 PM

Karl Marx had a hell of an education too.

Alden Pyle on August 31, 2009 at 9:49 PM

Just the two of us
We can make it if we try
Just the two of us
Just the two of us
Building castles in the sky
Just the two of us
You and I

Ris4victory on August 31, 2009 at 9:50 PM

This is the same person who called the rise of Sarah Palin the “retardation of the Republican Party.”

mjbrooks3 on August 31, 2009 at 9:50 PM

seriously??

Brooks needs to take a cold shower….

cmsinaz on August 31, 2009 at 9:51 PM

So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up.”

That was beautiful, poetic even, I could see why you would want to categorize people on how they talk.

Bishop on August 31, 2009 at 9:51 PM

Funny how those such as Brooks who imagine themselves to be intelligent mistake superficial glibness for substance. What has Obama ever said that was interesting? It’s all phony Hope ‘n’ Change crap that Axelrod already leased to Patrick Deval.

BCrago66 on August 31, 2009 at 9:51 PM

Whoa, AP!

I believe you are reading Brooks all wrong…which surprises me. And a person isn’t a “RINO apologist” by defending more mods like Brooks…He’s not my favorite by any means, but he often does speak truth.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 9:48 PM

And, that’s a statement from the biggest RINO apologist of all.

bw222 on August 31, 2009 at 9:51 PM

“Obama sees himself as a Burkean,” Brooks says.

You just have to laugh out loud, don’t you?

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 9:42 PM

I agree. But I think he’s more like this Burke:
http://www.movievillains.com/archives/2004/04/carter_burke.html

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 9:52 PM

I believe you are reading Brooks all wrong…which surprises me.

Yeah? How?

Allahpundit on August 31, 2009 at 9:52 PM

The question we don’t want answered…full of WHAT?

Jeff from WI on August 31, 2009 at 9:49 PM

Obama schlong.

SouthernGent on August 31, 2009 at 9:52 PM

So,I think next time,I`ll be a bit more careful,as Brooks leads me through his literary Orgasmic romps of Hopey’s pants!!(Sarc).

canopfor on August 31, 2009 at 9:52 PM

The question we don’t want answered…full of WHAT?
Jeff from WI on August 31, 2009 at 9:49 PM

Brooks wears lip gloss. We definitely do not want to know.

Bishop on August 31, 2009 at 9:52 PM

I remember during the campaign Brooks describing Obama as “a MOUNTAIN”… I think he was refering to the mountain in his creased pants.

mjbrooks3 on August 31, 2009 at 9:53 PM

I wonder if Ivy League grads have figured out that most of the country laughs at them when they hear their pedigree. It’s actually a badge of stupidity and being unable to make it in the real world.

Jeff from WI on August 31, 2009 at 9:54 PM

The real measure of a confidence man is for how long can he con everybody?

Obama has a gift.

Skandia Recluse on August 31, 2009 at 9:54 PM

mjbrooks3 on August 31, 2009 at 9:53 PM

ding ding ding!

cmsinaz on August 31, 2009 at 9:54 PM

Moreover, after the Bush years, Brooks seems relieved to have an intellectual in the White House again.

Intellectual and intelligence are not the same thing.

BadgerHawk on August 31, 2009 at 9:43 PM

I’ve not seen any evidence that either term could be applied to Obama.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 9:55 PM

“He sees his view of the world as a view that understands complexity and the organic nature of change.”

Bulls produce something of an organic nature, too.

He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics. I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room. So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up.”

That’s a steaming load of something organic there.

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Don’tcha wish your Commie could talk like me,
Don’tcha wish your Commie was wrong like me,
Don’tcha, don’tcha,
Don’tcha wish your Commie had pants like me,
Don’tcha wish your Commie loved France like me,
don’tcha, don’tcha…

TheQuestion on August 31, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Brooks wears lip gloss. We definitely do not want to know.

Bishop on August 31, 2009 at 9:52 PM

I agree and I don’t think my husband has ever looked at the crease in another man’s pants and thought how wonderful he is. Pretty scary stuff, there.

TXMomof3 on August 31, 2009 at 9:57 PM

I also remember Brooks telling a story of an un-named GOP Sen. placing his hand on Brooks’ thigh during a luncheon and keeping it there… Who would put up with that? Someone aroused by the creased pants of an eligant man…

mjbrooks3 on August 31, 2009 at 9:57 PM

Allah -

It’s getting scary. You’re starting to make sense.

bw222 on August 31, 2009 at 9:57 PM

That first encounter is still vivid in Brooks’s mind. “I remember distinctly an image of–we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant,” Brooks says, “and I’m thinking, a) he’s going to be president and b) he’ll be a very good president.”

Guess the pant-crease tea leaves only got half that right, fella.

RedNewEnglander on August 31, 2009 at 9:58 PM

TheQuestion on August 31, 2009 at 9:55 PM

excellent my friend

cmsinaz on August 31, 2009 at 9:58 PM

I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room. So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up.

Boy, I would think it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up because IT WOULD MEAN FUCKING UP THE COUNTRY!!!

Of course for Brooksie that small potatoes compared to shattering the illusion that some guy with the right degree and nicely-creased pants should be the Lord and Master of us, peons.

To borrow the language of the elites: FUCK you Brooksie.

PackerBronco on August 31, 2009 at 9:58 PM

Yeah? How?

Well, take this one:

“Obama sees himself as a Burkean,” Brooks says. “He sees his view of the world as a view that understands complexity and the organic nature of change.”

Self-explanatory…

And with this:

“I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us,” he explains. “Of recent presidents, Clinton could sort of talk like us, but Obama is definitely–you could see him as a New Republic writer. He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics. I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room.

Brooks isn’t being some pompous intellectual here…I’m no Obama fan, but I’m sure he does dazzle a room when he enters. As for “talented”, Brooks is plainly saying so in the realm of political discourse. That’s my opinion, anyway.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 9:58 PM

Brooks wears lip gloss. We definitely do not want to know.

Bishop on August 31, 2009 at 9:52 PM

I agree and I don’t think my husband has ever looked at the crease in another man’s pants and thought how wonderful he is. Pretty scary stuff, there.

TXMomof3 on August 31, 2009 at 9:57 PM

Mostly I’m just glad a guy is wearing pants. Too many old hippies around here so you never know.

Jeff from WI on August 31, 2009 at 9:59 PM

Wipe your chin David. Have you no shame?

He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics. I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room. So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up.”

One more thing: If he’s so wonderful, how could Obama possibly f*ck it up?

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 9:44 PM

Because David knows what we know. Obama is nothing more than stagecraft. One slip up spoils the illusion of his “dizzying intellect” and reveals the actor.

Guardian on August 31, 2009 at 9:59 PM

*sorry…tag FAIL there

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 9:59 PM

Give it up Brooks, Obama has already found his dream girl.

I know that’s tough to handle, given your more feminine nature.

fogw on August 31, 2009 at 9:59 PM

So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t —- this up.”
Does he know Obama has been ——- things up since day one?

fourdeucer on August 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM

Get a room!

deedtrader on August 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM

Another bisexual male. Put him with Crist and Chrissy where he belongs.

Part of what I call the “Brideshead Revisited” crowd.

Sapwolf on August 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM

Beware of “intellectuals” who find the need to pat themselves on the back. They are usually the only one’s doing it.
Hey David, since you ‘speak their language’, tell us a Chappaquiddick joke, perhaps something got lost in the translation.

GarandFan on August 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM

Brooks thinks “W” talks funny?

I wonder how he feels about the way Bonnie Fwank talks?

On second thought, never mind….

GoldenEagle4444 on August 31, 2009 at 10:01 PM

SouthernGent on August 31, 2009 at 9:48 PM

Scorch!

exlibris on August 31, 2009 at 10:02 PM

His man privileges have been revoked.

JammieWearingFool on August 31, 2009 at 10:02 PM

Brooks isn’t being some pompous intellectual here…I’m no Obama fan, but I’m sure he does dazzle a room when he enters. As for “talented”, Brooks is plainly saying so in the realm of political discourse.

Dude, there’s no major pundit in America who has a bigger rod for intellectual pedigree than Brooks. He’s proved it time and again. Follow that link about the Ivy League in my post.

Allahpundit on August 31, 2009 at 10:03 PM

Until I saw and heard Obama and Brooks. I thought the term “metrosexual male” was just to sell magazines.

kingsjester on August 31, 2009 at 10:03 PM

Brooks is no longer contributing anything useful to the national conversation. He’s reached Maureen Dowd levels of silliness and vacuousness.

Rational Thought on August 31, 2009 at 10:03 PM

Golden kneepad award-winner all the way.

Chrissy feels threatened now.

I’m sending Brooks a box of kneepads. I’m sure his sharp brain will know what it is for.

Sapwolf on August 31, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Hey Brooks, Frum, Noonan & Parker:

STFU

I don’t want to read, hear or see you RINO swines ever again. You are dead to me.

Norwegian on August 31, 2009 at 10:05 PM

Personally, I don’t trust a man whose creases are too sharp. Unless they’re a fashion model, it tells me they aren’t working hard enough.

JohnGalt23 on August 31, 2009 at 10:05 PM

“I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us,” he explains.

His arrogance has no bounds.

But what is more disconcerting is the fact that he admits to pondering BHO’s well creased pants, and the correlation to being a good president.

tru2tx on August 31, 2009 at 10:05 PM

If I work on my technique with the iron, could I become President? Who knew? Mom always used to tell me it was important, but I never knew it was THAT important. A lot of times my girlfriend is kind enough to iron my clothes for me, and I must say she does a really fantastic job of it. Can I still be President if I outsource that job? My wages are almost criminal though…In fact they are nonexistent. That may not play well with the electorate, so maybe I best just learn to do it myself so I can talk it up in the debates intelligently.

stldave on August 31, 2009 at 10:07 PM

An intellectual is a man who takes more words than necessary to tell more than he knows. -Dwight D. Eisenhower

phreshone on August 31, 2009 at 10:07 PM

Oh, and by the way, when did Brooks become “center-right” again. He left that point years ago.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on August 31, 2009 at 10:07 PM

Er, didn’t this “bromance” actually end six months ago? Quote: “Those of us who consider ourselves moderates — moderate-conservative, in my case — are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was.”

Love is mysterious…he may have been complimenting the object of his affection in the way he teases him. Probably finds it naughty…but HAWT!

AUINSC on August 31, 2009 at 10:08 PM

Dude, there’s no major pundit in America who has a bigger rod for intellectual pedigree than Brooks. He’s proved it time and again. Follow that link about the Ivy League in my post.

Allahpundit on August 31, 2009 at 10:03 PM

Allahpundit: Yer killin me,LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(no major pundit in American who has a bigger
rod for intellectual pegigree than Brooks).

canopfor on August 31, 2009 at 10:08 PM

Damn, now I have to be worried that when I run into David Brooks he’s going to be checking out the crease of my pants and making a judgement on what kind of a president I will be. I better avoid that guy at all costs.

t.ferg on August 31, 2009 at 10:08 PM

Too bad Brooks doesn’t know English grammar. It’s he has better policy than I. As in, “he has a better understanding of the English language than I have. Don’t want to sound superior, but, if you’re going to be a RINO apologist, at least learn how to speak!

flytier on August 31, 2009 at 10:08 PM

Brooks’ next column will be titled, “Kill Me, Barack, Kiss Me.”

Bishop on August 31, 2009 at 10:09 PM

Crapola,thats pedigree,sorry AP:)

canopfor on August 31, 2009 at 10:09 PM

Does Brooks like to hang out in the men’s room of the Minneapolis Airport…

phreshone on August 31, 2009 at 10:11 PM

Also, did I misread that last paragraph or is he suggesting that the main reason he wants Obama to succeed is to vindicate governance by the smart set

Where does that lead us… government by the idiots? Is there another option?
According to a recent book I read, Lincoln had perhaps the smartest set ever to enter the White House. T. Roosevelt was by every definition an intellectual guy as well.

Maybe the problem is that some of Obama’s people aren’t as smart at they think they are.

bayam on August 31, 2009 at 10:11 PM

Dude, there’s no major pundit in America who has a bigger rod for intellectual pedigree than Brooks. He’s proved it time and again. Follow that link about the Ivy League in my post.

Two different contexts…Sure, the quote from Brooks on MM is “out there” for intellectual fellatio, but in the above piece, it’s not about educational breeding (if you will) it’s simply about…can’t think of the word I want…so “aura” will have to suffice.

But hey, maybe I’m wrong.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:12 PM

Who gives a rip about Brooks? I call him “babbling brooks”. Idiot or for the libs…. useful idiot. We’ll do this on our own. You suck David.

suzyk on August 31, 2009 at 10:14 PM

“I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us,” he explains.

#@$% you.

Brooks, tell me:

-when’s the last time you pumped your own gas?
-when’s the last time you got a frosty at wendy’s?
-when’s the last time you went to walmart?
-when’s the last time you spent $100 on groceries at walmart?
-when’s the last time you went to a high school football game?
-when’s the last time you stopped at a gas station just to use the bathroom?
-when’s the last time you had a haircut for $15 or less?
-when’s the last time drank a ‘common’ beer like bud light or miller?
-when’s the last time you watched 30 minutes of espn?

I fear, Mr. Brooks, there are people that LIVE like me….. and people that DONT.

battleoflepanto1571 on August 31, 2009 at 10:14 PM

Bill Buckley
telephone book

Look it up.

corona on August 31, 2009 at 10:15 PM

Brooks, tell me:

-when’s the last time you pumped your own gas?
-when’s the last time you got a frosty at wendy’s?
-when’s the last time you went to walmart?
-when’s the last time you spent $100 on groceries at walmart?
-when’s the last time you went to a high school football game?
-when’s the last time you stopped at a gas station just to use the bathroom?
-when’s the last time you had a haircut for $15 or less?
-when’s the last time drank a ‘common’ beer like bud light or miller?
-when’s the last time you watched 30 minutes of espn?

I fear, Mr. Brooks, there are people that LIVE like me….. and people that DONT.

battleoflepanto1571 on August 31, 2009 at 10:14 PM

So you are the guy that trashed that bathroom..damn you..I had to go!

Jeff from WI on August 31, 2009 at 10:16 PM

That first encounter is still vivid in Brooks’s mind. “I remember distinctly an image of–we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant,” Brooks says, “and I’m thinking, a) he’s going to be president and b) he’ll be a very good president.”

Ohmigosh! Oh…Wow!

We will know our next president by the crease in his/her pants!!!!!

I’m so excited. I will be looking for the perfect crease.

ladyingray on August 31, 2009 at 10:17 PM

I’ve grown accustomed to his pants
He almost makes the day begin
I’ve gotten used to hear him say
hope and change are on their way
His joys, his woes
his highs, his lows
are second-natured to me now
like breathing out and breathing in
I’m very grateful he’s a liberal and so easy to forget
rather like a habit one can always break, and yet
I’ve grown accustomed to the trace
of something in the air
accustomed to his pants.

TheQuestion on August 31, 2009 at 10:18 PM

D2Boston on August 31, 2009 at 9:38 PM

Now that statement says a LOT.

JeffWeimer on August 31, 2009 at 10:19 PM

He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics. I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room. So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up.”

I don’t understand the point Brooksie is making here. It’s important that Obama not f___ things up because of – why exactly? I mean I think it’s important that Obama not f___ things up because it’ll be bad for the country; but Brooksie seems to be saying it’ll be bad because it will reflect poorly on all those guys (himself included) with the right degrees and the right friends. The country will learn that Brooksie and his pals are not quite as smart and as capable as they claim.

Gee that wouldbe bad — for Brooksie.

PackerBronco on August 31, 2009 at 10:20 PM

TheQuestion on August 31, 2009 at 10:18 PM

I LOL’ed at that….nice

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:20 PM

It could be a mixup at the NYTimes. It’s actually a Maureen Dowd column, and they mistakenly put Brooks’ byline on it…

Wethal on August 31, 2009 at 10:20 PM

Who gives a rip about Brooks?

suzyk on August 31, 2009 at 10:14 PM

Lib media types who like to keep a “conservative” gimp around.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 10:21 PM

Brooks = Teh Ghey

Seven Percent Solution on August 31, 2009 at 10:21 PM

He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics.

As long as someone feeds it into TOTUS for him. Otherwise, it’s stupid policemen, tonsil snatchers and foot rustlers.

Wethal on August 31, 2009 at 10:22 PM

-when’s the last time you spent $100 on groceries at walmart?

don’t have one in my area and prefer grocery stores anyway

-when’s the last time you went to a high school football game?

why does this matter? i watch nfl and that’s good enough

-when’s the last time you stopped at a gas station just to use the bathroom?

wtf… isn’t wendys or any place else better than a gas staion?

-when’s the last time you had a haircut for $15 or less?

brooks is clearly a supercuts guy, come on

-when’s the last time drank a ‘common’ beer like bud light or miller?

that stuff is like drinking piss, whats wrong with samual adams? are you too much of an elitist commoner for a beer with real taste?

bayam on August 31, 2009 at 10:22 PM

I don’t understand the point Brooksie is making here. It’s important that Obama not f___ things up because of – why exactly? I mean I think it’s important that Obama not f___ things up because it’ll be bad for the country; but Brooksie seems to be saying it’ll be bad because it will reflect poorly on all those guys (himself included) with the right degrees and the right friends. The country will learn that Brooksie and his pals are not quite as smart and as capable as they claim.

Gee that wouldbe bad — for Brooksie.

PackerBronco on August 31, 2009 at 10:20 PM

We learned our lesson for 80 years with Woodrow Wilson and his pretentious PhD.

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 10:23 PM

Did he then hump Obama’s leg, or just drool obsequiously upon it?

Burke this, David

Lenin and Trotsky talked a good game, too.

Unless you disgreed with them.

Then it was time for that despotically intellectualized neologism liquidation.

Or wee-wee’d up, as Barry the Childish put it.

profitsbeard on August 31, 2009 at 10:23 PM

Lost in the verbal ejaculation about the cut of Obama’s jib is how incredibly inarticulate Brooks is. He misuses the objective case repeatedly. Epic fail of fifth grade grammar. How embarrassing.

Ted Torgerson on August 31, 2009 at 10:23 PM

me thinks chris mathews has some competition for the biggest man crush in history. i wonder if brooks got a tingle down his leg…..hmmmmmm.

SHARPTOOTH on August 31, 2009 at 10:23 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3