David Brooks: Tea partiers are narcissistic, egomaniacal, self-righteous people who distort the truth!

posted at 8:37 pm on September 18, 2010 by Patterico

David Brooks on the Tea Party:

Along the way, the movement has picked up some of the worst excesses of modern American culture: a narcissistic sense of victimization, an egomaniacal belief in one’s own rightness and purity, a willingness to distort the truth so that every conflict becomes a contest of pure good versus pure evil.

It’s good to know none of this applies to the Democrat party!

Narcissism? Brooks thinks the Tea Party suffers from it, but does not mention Obama. I guess Brooks thinks there’s no narcissism in Obama’s comparing his election to the fall of the Berlin Wall, or turning the White House into almost a shrine to himself, or reading a letter from someone who says she is going to be buried in an Obama T-shirt, or building an imperial stage for his nomination speech, or writing his autobiography years before being elected President.

Victimhood? Brooks thinks the Tea Party has it — but not Obama, who thinks people don’t like him because of his middle name, which his wife calls the “fear bomb”; or who plays the race card (I don’t “look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills”).

An egomaniacal belief in one’s own rightness and purity? Are you kidding me, David Brooks?

Obama humiliated the Supreme Court in front of the nation. He humiliated Netanyahu. He gives his opponents the finger (not once, not twice, but three times). He is haughty with opponents (even as Michelle assures us that he is never disagreeable).

A willingness to distort the truth so that every conflict becomes a contest of pure good versus pure evil? David Brooks, are you telling me that the Tea Partiers distort the truth, and President Obama doesn’t?

Let me list just a few examples, Mr. Brooks.

Obama claimed an aide filled out a questionnaire with extreme views, but his handwriting showed up on the form. He said he wouldn’t run for president in 2008 and then did. He ran a dishonest ad tying John McCain to Rush Limbaugh on the issue of immigration reform — and distorting Limbaugh’s quotes beyond all recognition in the process. He claimed McCain was “fueled” by money from lobbyists and PACs, when that actually accounted for only 1.7% of McCain’s money.

Obama flat-out lied about taking public financing — and he lied about why he didn’t do it, blaming it all on McCain when it was his own decision. Obama misstated the reason that he voted against a bill that would have required doctors to give medical attention to babies born alive after a botched abortion. Obama took money from oil companies and claimed he didn’t.

He inflated his role in the creation of the stimulus package. He was deceptive about McCain’s regulatory record.

Since being President, he has misrepresented job creation numbers; broken his promise to allow bills to be reviewed by the public before passage; broken his promise to have no lobbyists in the White House; broken his promise to close Gitmo (thank goodness), and has broken a whole host of other promises. He has lied about whether ObamaCare would cover illegals and a host of other things.

He asked people to send “fishy” online commentary about his health care plan to a special e-mail address: flag@whitehouse.gov. Sounds like someone making a list — but it’s all for the greater good, you see.

Obama has consistently demonized his opponents — including the Tea Partiers, the GOP, Fox News, BP and other oil companies, “bitter clingers” who won’t vote for him, Wall Street/banks and businesses, the rich (especially those who got bonuses), insurance companies during the health care debate, car companies, and anyone who opposes unions or him.

He called the Cambridge police “stupid”; has demonized insurance companies; gone after Rush Limbaugh; and recently declared war on John Boehner.

I don’t really have to list all the ways he has demonized and blamed George W. Bush, do I?

Yet according to David Brooks, the people who distort the truth and demonize opponents in an effort to paint themselves as the Good fighting the Evil are . . . the Tea Partiers.

Wouldn’t it be nice if the “conservative” at the New York Times could see a few logs in the opponents’ eyes, even as he whines about the mote in the eyes of the Tea Party?

Thanks to a reader who pointed me to the link, gave me considerable help in researching this, and listed all the people and groups Obama has demonized.


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

This is great! True colors coming out every where. Go tea Party Movement, Go Sarah!

IowaWoman on September 18, 2010 at 9:48 PM

OT (but since the topic is narcism) Breaking News: President Obama removed the reference to the “Creator” from the Declaration of Independence when he quoted a portion at a meeting of the Congressional Hispanic Congress.

Tommy_G on September 18, 2010 at 9:48 PM

Sounds to me like the Tea Party is putting a little fear-of-God to the ruling class elites. heh heh

John Doe on September 18, 2010 at 9:48 PM

ridiculous idiotic nonsensical obtuse schmucks.

reliapundit on September 18, 2010 at 9:23 PM

reliapundit: I think David Brooks should be awarded,

The Flying Fickle Finger of Fate Award!!

canopfor on September 18, 2010 at 9:53 PM

Excellent Patterico.

Poor Brooks. God help him if he every finds himself stranded in small town rural America, he’d probably die of fright.

Texas Gal on September 18, 2010 at 9:53 PM

I hear that she dabbled in “penumbras” and “emanations”, oh wait, I’m sorry, that was the Supreme Court …

PackerBronco on September 18, 2010 at 9:27 PM

Well at least it wasn’t in rectitudes and rectums as Tokyo Rove does!

dhunter on September 18, 2010 at 9:54 PM

David Brooks is clearly off his meds and his doctor should be notified.

ButterflyDragon on September 18, 2010 at 9:54 PM

If that’s true, then she is a shoe in to become president.

Brooks is living proof that IQ and Wisdom seldom walk hand in hand.

lilium on September 18, 2010 at 9:55 PM

These pathetic self-centered worms vomit their pusillanimous croakings and in doing so reveal that everything they decry is true of themselves.

So when they cry “The Tea Party is X!” — really it is the X in themselves that they refuse to recognize, thus they project it outwards on an imagined “enemy” that they may despise.

May they die choking in their own puke.

SunSword on September 18, 2010 at 10:01 PM

This is great! True colors coming out every where. Go tea Party Movement, Go Sarah!

IowaWoman on September 18, 2010 at 9:48 PM

IowaWomen: Exactly,for some inexplicable reason,the
so-called pundits are Self-Purging them
selves!!(sarc).

PINO’s (Pundits in Name Only):)

canopfor on September 18, 2010 at 10:01 PM

I like witches so much I married one.

John the Libertarian on September 18, 2010 at 10:04 PM

Brooks is projecting, both personally and on behalf of Obama.

JimP on September 18, 2010 at 10:04 PM

The New York Times thinks Brooks is a conservative because he used to work for The Wall Street Journal.

Emperor Norton on September 18, 2010 at 10:07 PM

Wow!!!! These kooks don’t need the tea party to expose them. They are exposing themselves. Amazing, truly, amazing!!!!

mobydutch on September 18, 2010 at 9:27 PM

mobydutch:Well put,now we see what they truly stand for!:)

canopfor on September 18, 2010 at 10:14 PM

They’re nothin dangerous
They’re off the rack
I’ve got to ch-ch-change
Who needs a tailor when your bowels crack
It makes a grown man sighin’ sighin’
Won’t you thrill my leg –

He gives me PANT CREASE FEVER!
PANT CREASE FEVER!

(apologies to Ted Nugent)

ForNow on September 18, 2010 at 10:14 PM

To hades with Brooks . . . he’s a self serving, elitist jackass.

rplat on September 18, 2010 at 10:16 PM

What an ignorant twit. I’ll bet he knows nothing more about the folks that align with the Tea Party than what he heard in typical private libtard dinner parties in DC. Brooks is no more conservative than Barney Frank.

David in ATL on September 18, 2010 at 10:20 PM

Wasn’t Brooks the one who got excited about the crease in Obama’s trousers?

forest on September 18, 2010 at 10:21 PM

David, how do you keep your job?

diogenes on September 18, 2010 at 10:28 PM

Wow. There is so much resistance being put forth from these wacko libbies….The force is so massive the political landscape will be changed forever.

hawkman on September 18, 2010 at 10:31 PM

BTW, 44 days to go. David, for you, that’s about 6 weeks.

diogenes on September 18, 2010 at 10:31 PM

Whom Obama derides as “elitist”, the narcissistic liar and hypocrite, no the impertinent.

Schadenfreude on September 18, 2010 at 10:32 PM

Like a lot of others, Brooks just doesn’t <em>get it.</em>

kingsjester on September 18, 2010 at 10:33 PM

There they go again… projecting themse;ves on others again.

You know what they say, “There’s something about them I don’t like in me!”

CynicalOptimist on September 18, 2010 at 10:37 PM

omg so many links =\

lansing quaker on September 18, 2010 at 10:48 PM

Brooks–one more pi$$ed-off pundit who hasn’t figured out that his career is over due to a serious lack of relevance. He’s a zombie.

RandyChandler on September 18, 2010 at 10:50 PM

What an idiot! I wonder how many Tea Part.iers he actually knows. I’ll bet none.

jeanie on September 18, 2010 at 10:51 PM

It’s official! Brooks is on crack!

MCGIRV on September 18, 2010 at 10:51 PM

Um, Pat, just because it also applies to P.BO doesn’t mean it isn’t an accurate criticism of the Tea Party movement.

Count to 10 on September 18, 2010 at 10:52 PM

This post kicks @ss!

OxyCon on September 18, 2010 at 10:59 PM

Time to tear that old system down.

Chicago V- “Tear it down! Down to the ground! Tear it down down down down down!” (excellent album by the way.)

Coronagold on September 18, 2010 at 11:01 PM

Mr. Brooks,

Before 2008 we all thought you were hetero.

Really Right on September 18, 2010 at 11:14 PM

If the conservative ruling class pundits had any balls they would write letters to the editor of the major papers saying:

From this point forward, please don’t refer to these people as “conservatives”:
Brooks, Noonan, Frum

faraway on September 18, 2010 at 11:18 PM

So Mr. Patterico,
Do you still believe Obama to be the “Good Man” that you did 18 months ago? And, are you still pissed at guys like Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Stacy McCain, and Jeff Goldstein for calling it like they saw it then? Like you seem to see it now?

not criticizing, just sayin’…

RocketmanBob on September 18, 2010 at 11:19 PM

Um Mr. Brooks,
Your the one was is all that!!!!

mmcnamer1 on September 18, 2010 at 11:20 PM

The more I hear from Brooks, the more I find myself admiring the perfect crease of his trousers.

tryptic on September 18, 2010 at 11:25 PM

Summoning the joy many blacks felt at the election of the first African-American president and recalling the words of the late actor and activist Ossie Davis, he declared, It’s not the man, it’s the plan.”

It’s both, Mr. Narcissist, and the land doesn’t like the plan.

Schadenfreude on September 18, 2010 at 11:36 PM

Damn, the more I listen to old 70s rock stars the more I agree with their lyrics. Stoned as they were, they had a message.

Let’s rip us some new fun.

Coronagold on September 18, 2010 at 11:42 PM

Does Brooks own his kneepads, or does he have a lease with an option to buy at the end of the current administration?

Bruce MacMahon on September 18, 2010 at 11:44 PM

May be interesting to see if he received some stimulus money from O after the Repubs start investigating where all that money really went.

chickasaw42 on September 18, 2010 at 11:51 PM

mobydutch:Well put,now we see what they truly stand for!:)

canopfor on September 18, 2010 at 10:14 PM
Have you ever heard the old phrase “they dropping like flies,Right and Left” I never realized that this meant politically.

mobydutch on September 18, 2010 at 11:53 PM

RE:Bishop on September 18, 2010 at 9:22 PM

Gee… Guess that isn’t news.
Boxy_Brown on September 18, 2010 at 8:44 PM

Guess not, if you show up at HA once per month for 3 whole minutes.

Sounds like you missed me.

See earlier threads.

I did. We’re still in denial mode I think. I’ll stick around for anger, bargaining, depression… That’s going to take more then 3 minutes I’ll wager.

Boxy_Brown on September 18, 2010 at 11:56 PM

RINO Fever! Catch it!

The Mega Independent on September 19, 2010 at 12:10 AM

So Mr. Patterico,
Do you still believe Obama to be the “Good Man” that you did 18 months ago? And, are you still pissed at guys like Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Stacy McCain, and Jeff Goldstein for calling it like they saw it then? Like you seem to see it now?

So Mr. Rocketman Bob — or should I call you regular Protein Wisdom commenter Bob Reed?:

I know you’re “not criticizing, just sayin’” — but I think you are criticizing, in an effort to win the approval of Jeff Goldstein, to whom you dutifully reported your comment here, as well as your position that I was being “ridiculous.”

But you’re not criticizing! You’re just . . . disinterested.

Do you know the context in which I made that comment? It was in a post about teaching my young daughter not to make politics into something personal.

It was, of course, changed into something different, and that meme was spread throughout the blogosphere.

So to answer your question, with appropriate context: yes, I would still teach my eight-year-old child again that in general, she should not treat politics as personal.

I would also encourage her to make up her own mind about a candidate — and if she thought that candidate would engage in destructive policies, to oppose that candidate with all her heart and soul. As I opposed Barack Obama in the 2008 election. Many of the links in this post are taken from my numerous posts trashing Obama throughout the election.

(I am proud to announce that when they had a school election in 2008, my daughter voted for McCain, because of what I had told her. And I did NOT brainwash her.)

Although your motive here was not as you portrayed it, I still thank you for raising the question, and giving me another opportunity to set the record straight regarding the true context of the quote that you presented here, ripped from its original context.

Yours in opposition to Obama’s policies,

Patterco

Patterico on September 19, 2010 at 12:26 AM

He was obviously willing to forgive Obama all sorts of awful associations but cuts the Tea Party no slack. I suppose that’s what growing up in the Village will do to you.

Seth Halpern on September 19, 2010 at 12:36 AM

David Brooks prefers Otto von Bismarck to Thomas Jefferson.

No kidding.

AshleyTKing on September 19, 2010 at 12:42 AM

Wouldn’t it be nice if the “conservative” at the New York Times could see a few logs in the opponents’ eyes, even as he whines about the mote in the eyes of the Tea Party?

Great post Patterico.

Thorough and devastating as usual.

Like many elitist on the Hill and in the MSM,Brooks is scared to death watching Americans stand up and start to take their country back from the narcissistic elites that have screwed things up so badly.

Brooks likes the status quo because he gets to remain in his pompous bubble with the select few that feel they need to direct and command the peasants around them.

Brooks was one of Obama’s biggest cheerleaders and is watching his faux credibility going right down the same drain that “Hope and Change” has funneled down.

He and his elitist friends are quickly becoming irrelevant and these temper tantrums are a clear sign of desperation in losing their elitist tenure.

Brooks will never honestly write about the failure of democrats and the Obama administration.

He is fulfilling his role for the NY Times as the vaudeville Conservative whose columns “unexpectedly” can’t be differentiated from Frank Rich’s.

Baxter Greene on September 19, 2010 at 12:47 AM

@AshleyTKing: I couldn’t find anything by Brooks re Bismarck via that link. Mind being more specific?

Seth Halpern on September 19, 2010 at 12:50 AM

Because only the truly narcissistic do not have wonderfully creased trousers…

phreshone on September 19, 2010 at 12:51 AM

Yet according to David Brooks, the people who distort the truth and demonize opponents in an effort to paint themselves as the Good fighting the Evil are . . . the Tea Partiers.

Doctor Zero sums of the idiocy that Pattrico so expertly exposed quite well:

(via Hot Air)
http://www.doczero.org/2010/09/the-palin-card/


Let me put this bluntly: virtually no one in America gives a damn what Barack Obama says about anything at this point. What could be more predictable, and less interesting, than Obama’s opinion on any given subject? Who wants to contemplate the economic wisdom of a guy who looted the Treasury for a trillion dollars, with less benefit than we could have achieved by stuffing hundred dollar bills into random cereal boxes?

….But there is no way for Brooks to see or realize any of this with his head stuck so firmly up Pelosi’s butt.

Baxter Greene on September 19, 2010 at 1:05 AM

Brooks jumped the shark shortly after joining the Sulzberger Fiction Review (aka NYT). Somewhere about the time he decided he “like[d] the crease of Obama’s slacks.”
`
`
`
Thanks, Patrick, for reading Brooks so we don’t have to. It’s a dirty, thankless job but without it who knows what mischief he might get into?

Adjoran on September 19, 2010 at 1:12 AM

My collie says:

Now, I want you to remember. . . that no political party ever won an election. . . by nominating the party elite’s favorite. They won it. . . by making the other poor dumb political party nominate their elite’s favorite. . . Tea partiers. . . all this stuff you’ve heard about conservatives not wanting to fight. . . wanting to reach across the aisle. . . is a lot of horse dung. Conservatives. . . traditionally love to fight. All REAL conservatives love the sting of battle. When you were kids. . . you all admired the founding fathers. . . the great emancipator, silent Cal, and Ronald Reagan. Tea partiers love a true conservative. . .and will not tolerate a centrist. Conservatives play to win all the time. I wouldn’t give a hoot in hell for a guy like David Brooks who lost and laughed. That’s why the Tea Party has never been a party of centrists and will never be a party of centrists. . . because the very thought of being a squishy centrist. . . is hateful to the Tea Party. Now. . . an army of tea partiers is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of crap. The bilious bastards who wrote that stuff about individuality. . . for the New York Times. . . don’t know anything more about real election battles than they do about fornicating. Now we have the finest party apparatus. . . the best spirit. . . and the best men and women in the world. You know. . . by God, I actually pity those poor big-spending incumbants we’re going up against. By God, I do. We’re not just going to rout the bastards at the polls. . . we’re going to cut out their living guts. . . and use them to grease the rails of the tea party express. We’re going to slaughter those lousy bastards by the bushel. Now. . . some of you tea partiers. . . I know are wondering. . . . . .whether or not you’ll chicken out under fire. Don’t worry about it. I can assure you. . . that you will all do your duty. The elitists. . . are the enemy. Wade into them! Spill their blood! Shoot them in the belly! When you put your hand. . . into a bunch of goo. . . that a moment before was the Constitution of the United States. . . you’ll know what to do. There’s another thing I want you to remember. I don’t want to get any messages saying we are “holding our position. ” We’re not “holding” anything. Let David Brooks do that. We are advancing constantly. We’re not interested in holding on to anything. . . . . .except the enemy. We’re going to hold on to him by the nose and kick him in the ass. We’re going to kick the hell out of him all the time. . . and we’re going to go through him like crap through a goose! Now. . . there’s one thing. . . that you men and women will be able to say when you get back home. And you may thank God for it. Thirty years from now when you’re sitting around your fireside. . .with your grandson on your knee. . . and he asks you: “What did you do in the great election of 2010?” You won’t have to say: “Well. . . I wrote meaningless bullshit propaganda for the New York Times. ” All right, now, you magnificent sons of bitches. . . you know how I feel. I will be proud. . . to lead you wonderful men and women into battle anytime. . . anywhere. That is all.

DISMISSED!

CyberCipher on September 19, 2010 at 1:26 AM

Keep yappin’, Brooks. With your elitist nonsense, you’re part of the reason the Tea Party exists in the first place.

Metro on September 19, 2010 at 1:33 AM

Is there any evidence that the New York Times even knows what a Conservative is? (Hint: It’s NOT David Brooks)

NYT isn’t a news source, it’s just a publisher of the noise that leftists make babbling among themselves.

landlines on September 19, 2010 at 1:59 AM

Seth Halpern on September 19, 2010 at 12:50 AM

My bad. The book does that: Neoconservatism: an obituary for an idea. Brooks comes up often in that book. He and Irving Kristol and others are pretty contemptuous of Jefferson and limited government. They are pretty OK with FDR and the welfare state.

AshleyTKing on September 19, 2010 at 2:09 AM

From the book’s product description:

Neoconservatism: An Obituary for an Idea reveals publicly for the first time what the neocons call their philosophy of governance–their plan for governing America. This book explicates the deepest philosophic principles of neoconservatism, traces the intellectual relationship between the political philosopher Leo Strauss and contemporary neoconservative political actors, and provides a trenchant critique of neoconservatism from the perspective of America’s founding principles. The theme of this timely book–neoconservatism as a species of anti-Americanism–will shake up the intellectual salons of both the Left and Right. What makes this book so compelling is that Thompson actually lived for many years in the Straussian/neoconservative intellectual world. Neoconservatism therefore fits into the “breaking ranks” tradition of scholarly criticism and breaks the mold when it comes to informed, incisive, nonpartisan critique of neoconservative thought and action.

AshleyTKing on September 19, 2010 at 2:12 AM

Gotta agree with him here. Take, for example, well, you all must remember that arrogant teabagger who said:

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

What was that guy’s name was again?

RINO in Name Only on September 19, 2010 at 2:24 AM

Empty vessels make the most noise !

The man is a misguided elite fool .

Sandybourne on September 19, 2010 at 2:24 AM

Another news paper writer reduced to name calling.

I wonder if this is what will bring the NYt back from the brink of financial ruin?

Freddy on September 19, 2010 at 2:37 AM

Victimhood? Brooks thinks the Tea Party has it — but not Obama, who thinks people don’t like him because of his middle name, which his wife calls the “fear bomb”; or who plays the race card (I don’t “look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills”).

I think the mint needs to come out with a new three dollar denominated currency note. We can put Obummers picture on it.

Everybody already knows a three dollar bill is phoney.

trigon on September 19, 2010 at 3:23 AM

David Brooks: “Tea partiers are narcissistic, egomaniacal, self-righteous people who distort the truth!”

IMO Dave Brooks gave a near perfect description of a LIBERAL!

GFW on September 19, 2010 at 6:33 AM

Nice. This one goes in my permanent link file.

Chris of Rights on September 19, 2010 at 6:38 AM

Miss Brooks comments mean absolutely zero to Freedom loving people. I would not pis* on him if he were on fire. That goes for all libtards.

Call me a ‘hater’, c if I care. I live free.

jarhead0311 on September 19, 2010 at 6:52 AM

David Brooks on the Tea Party:

Along the way, the movement has picked up some of the worst excesses of modern American culture: a narcissistic sense of victimization, an egomaniacal belief in one’s own rightness and purity, a willingness to distort the truth so that every conflict becomes a contest of pure good versus pure evil.
==========================================================

From Der Spiegel,

Me thinks the Tea Party might be cook’n Hopey’s goose,
this analysist sounds good to me!!
———————————–
The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:

“The success of the Tea Party candidate Christine O’Donnell does not bode well for the Republicans, nor for the Democrats (even if they see it differently at the moment), nor for the whole American political machine.”

“Obama has underestimated the frustration in the country and the power of the Tea Party movement, which gives the prevailing disillusionment a platform and a voice. It is by far the most vibrant political force in America. Obama’s left-of-center coalition, which got young people and intellectuals involved and which appealed to a majority of women, blacks and Latinos, has evaporated into nothing.”

“The new right, though, is on the rise. It sets the agenda. America is facing a shift to the right. The Republicans have already marched in this direction of their own accord, regardless how many Tea Party reactionaries get a seat and a voice in Congress in November. The Democrats and the president have been put totally on the defensive. From now on they will only be able to react, rather than act.”

– Jess Smee
===================================

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,717845,00.html

canopfor on September 19, 2010 at 6:57 AM

David, how do you keep your job?

diogenes on September 18, 2010 at 10:28 PM

Diogenes: he keeps it because he works for the NY Times, who must love him for his thoughtful prose!

chai on September 19, 2010 at 7:17 AM

An egomaniacal belief in one’s own rightness and purity? Are you kidding me, David Brooks?

As I recall, it wasn’t Tea Partiers announcing that Obama’s win would be remembered by posterity as the day when the world’s oceans began to recede and temperatures began to decline . . . that little display of narcissistic egomania was straight from Mr. Perfect Trouser Creases himself — and it’s just one of many such modest gems (“I’m the LeBron of politics“) that this oh-so-full-of-himself loon has treated us to.

AZCoyote on September 19, 2010 at 7:34 AM

The downfall of the arrogant is their arrogance. Sun Tzu

tarpon on September 19, 2010 at 7:52 AM

… the worst excesses of modern American culture: a narcissistic sense of victimization, an egomaniacal belief in one’s own rightness and purity, a willingness to distort the truth so that every conflict becomes a contest of pure good versus pure evil.

In other words, We The People are the worst nightmare for the likes of David Brooks.

Sir Napsalot on September 19, 2010 at 7:55 AM

well its offical Allah during the day is mild manner david brooks.

It all makes sense now.

unseen on September 19, 2010 at 8:01 AM

The War Planner on September 18, 2010 at 10:12 PM

I don’t watch a lot of TV, but is this typical of Mort Kondracke? I couldn’t believe how upset he is about the TP rabble coming to DC. It is really messing them up. And he actually said he wishes Castle would do a Murkowski?? Heads are going to explode in Nov. and I’m guessing the “revered” token conservatives such as Frum and Brooks and T. Coddington Van Vorhees VII will be included in the carnage. They really don’t want these people at their parties, stinking up the town.

hoosiermama on September 19, 2010 at 8:09 AM

what was more arrogant then passage of Obamacare?

rob verdi on September 19, 2010 at 8:18 AM

Has it been made sufficiently clear that David Brooks is no conservative, but just one more insufferable elitist at the New York Times who distorts the truth and engages in personal attack on people with genuine conservative views?

Phil Byler on September 19, 2010 at 8:20 AM

Good. Its jerks like you which is why a Tea Party formed to begin with.

It’s on people. Let’s not waste this opportunity. We won’t change it overnight, but the again, maybe we will. Starting with REPEAL!!!!

johnnyU on September 19, 2010 at 8:23 AM

Excellent Patterico.

Poor Brooks. God help him if he every finds himself stranded in small town rural America, he’d probably die of fright.

Texas Gal on September 18, 2010 at 9:53 PM

I’d pay money to watch this.

Clutching his pearls and fanning away the vapors.

tru2tx on September 19, 2010 at 8:27 AM

Brooks? That the same guy swooning about the PANT CREASE on the DOTUS?

Between him or Brian Williams or Matt Lauer….who’s the biggest suckup? Tossup?

PappyD61 on September 19, 2010 at 8:40 AM

Brooks is a RINYTO – a Republican in the New York Times Only.

Years ago when I was dismissing the NYTs as a liberal rag with its own agenda to one of my liberal friends, she suggested I read some of David Brooks’ articles that she cut out for me. She said he was a Conservative Republican and that I would like his work. (She said that she actually often agreed with him!) After reading said articles, I told her that this Brooks guy was no “Conservative” by any stretch of the imagination.

Logic on September 19, 2010 at 8:52 AM

Wait a darn minute! Brooks is a smart man,and we need to be educated by him.

JAW on September 19, 2010 at 9:19 AM

David Brooks?

Never heard of him….

ladyingray on September 19, 2010 at 9:19 AM

Watching these people come unglued is good entertainment.

rollthedice on September 19, 2010 at 9:37 AM

Projection – it doesn’t just happen in the little room at the back of the Cineplex!

Is there no reverse-Pulitzer that can be awared to the most offensively dishonest editorial of the year? Sort of like the Ig-Nobel prize? Maybe the Pee-yewlitzer?

drunyan8315 on September 19, 2010 at 9:47 AM

Every time one of these victims of a “social cascade” appears making obtuse statements, it only reinforces the view in the “Tea Party” that the “elites” are completely out of touch with reality.

J_Crater on September 19, 2010 at 9:52 AM

“Narcissistic, egomaniacal, self-righteous people who distort the truth!”

Classic case of guilt ridden psychological projectionism… nothing more…..

The RINO sees he has to either go away or join the DNC outright……

rabidamerican on September 19, 2010 at 10:08 AM

What? Obama is a jackass? I was told that he was a good man.

Pablo on September 19, 2010 at 10:11 AM

Democrats. Can’t live with ‘em…. can’t….well, you know.

afotia on September 19, 2010 at 10:12 AM

great piece and so SPOT ON…the ‘establishment’ needs to read this and they’ve got their ads for 2012

cmsinaz on September 19, 2010 at 10:15 AM

I don’t watch a lot of TV, but is this typical of Mort Kondracke? I couldn’t believe how upset he is about the TP rabble coming to DC. It is really messing them up. And he actually said he wishes Castle would do a Murkowski?? Heads are going to explode in Nov. and I’m guessing the “revered” token conservatives such as Frum and Brooks and T. Coddington Van Vorhees VII will be included in the carnage. They really don’t want these people at their parties, stinking up the town.

hoosiermama on September 19, 2010 at 8:09 AM

Mort has turned into a real jerk in the last couple years. He belongs on msnbc, not Fox News.

slickwillie2001 on September 19, 2010 at 10:15 AM

I kinda like this quote (from local blogland here in Texas)

Tea Partiers are not to be defined — honestly, that is — by a few fringe thinkers. The fringe thinkers, thanks to the liberal media, get the air time and page-one, above-the-fold. No movement is pure and no enity exists without a few “pilot fish” latching on to feed. You likely wouldn’t attend a rally but even if you did we could only hope you would hear the central message — the one that has had such an effect on politics — not the “fart in the windstorm” of a few. Alas, we don’t listen to them but I’m afraid you and yours are conditioned to.

Katfish on September 19, 2010 at 10:16 AM

OT (sort of): When do we get the “Colin Powell is a Jacka$$” thread? This tool is on NBC spewing nonsense about the Tea Party. Seriously, why does this guy still call himself a Republican? He needs to change his voter registration.

WordsMatter on September 19, 2010 at 10:24 AM

@AshleyTKing: Thanks for clarifying.
I would suggest that the neocons take their cues more from Hamilton than Jefferson or Madison. I don’t remember reading many paeans to Bismarck in the pages of COMMENTARY. But certainly their emphasis on an activist foreign policy, requiring as it does a large military, lends itself more to the centralized regimentation of society than would a more pacifist brand of libertarianism. The occasional comparatively populist strain in neoconservatism does as well. But I don’t think of Tea Partiers as strictly libertarian either, and Sarah Palin (whom neocons like Norman Podhoretz have at least tepidly supported) has a touch of old fashioned progressivism in her makeup, besides sharing many neocon foreign policy goals. So I think the jury is out on just how Jeffersonian the TPs are.

It’s not a state secret that most neocons are “liberals who were mugged by reality” (to use Kristol’s phrase) but part of reality is that a strong state is both externally necessary and internally dangerous. That’s a conflict at the heart of neocon thinking which most neocons would probably admit to, some more grudgingly than others.

But the kind of fussiness exhibited by Brooks strikes me as nothing more profound than Manhattan snobbery.

Seth Halpern on September 19, 2010 at 10:37 AM

Why do you constantly keep us up to date on what this irrelevant Democrat thinks?. He might call himself a Republican but everyone knows he isn’t even a RINO. He might think he’s an elitist but everyone knows he’s just a wannabe. I hate to burst your bubble but no one cares about this loser in the least. Myself, I just look at the headline and never read the article. No one cares what this dope thinks. Let him go get a job as a dry cleaner so he can press the best creases in pants since this is something he is so passionate about. This man is a loser times 10. Get over it. I can’t even stand to look at this doofus, next!

Jayrae on September 19, 2010 at 10:39 AM

We have the democrats projection, now we have a huge republican “screen” to block them in November 2010.

Seriously, why does this guy still call himself a Republican? He needs to change his voter registration.

WordsMatter on September 19, 2010 at 10:24 AM

To keep us common folk in line, akin to a tv version of Rush Limbaugh’s “seminar callers”, and he can continue to enjoy the Washington parties he is acustomed to,living the high life with the Hoi Polloi.

dthorny on September 19, 2010 at 10:56 AM

I should add that many neocons regard Jefferson’s fairly secularized rationalism as almost French, hence dangerous, compared to the plainer religiosity of an Adams or the bulk of Americans. This fits at least adequately the neocon version of evangelical Americanism, which is a middle ground between French revolutionary militance and British colonial noblesse.

Seth Halpern on September 19, 2010 at 10:57 AM

Brooks is just a greasy maggot.

royzer on September 19, 2010 at 11:02 AM

The victims are those who have their property taken; the perpetrators are those who take the property. I am a victim; the perpetrators are the Democrats and middle-of-the-road Republicans who keep expanding entitlements to the point that this Government is far more bloated than even the most Federalist of the founders could have imagined.

An egomaniacal belief in rightness and purity manifests itself in a grasping Government which attempts to redistribute wealth from the “haves” to the “have nots” and calls those “haves” who want to keep the work of their own hands for their own use — including their own choices of charity — “selfish”. Three fingers point back to Mr. Brooks and his crew in that regard, as they point a single finger at the Taxed Enough Already Party.

As for pure good vs. pure evil, evil would be the Good Samaritan taking the Levite to the inn and telling the innkeeper “You are richer than I, so it is now your obligation to nurse this man back to health”. Good is what the Samaritan really did do — putting his own wealth and works on the line for the Levite, rather than giving to the Levite that which is not his to give.

unclesmrgol on September 19, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Brooks is living proof that IQ and Wisdom seldom walk hand in hand

How dare you use the words IQ and Wisdom in the same sentence when referring to a liberal.

It should read “Brooks is living proof that IQ and Wisdom seldom walk hand in hand zombies exist.

BruceB on September 19, 2010 at 11:05 AM

The enlightened herd needs to be thinned – it’s inbreeding is becoming obvious and detrimental to the balance.

Fuquay Steve on September 19, 2010 at 11:14 AM

Come Nov 3rd, David Brooks will join the ranks of the ‘irrelevant’.

GarandFan on September 19, 2010 at 11:19 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3