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

Brooks isn’t being some pompous intellectual here…I’m sure he does dazzle a room when he enters.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 9:58 PM

So he’s not a pompous intellectual despite the fact that the only “dazzling” thing about Obama is his ability to spew bullshit in an articulate manner, when he’s not “uh”ing his way through an answer to a question.

Obama’s intellect is not dazzling, in any manner. Have you read some of the articles he wrote in college? I wrote with more erudition than that, and I never focused much on advanced writing or English classes. Obama purports intelligence, when all he has is the ability to appear educated. Bill Clinton, hick though he had the veneer of, was very clever and very intelligent when it came to addressing policies and issues. I’d LOVE to see a debate between him and the empty suit.

MadisonConservative on August 31, 2009 at 10:24 PM

Where does that lead us… government by the idiots? Is there another option?

bayam on August 31, 2009 at 10:11 PM

Yes!! The realization that people are limited and flawed creatures, easily tempted by the trappings of power. Thus the powers of government should be limited and balanced so that one person or one group of persons cannot control another.

The BEST person to govern your life Bayam … is you.

PackerBronco on August 31, 2009 at 10:25 PM

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.

It will be hilarious if it’s discovered that the undergrad is fake.

baldilocks on August 31, 2009 at 10:25 PM

Yuck.

TXMomof3 on August 31, 2009 at 10:25 PM

who is the smartest man in the room when they all think they are the smartest man in the room?

rob verdi on August 31, 2009 at 10:25 PM

Brooks is looking more and more like Salvatore Romano from Mad Men. He may be trying hard and may even have a wife- but it ain’t 1960 anymore and he’s not fooliing anyone.

Kasper Hauser on August 31, 2009 at 10:26 PM

that stuff is like drinking p%%%, 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

LOL. must be a regional thing.

battleoflepanto1571 on August 31, 2009 at 10:27 PM

Gotta say, Brooks was right in this:

When I first started in journalism, I worked at the National Review for Bill Buckley. And Buckley famously said he’d rather be ruled by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. But he didn’t think those were the only two options. He thought it was important to have people on the conservative side who celebrated ideas, who celebrated learning. And his whole life was based on that, and that was also true for a lot of the other conservatives in the Reagan era. Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I’m afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:27 PM

Dang, I meant to add: Brooks isn’t simply an “intellectual” solely, he does understand the importance of basic and fundamental ideas and focus.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:28 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

Really good list. I’ll bet Brooks hasn’t done any of those things in a long time.

Mr. D on August 31, 2009 at 10:28 PM

Yes!! The realization that people are limited and flawed creatures, easily tempted by the trappings of power. Thus the powers of government should be limited and balanced so that one person or one group of persons cannot control another.

The BEST person to govern your life Bayam … is you.

PackerBronco on August 31, 2009 at 10:25 PM

Bingo – but the problem is that there are some people who’ve been so programmed into accepting others as their superiors, that they lack the natural instinct and initiative to take care of themselves. They want to leave living their lives to the professionals who will tell them how to live.

People who need nannies will want a nanny state. People who don’t think they’re smart enough to run their lives will want people to run it for them. And some people will want to always convince others to let them run their lives…

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 10:29 PM

So let’s see if I have this right…in order to talk like Brooks, and be as smart as he is, I have to say f^%k? Well, alrighty then…just call me a f^&king intellectual.

Sue on August 31, 2009 at 10:30 PM

If ever there were a pundit just begging to be ripped a new one by Iowahawk, it’s Brooks.

Erich66 on August 31, 2009 at 10:32 PM

Brooks: But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I’m afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices.
JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:27 PM

That’s idiocy.

Modern liberals are statists, socialists, and communists (look at the czars). Sarah Palin’s rejects those foolish ideas for what they are.

As one prominent counterexample, she supported gay civil unions in Alaska, based off the Constitutional framework that says govt. doesn’t have business there. She accepted an idea that may be counter to her personal belief system based on its merits and sound reasoning.

This is entirely antithetical to what Brooks is spouting and what you’ve agreed with. You choose to portray her as some iconoclast reactionary who “scorns ideas entirely” when she’s no such thing – and she’s even proven to embrace liberal (in this case classic liberal) ideas.

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 10:33 PM

but to scorn ideas entirely. And I’m afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices.
JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:27 PM

No personal offense. But this has to be one of the dumbest things every written by a ‘serious’ person, here.

That’s right, Sarah Palin, student of Reagan is afraid of ideas. That is mind-numbingly dumb.

Spirit of 1776 on August 31, 2009 at 10:36 PM

Brooks—–LOSER!!!!!!!!!!!

mobydutch on August 31, 2009 at 10:37 PM

Dang, I meant to add: Brooks isn’t simply an “intellectual” solely, he does understand the importance of basic and fundamental ideas and focus.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:28 PM

Brooks is a pseudo-intellectual. He has no intellectual integrity. He’s a camp-following time-server.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 10:37 PM

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

battleoflepanto1571 on August 31, 2009 at 10:14 PM

I’ll go you one better: When is the last time you changed a flat tire on your car???

I’ll go ahead and answer that question…NO!! You don’t have the foggiest idea how to something as simple as that. If you didn’t have a cell phone and a AAA account, you’d just lay down and starve to death.

This country needs an enema….

BigWyo on August 31, 2009 at 10:37 PM

Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I’m afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:27 PM

If Ronald Reagan somehow was transported from 1977 to today, David Brooks and his ilk would be given the same treatment Sarah Palin gets, only instead they’d be joking about his bad movies constantly.

MadisonConservative on August 31, 2009 at 10:38 PM

If ever there were a pundit just begging to be ripped a new one by Iowahawk, it’s Brooks.

Erich66 on August 31, 2009 at 10:32 PM

Good call… Can’t wait!

Norwegian on August 31, 2009 at 10:39 PM

yikes…the rage makes me not type so good…

BigWyo on August 31, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Brooks is a pseudo-intellectual. He has no intellectual integrity.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 10:37 PM

Ergo would he have pseudo-intellectual integrity? Or intellectual pseudo-integrity?

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 10:42 PM

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.

Obama is a deceiver, a dissembler
His ironed trousers are alight
From what poll or banner
Shall they dangle in the night?

PercyB on August 31, 2009 at 10:42 PM

I’d say once you start demanding people speak about established, named, political philosophies, you’ve pretty much missed the point of the idea that change is organic.

MayBee on August 31, 2009 at 10:45 PM

“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.”

After drinking a potion of his own, Saul Alinsky’s and Jeremiah Wright’s creation, Barry is transformed into the cruel, remorseless, evil Herr Hussein, representing the hidden side of Obama’s dual nature brought to the fore. Barry has many friends and has a pleasing personality, but as Herr Hussein he becomes more and more dictatorial, encourages violence and becomes ever more fascist like as time goes by as Herr Hussein grows in dominance. After taking this potion repetitively, he no longer needs to rely upon it to unleash his inner fascist demons.

The Strange Case of Professor Obama and Herr Hussein is a real life drama playing out in the aftermath of the Presidential election of 2008. It is about the dilemma of the American citizen who sees strange dissonances between the new found Messiah, Professor Obama, and the ever more emerging misanthropic, pyromaniac (reference note #1) Herr Hussein. It is a vivid portrayal of a split personality, split in the sense that within the same person there is, or was, both an apparently good and an ever more emerging evil personality each being quite distinct from the other. In mainstream culture the very phrase “Obama and Hussien” will come to mean a person who’s words are vastly different in moral character from his actions.

Reference note #1: Such individuals who lack ulterior motive have traditionally been referred to in layman’s terms simply as a variation of a pyromaniac. Most such maniacs lack conscious motivation although they are fully aware of the acts they are failing to stop or they themselves are committing. Typically they will feel intense pleasure, gratification, or relief when causing destruction or when witnessing or participating in the aftermath. Motivation is also classified as pathological and non-pathological. Some research suggests that feeling such joy at horrific situation is pathological. Other research suggests that some motivation for this comes from rational thought. Taking joy in horrific situations for envisioned gains in political power and/or the concealment of the imposition of devious plans are examples of supposed rational decision making.

Sigmund on August 31, 2009 at 10:46 PM

The BEST person to govern your life Bayam … is you.

PackerBronco on August 31, 2009 at 10:25 PM

Exactly! Now wouldn’t it be great if we could get that lightbulb to turn on over the heads of the Americans who haven’t woken up yet? Geesh, what’s it going to take?

sisterchristian on August 31, 2009 at 10:46 PM

That’s right, Sarah Palin, student of Reagan is afraid of ideas. That is mind-numbingly dumb.

Spirit of 1776 on August 31, 2009 at 10:36 PM

Y’all have focused on Palin there, when I highlighted something entirely different. And I fail to see how Palin is a “student of Reagan” when compared to John McCain…a true “foot soldier”.

Again, I’m just sayin.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:47 PM

when compared to John McCain…a true “foot soldier”.

Again, I’m just sayin.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:47 PM

1 That’s not a fair comparison, is it? McCain was in politics when Reagan was in office, so lets not compare 20 years ago. And I didn’t slight McCain to compliment Palin.

2 She grew up reading and chewing on Reagan thought. Her dad had Reagan books all over the house and she devoured them in her youth. So unless you are looking to echo the Matt Damon school of thought, I’m encouraging you to drop the ‘afraid of ideas’ tripe.

Spirit of 1776 on August 31, 2009 at 10:50 PM

Y’all have focused on Palin there, when I highlighted something entirely different. And I fail to see how Palin is a “student of Reagan” when compared to John McCain…a true “foot soldier”.

Again, I’m just sayin.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Because it’s the example given. And it’s the only example given. And it’s terribly flawed and immediately recognizable.

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 10:52 PM

when I highlighted something entirely different.

And yes, I acknowledge that point. So if you didn’t quote that part to reflect your view, then I didn’t mean to put words in your mouth.

Spirit of 1776 on August 31, 2009 at 10:52 PM

Just to add another perspective to Brook’s idiocy, Bill and I share a hometown. I have met him on numerous occasions. I would not vote for him, but he was one of the brightest people you will ever meet. The idea that Barack, “I went to Occidental,” Obama is smarter than Bill Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar, tells you all you need to know about Brooks and his level of stupidity.

The Opinionator on August 31, 2009 at 10:52 PM

Again, I’m just sayin.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:47 PM

…nothin’.

Well, now we know: Obama hypnotizes pseudoconservatives with his pantslegs to keep them from wondering what he’s got up his sleeves.

Jim Treacher on August 31, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Brooks is a pseudo-intellectual. He has no intellectual integrity.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 10:37 PM

Ergo would he have pseudo-intellectual integrity? Or intellectual pseudo-integrity?

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 10:42 PM

He has NO integrity. So “pseudo-integrity” maybe.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Spirit of 1776 on August 31, 2009 at 10:50 PM

Matt Damon!

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 10:56 PM

If Ronald Reagan somehow was transported from 1977 to today, David Brooks and his ilk would be given the same treatment Sarah Palin gets, only instead they’d be joking about his bad movies constantly.

MadisonConservative on August 31, 2009 at 10:38 PM

Abso-friggin-lutely.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Brooks, tell me:

-when’s the last time you pumped your own gas?
They don’t let us pump our own gas in Oregon.
-when’s the last time you got a frosty at wendy’s?
Never.
-when’s the last time you went to walmart?
Couple of days ago.
-when’s the last time you spent $100 on groceries at walmart?
Never.
-when’s the last time you went to a high school football game?
When I was in High School.
-when’s the last time you stopped at a gas station just to use the bathroom?
I usually just go in an alley.
-when’s the last time you had a haircut for $15 or less?
A couple of weeks ago. $8 plus $2 tip.
-when’s the last time drank a ‘common’ beer like bud light or miller?
Long ago. bad stuff. I drink Henry’s mostly.
-when’s the last time you watched 30 minutes of espn?
I don’t have cable. It rots the brain.

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

battleoflepanto1571 on August 31, 2009 at 10:14 PM

What’s my score!!!???

Do I get to be a pseudo-intellectual with peasant leanings or a peasant with pseudo-intellectual leanings?

MB4 on August 31, 2009 at 10:57 PM

Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I’m afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices.
JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:27 PM

What about her ideas on energy? How about her ideas on running the state of Alaska, which she apparently did pretty well. Just because you might not like all of her ideas doesn’t mean there aren’t any there.

Y’all have focused on Palin there, when I highlighted something entirely different. And I fail to see how Palin is a “student of Reagan” when compared to John McCain…a true “foot soldier”.

Again, I’m just sayin.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:47 PM

You may have highlighted something different but you still brought her into the picture, which you always seem to do, in order to get a dig in.

thevastlane on August 31, 2009 at 10:58 PM

Y’all have focused on Palin there, when I highlighted something entirely different. And I fail to see how Palin is a “student of Reagan” when compared to John McCain…a true “foot soldier”. backstabber.

Again, I’m just sayin.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Fixed it for you. That idiot ran one of the worst campaigns in recent history: “My opponent would make a fine president”. He has consistently thrown conservatives under the bus while embracing Democrats and (a few) RINOs like you idolize him.

There was only one good thing about the McCain campaign – Sarah Palin.

bw222 on August 31, 2009 at 10:59 PM

if brooks is at all embarrassed by this article he should sue for defamation.

but sadly, i think he is to use Rush’s term “a repeater”…brooks likes to repeat big, important sounding words that he’s heard elsewhere.

like in the sentence “Obama sees himself as a Burkean”

or maybe i’m wrong, maybe alinsky was a Burkean too?

r keller on August 31, 2009 at 11:00 PM

I swear…The Palin camp really, really needs to open up.

Not trying to be mean or anything, but dang…you guys are wearing hard-core blinders. Jumping at the slightest criticism of her viability. Sheesh. But then, I did defend McCain against some rather misinformed people of my party.

Thing is, I’m not…nor is Brooks for that matter…unfamiliar with Palin nor misinformed.

Ah…Good night all.

I leave you with a song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LraZEoRnkPc

Peace…until tomorrow ;)

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 11:01 PM

CPL 310 on August 31, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Still funny.

the slightest criticism of her viability.

That was about her viability? I need a new dictionary, I guess.

Spirit of 1776 on August 31, 2009 at 11:03 PM

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

God I am so sick of the pathetic elitist that have screwed this country up still having the audacity to talk down to the hundreds of millions of people who “don’t talk like them”.

If Brooks would get out of his limousine bubble for a second he might notice that there are a he!! of a lot of Americans that are pretty sick of the pompous, condescending, “people that talk like us” and their extreme record of failure over the past few decades.

Baxter Greene on August 31, 2009 at 11:07 PM

Allah, you bold the part about dividing people, and you skipped over the Michale jackson-like fetish over Obama’s crotch crease?

Testosterone to NYC. Stat.

faraway on August 31, 2009 at 11:08 PM

“I don’t want to sound like I’m bragging,” Brooks recently told me,

Funniest line of all.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 11:17 PM

I’m gonna call my mom and tell her to start pressing creases in my dad’s “Key” overalls. Since he’s well-spoken and has more intellect in his pinky finger than Hussein has in the tip of his wee-wee, we’ll be golden.

Cornhusker on August 31, 2009 at 11:19 PM

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.

Wow, this is how an “intellectual” makes decisions, this is it? By the crease in his pant?
This is like an Onion parody….

right2bright on August 31, 2009 at 11:23 PM

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

no, he can’t

runner on August 31, 2009 at 11:25 PM

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

This is why Palin struck a chord…American’s are sick and tired of this elitism…you think it is exaggerated about Boston and D.C. cocktail parties…just look at Hatch drooling over the Kennedy clan, look at how the bumbling journalists trip over each other to be invited to Obama’s gatherings, and his cronies parties…

right2bright on August 31, 2009 at 11:26 PM

David Brookes is more concerned about being with the East Coast in crowd and furthering his career in a Leftwing dominated media landscape than furthering Conservative intellectualism.

He has stated clearly that he prefers Obama to regular American folks.

EAD

EscapeVelocity on August 31, 2009 at 11:27 PM

He has stated clearly that he prefers Obama to regular American folks.

EAD

EscapeVelocity on August 31, 2009 at 11:27 PM

He has stated clearly that he engages in gay sex fantasies.

faraway on August 31, 2009 at 11:29 PM

Intellect divorced from right reason is vanity. David Brooks is a vain man.

spmat on August 31, 2009 at 11:34 PM

Gotta wonder about ‘an intellectual’ who stares at another man’s trousers. Is this making Chrissy or Barney jealous?

GarandFan on August 31, 2009 at 11:37 PM

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.

Wow, this is how an “intellectual” makes decisions, this is it? By the crease in his pant?
This is like an Onion parody….

right2bright on August 31, 2009 at 11:23 PM

The funny thing is, it’s hard to tell the difference these days.

ddrintn on August 31, 2009 at 11:39 PM

I predict a fight between Brooks and Matthews due to jealousy.

theblackcommenter on August 31, 2009 at 11:40 PM

Brooks dropped the “F Bomb” in an on-the-record interview? Wow. Shouldn’t a writer for the once great “Gray Lady” show a little more class than this? I see this as proof positive that Brooks is now completely “unhinged”.

Assegai on August 31, 2009 at 11:46 PM

Well, now we know: Obama hypnotizes pseudoconservatives with his pantslegs to keep them from wondering what he’s got up his sleeves.

Jim Treacher on August 31, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Hands can’t easily be laid on the Obama man, the flim flam man.
His mind is in the Soros clouds and his talk is all make believe.
Oh lord, the man’s a fraud, he’s a flim flam man. But he’s so cagey, he’s a flim flam man.

Hands can’t easily be laid on the Obama man, the flim flam man.
He’s wrapped up in a big beautiful box making out like he’ll give out more gifts than Santa Claus.
Oh lord, the man’s a fraud, he’s a flim flam man. But he’s such a fox, he’s a flim flam man.

Everybody wants him, the Germans and the Brits, and all the pseudo-intellectuals he does disarm.
Oh yeah, the beautiful gent, you know he’ll leave you with hardly any medical care and nary a cent.
But maybe you can heal the sick and pay your bills with his charm.

Hands can’t easily be laid on the Obama man, the flim flam man.
His Marxist plans may be back up his sleeve but his talk is still make believe.
Oh lord, the man’s a fraud, he’s a flim flam man. He’s so cagey, he’s an artist.

But now it’s looking like he can be floored, even though he’s a flim flam man.

MB4 on August 31, 2009 at 11:53 PM

I’ve sinned a lot, I’m mean a lot
But I’m like sweet seventeen a lot
Bewitched, bothered and bewildered – am I

Vexed again, perplexed again
Thank God, I can be oversexed again
Bewitched, bothered and bewildered – am I

I’ll sing to him, each spring to him
And worship the trousers that cling to him
Bewitched, bothered and bewildered – am I

Rayhummel on August 31, 2009 at 11:56 PM

Somebody send him a copy of this thread…and a dress.

whitetop on September 1, 2009 at 12:00 AM

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

What the hell does that mean? That sounds like the kind of verbiage college kids use to pad out term papers.

ddrintn on September 1, 2009 at 12:06 AM

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

What the hell does that mean? That sounds like the kind of verbiage college kids use to pad out term papers.

ddrintn on September 1, 2009 at 12:06 AM

By “complexity“, Brooks means “things that take too much time for intellectuals like him and Barack to understand” (specifically Congressional Bills that our hired governmental help don’t bother to read before they either vote for them or try to ram them down the throats of the populace they have supreme contempt for).

The “organic nature of change” means Brooks is irregular and trying to remember to get some bran cereal and prune juice on the way back to his palladian digs.

He sees his view of the world as a view…” denotes that Brooks is getting paid by the word, even redundant, monosyllablic ones.

Obama’s only organic view of the world is arugula.

profitsbeard on September 1, 2009 at 12:26 AM

Brooks…Brooks…didn’t he used to write about politics?

MarkT on September 1, 2009 at 12:26 AM

Isn’t it bromantic?

That’s no bromance, that’s a homance! /letting my South Central show.

baldilocks on September 1, 2009 at 12:32 AM

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

All evidence points to both of them being heavily into beating things already (with images of The Big O dancing in their heads).

ya2daup on September 1, 2009 at 12:39 AM

But then, I did defend McCain against some rather misinformed people of my party.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 11:01 PM

And how viable did he turn out to be? Jet, more often than not I’ll agree that Palin people need to lighten up and look at her seriously and not as some anointed one, but you seem to be piling it on more and more every day without a discernable reason.

Esthier on September 1, 2009 at 12:44 AM

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

Some TNR Lib Sissy on Some NYT Fake Con Sissy

Odd. I divide people into two groups, also: People who can speak and write in a grammatically correct manner, and ink-stained wretches who posture as intellectuals but are one step above illiteracy.

I would not dare to insult our gay readers by staining them with this effeminate twit and his pant-gazing. Every gay guy I have known is manlier that this knob-swallowing sycophant.

Jaibones on September 1, 2009 at 12:47 AM

Poof

Jaibones on September 1, 2009 at 12:47 AM

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.

Seems like a take on “Trading Places”….who did Brooks bet the dollar with? Frum?

BobMbx on September 1, 2009 at 12:49 AM

Somebody send him a copy of this thread…and a dress pair of crotchless fishnet stockings.

whitetop on September 1, 2009 at 12:00 AM

Jaibones on September 1, 2009 at 12:49 AM

Not trying to be mean or anything, but dang…you guys are wearing hard-core blinders. Jumping at the slightest criticism of her viability.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 11:01 PM

You counter his drooling sycophancy of Obama with his opinion of Palin, for reasons known only to you. Then you whine when anybody disagrees with you.

Jim Treacher on September 1, 2009 at 1:05 AM

Somebody should tell that guy that his (ridiculous) “…people who talk like us…” comment is grammatically incorrect. Smarty.

otherkid on September 1, 2009 at 1:16 AM

Exit question: Er, didn’t this “bromance” actually end six months ago?

His faucet dripped once more.

Schadenfreude on September 1, 2009 at 1:27 AM

I can’t believe no one’s brought up “Guys and Dolls” yet!

SKY MASTERSON: You have wished yourself a Scarsdale Galahad,
The breakfast-eating, Brooks-brothers type.

MISS SARAH DAVID BROOKS: Yes! And I shall meet him when the time is ripe. …

I’ll know
When my love comes along,
I won’t take a chance,
I’ll know
He’ll be just what I need,
Not some fly-by-night Broadway romance –

SKY: — And you’ll know at a glance by the two-pair of crease in his pants….

Here’s a clip with some lovely voices.

Mary in LA on September 1, 2009 at 1:36 AM

I got the sense he knew both better than me.”

First of all, if you’re going to talk about how smart you are, you should know that it’s “better than I,” not “better than me.”

Second, how is it that his claim of having been fondled by a Republican senator has gotten such a pass? I reveal the identity of that senator here.

Steven on September 1, 2009 at 2:17 AM

Prince Barry! Handsome is he!
Barry Obama!
That physique, how can I speak!
Weak at the knee!
Well, get on out in that square,
Adjust your veil and prepare
To gawk and grovel and stare at
Prince Barry!

Counterpoint:
Prince Barry is alluring!
Never ordinary, never boring!
Everything about the man just plain impresses!
He’s a winner! He’s a whiz, a wonder!
He’s about to pull my heart asunder!
And I absolutely love the way he dresses!

TheQuestion on September 1, 2009 at 4:15 AM

Y’all have focused on Palin there, when I highlighted something entirely different. And I fail to see how Palin is a “student of Reagan” when compared to John McCain…a true “foot soldier”.

Again, I’m just sayin.

JetBoy on August 31, 2009 at 10:47 PM

.
Wasn’t McCain a flyboy? Just Sayin!

Dasher on September 1, 2009 at 4:35 AM

Is Brooks’ boyfriend jealous of Brooks having the hots for Obama?

bill30097 on September 1, 2009 at 5:39 AM

A couple of years ago, maybe more, I happened to see Brooks on Hardball. He was at the end of the line sucking the hind teat, bouncing up and down in the chair waving his hand in the air yelling ,” ME, ME, ME, call on ME teacher.”
(metaphorically speaking, of course). It was the most disgusting display of sycophantic toadyism I had ever seen outside of 3rd grade.
He hasn’t changed one bit. Since that singular eye opening moment I have had ZERO interest in anything he has to say!
(Good Grief, trying to impress Chris Matthews of all people.)

davo on September 1, 2009 at 6:05 AM

I gauge intelligence by the commen sense individuals have and not by the grades they received in school. I can’t think of a politician who has been using their good common sense lately.

yoda on September 1, 2009 at 7:02 AM

that stuff is like drinking p%%%, 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

LOL. must be a regional thing.

battleoflepanto1571 on August 31, 2009 at 10:27 PM

LOL…Yes…I’m sure he meant MGD

Jeff from WI on September 1, 2009 at 7:22 AM

Remember the IVY LEAGUE has gotten us into this mess.

Jeff from WI on September 1, 2009 at 7:24 AM

LOL.

battle of le pants 2009 on August 31, 2009 at 10:27 PM

The Brooks – Matthews – Obama Battle of Le Pants

Jaibones on September 1, 2009 at 7:44 AM

How can a so-called man suck another so-called man off in public like this?

Whoopsie!!!

Sorry, Chris, Rahm, Harry, Teddy, Barney…my fingers tire.

LtE126 on September 1, 2009 at 8:03 AM

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

The are 10 kinds of people in the world, David: those who understand binary and those who don’t. (Are we moving into territory too intellectual for you?)

ya2daup on September 1, 2009 at 8:10 AM

What a moron.

becki51758 on September 1, 2009 at 8:22 AM

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

…and resistance is futile!

ya2daup on September 1, 2009 at 8:23 AM

He’s not who I thought he was either, and my opinion of him wasn’t very high to start with. He’s much worse than I ever imagined.

scalleywag on September 1, 2009 at 8:27 AM

I remember being totally dazzled the first time I saw Al Gore enter a room in the mid-1980s, when he was just a freshman Senator from Tennessee. I knew he would be President someday. But I was also 25 years old at the time. There is simply no excuse for a grown man and a journalist to exhibit this kind of fanboy worship.

rockmom on September 1, 2009 at 8:39 AM

Wasn’t McCain a flyboy? Just Sayin!

Dasher on September 1, 2009 at 4:35 AM

McCain frequently refers to himself as a “foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution.” I think that is what JetBoy is talking about.

rockmom on September 1, 2009 at 8:41 AM

David Brooks and the other members of the Bootlick Media should just get a room!!

These people just can’t lick Obamas’ boots enough.

Disgusting. They are just showing us over and over again how they are really not even journalists they are just fawning high school girls with a crush on the head of the football team.

Brooks/Parker/Noonan/Buckley/Olbermann/Brian Williams/Gibson
Just give it up and start wearing Obama buttons.

PappyD61 on September 1, 2009 at 8:46 AM

Sounds like Brooks had a bigger crush on Obama than he has on himself. There’s nothing that screams “intellect” like a guy who’s impressed with a pant crease is there?

scalleywag on September 1, 2009 at 8:47 AM

McCain frequently refers to himself as a “foot soldier Benedict Armold in the Reagan Revolution.” I think that is what JetBoy is talking about.

rockmom on September 1, 2009 at 8:41 AM

Fixed it for you

bw222 on September 1, 2009 at 8:48 AM

PappyD61 on September 1, 2009 at 8:46 AM

You forgot the biggest slobberer of them all…Matthews!

scalleywag on September 1, 2009 at 8:48 AM

I wouldn’t say that Brooks is even a RINO. He’s just a left liberal. I’m sure he voted for Obama, so he is not a Republican. Why do people who have liberal ideas/views, who vote for libs, defend libs, say that conservatism is dead, etc. try to say they are conservatives???

I guess some news organizations need to say they have conservatives, so they draw straws and whoever loses claims to be conservative.

jeffn21 on September 1, 2009 at 9:16 AM

What an odd admission. I suppose it’s better that he’s honest about his elitism.

AnninCA on September 1, 2009 at 9:19 AM

I think krauthammer said it best about another Rino.
He is what liberals wish conservatives were

That about explains Brooks, his whole world in which he lives is surronded and influenced by liberals.

kangjie on September 1, 2009 at 9:36 AM

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

Behold the elevated prose of one who could write for the New Republic.

patriette on September 1, 2009 at 9:41 AM

Called him everything but “clean.”

mugged on September 1, 2009 at 10:07 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3