Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Registration is currently closed. That means if you're not already registered, you can't comment. We will let you know if and when registration re-opens. 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.
I hate to agree with a Huffpo commenter, but this one nails it:
Anyone who regards Palin as a “fatal cancer” but praises the man who chose her as his running mate as one of “the best candidates we’ve had in a long time” is intellectually deficient (to say the least).
“The more I follow politicians, the more I think experience matters, the ability to have a template of things in your mind that you can refer to on the spot, because believe me, once in office there’s no time to think or make decisions.”
annnd Obama has WHAT EXPERIENCE?
marklmail on October 8, 2008 at 3:10 PM
…but to scorn ideas entirely. And I’m afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices.
Sarah Palin scorns ideas. Yeah, that has to be close to the dumbest thing I’ve read today.
But Brooks is right in the sense that she is a threat to the current leadership in the Republican party. Thankfully.
I find it ironic this piece is accompanied with Brooks in front of An Atlantic sign.
This is a very odd mental ailment, going from right to left (or more accurately, from right to wrong). It’s hard to explain, why anyone would choose such a descent. Inner entropy? Emotional imbalance?
Halley on October 8, 2008 at 3:15 PM
once in office there’s no time to think or make decisions.”
um…isn’t making decisions kind of what a president and vice president do? the whole executive branch, “the buck stops here” deal? I know guys like Brooks are still horrified that hick Harry Truman actually won an election, and they see Palin as Truman redux, but c’mon.
But Brooks is right in the sense that she is a threat to the current leadership in the Republican party. Thankfully.
I find it ironic this piece is accompanied with Brooks in front of An Atlantic sign.
Spirit of 1776 on October 8, 2008 at 3:10 PM
You mean the gay gossip magazine? or whatever Ace calls it.
funky chicken on October 8, 2008 at 3:17 PM
“God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”
In a few more years, Maureen Dowdy will make a pretty good Helen Thomas.
Blake on October 8, 2008 at 3:19 PM
This is a very odd mental ailment, going from right to left
Not really. The longer you are as a “gatekeeper” of information (media etc), the more inclined you are to see the world as either educated or ignorant. Once you reach that point it is a very small step to intellectually supported aristocratic governmental manifestations and degrading the populace.
That’s why it’s so important to purge pundits from time to time, and why I wish we’d stopp linking Parker and Noonan here. They have chosen a different path and are no longer worthy of recognition.
David Brooks was never really a conservative. Didn’t he suggest the formation of a McCain-Lieberman Party? Hasn’t he always gone against the small-government conservatism championed by Reagan on Goldwater? Brooks seems like a tool that the NY Times uses to make its readers think that it has a balanced editorial stance.
MedSchoolCatholic on October 8, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Brooks belongs on the Harvard faculty.
drjohn on October 8, 2008 at 3:26 PM
All Brooks proves with this is that elitism is not confined to the left wing. From this I’d say its safe to say its a coastal phenomenon. The Boston-Washington corridor and Seattle, San Francisco and LA with little outposts surrounding colleges and universities.
johnsteele on October 8, 2008 at 3:26 PM
He explained, “The more I follow politicians, the more I think experience matters, the ability to have a template of things in your mind that you can refer to on the spot, because believe me, once in office there’s no time to think or make decisions.”
……………………….
……..”[Biden] can’t not say what he thinks,” Brooks remarked. “There’s no internal monitor,
Attacking the most popular (and smart) politician since Ronald Reagan? Dumb.
If a nerd brings a knife to a gunfight the nerd will wind up stabbing himself.
This is my opinion of the intellectual conservative. If you consider yourself one all I have to ask is how does it feel to be the captain’s dog on the ship SS Liberal.
John McCain and Barack Obama as “the two best candidates we’ve had in a long time.”
David Brooks burns last bridge to the conservative base reality.
FIFY.
McCain does understand foreign policy at least, but not domestic or economic. As for Dear Leader Obamassiah. . . yeesh.
rbj on October 8, 2008 at 3:31 PM
Parker, Noonan, Brooks…all should consider themselves Dead to me
jp on October 8, 2008 at 3:32 PM
In a wig and lipstick
.
You mean that’s not lipstick in his bio picture??
rhodeymark on October 8, 2008 at 3:33 PM
And this is surprising to …..whom?
*crickets*
He left the reservation a long time ago.
RedMindBlueState on October 8, 2008 at 3:36 PM
David Gergen Sarah Palin can kick his @$$ – I’d lash out in blind rage too.
rhodeymark on October 8, 2008 at 3:36 PM
I’m sure Vladimir and Mahmoud would love to discuss Reinhold Niebuhr with Obama.
All Brooks proves with this is that elitism is not confined to the left wing.
johnsteele on October 8, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Amen, brother.
SAZMD on October 8, 2008 at 3:37 PM
Can we throw Brooks under our bus?
pseudonominus on October 8, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Obama has the great intellect. I was interviewing Obama a couple years ago, and I’m getting nowhere with the interview, it’s late in the night, he’s on the phone, walking off the Senate floor, he’s cranky. Out of the blue I say, ‘Ever read a guy named Reinhold Niebuhr?’ And he says, ‘Yeah.’ So i say, ‘What did Niebuhr mean to you?’ For the next 20 minutes, he gave me a perfect description of Reinhold Niebuhr’s thought, which is a very subtle thought process based on the idea that you have to use power while it corrupts you. And I was dazzled, I felt the tingle up my knee as Chris Matthews would say.
Brooks, I know conservatives, I’ve worked with conservatives. Conservatives are my friends.
Brooks, you’re no conservative.
lodge on October 8, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Out of the blue I say, ‘Ever read a guy named Reinhold Niebuhr?’ And he says, ‘Yeah.’ So i say, ‘What did Niebuhr mean to you?’ For the next 20 minutes, he gave me a perfect description of Reinhold Niebuhr’s thought
Oh by all means, let us elect Obama for life. In fact, I’ll only vote for a candidate who has a doctoral degree in theology, political science, philosophy, comparative literature, history, physics, biology, mathematics, sociology, forestry, education, English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Esperanto, psychology, and library science. In addition, he or she should be able to translate Beowulf, the Bible, the Iliad, the Koran, and the Bhagavad Gita into multiple languages. A medical degree would be nice as well.
Woodrow Wilson was an Ivy League PhD. He read alot. And was one of the worst Presidents in American history.
Harry Truman? Not so much.
Turncoat douchenozzle.
melkor on October 8, 2008 at 4:07 PM
David Brooks is just another elitist beltway neo-con that likes to pretend he is a real conservative.
I love this quote of Brooks…
…but to scorn ideas entirely. And I’m afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices.
There are certain ideas I reject out of hand as well.
I reject the idea that we should walk away from a war and concede defeat just because things get a bit tough.
I reject the idea that abortion is morally and ethically acceptable.
I reject the idea that government can do a better job with my money than I can.
I reject the idea that a police state is a better direction for social regulation than a voluntarily moral and ethical populace.
I reject the idea that it is the purpose of our government to redistribute wealth.
I reject the idea that there is not an individual right to keep and bear firearms.
I reject the idea that an education in an Ivy League school makes you more capable than other Americans.
I have many more, but these will suffice to say that there are a lot of ideas that I am not open to either. That is what defines me as a conservative. I will put forward one final example…
I reject the notion that David Brooks is in fact a true conservative rather than an elitist snob poser.
Hawthorne on October 8, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Brooks and Noonan belong to the same club.
obladioblada on October 8, 2008 at 4:13 PM
Won’t need a radio to hear Rush’s comments on this.
These people like being an emasculated minority party. They like being bullied and beaten by the Tip O’Neals and Richard Daleys. Just leave them to their books and their pointless, toothless screeds in the WaPo and NYT.
And I reject these ideas as well. Well said, Hawthorne. Very well said, indeed.
Brooks…you’re an arrogant, raised-pinky, poser, and we, as real conservatives, don’t give a rat’s hairy backside what you think. Period.
tickleddragon on October 8, 2008 at 4:37 PM
I’m still scratching my head over his assumption that a chief executive “doesn’t have time” to make decisions.
I know I’m not a smarty pants like David Brooks, but I just have always thought that was kind of the job of a chief executive.
funky chicken on October 8, 2008 at 4:38 PM
I think I meant “assertion” rather than “assumption”
see, I’m just not too bright I guess. that must be why I can’t appreciate the true brilliance of Brooks, Noonan, and Frum
/gag
funky chicken on October 8, 2008 at 4:39 PM
I hadn’t realized there were any bridges left. Had I known, I would have burned them for him.
MarkTheGreat on October 8, 2008 at 4:44 PM
I’m beginning to the Barack Obama shoots crack lasers out of his eyes, causing people to become unwittingly addicted to him.
Or he really is the Messiah, and I am very sadly not one of the chosen people.
MayBee on October 8, 2008 at 4:44 PM
I’m still scratching my head over his assumption that a chief executive “doesn’t have time” to make decisions.
I know I’m not a smarty pants like David Brooks, but I just have always thought that was kind of the job of a chief executive.
funky chicken on October 8, 2008 at 4:38 PM
You are indeed correct. I was mystified by that statement as well. The President has the very extensive executive branch of our government to perform administrative tasks. The President has only three jobs to perform in essence.
To sign bills into law or veto them. I would imagine this requires some thought and a decision on the part of the President.
To make decisions on how to pursue the business of the United States of America within the guidelines of law. I am pretty certain this requires some thought as well.
To make efforts to propose desired legislation and explain it to the American people. I would guess that this requires some thought too.
Apparently Mr. Brooks has spent too much time in philosophical contemplation of Reinhold Niebuhr to actually think about what the President does.
Hawthorne on October 8, 2008 at 4:54 PM
LOL OK, youse guys are teh funny
funky chicken on October 8, 2008 at 4:55 PM
Out of the blue I say, ‘Ever read a guy named Reinhold Niebuhr?’ And he says, ‘Yeah.’ So i say, ‘What did Niebuhr mean to you?’ For the next 20 minutes, he gave me a perfect description of Reinhold Niebuhr’s thought
It was probably 20 seconds. It only seemed like 20 minutes.
swampleg on October 8, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Wait.
This was at an event for the ATLANTIC?
The place that pays Andrew Sullivan?
Unbelievable.
MayBee on October 8, 2008 at 5:13 PM
annnd Obama has WHAT EXPERIENCE?
marklmail on October 8, 2008 at 3:10 PM
It’s frankly difficult to follow the backward function of his brain. We have all commented ad nauseum about critics of Palin’s experience as a VP candidate, who find no objection to Obama’s experience as the Presidential candidate. It’s so blatantly stupid that we were calling her selection genius, just because no Obama supporter would be so myopic and stupid as to even raise the subject.
So much for that.
But this is just priceless:
[Buckley] thought it was important to have people on the conservative side who celebrated ideas, who celebrated learning.
Reasonable people can disagree about whether the selection of Palin is a cancer upon the ideal of “celebrating ideas and learning”, I suppose. But I don’t believe that fair-minded conservatives can disagree about whether Obama fits that ideal, and therefore becomes “a great candidate”.
Name an idea that Obama has expressed – just one – and held onto throughout the primary and this campaign, and I’ll show you it’s origin and death in 1960s and the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Like Lowry, Brooks is an effete Beltway RINO faaarrrrr too detached from anything like reality to be an effective commentator at this point. His commentary is surreal.
Jaibones on October 8, 2008 at 6:06 PM
David Brooks has never been a conservative. If you watch him on PBS’s News Hour, he almost always agree with Mark Shields. At most, when Shields says that Republicans are bad, Brooks will demur that Democrats may be equally as bad in some ways. Prior to his position as a NY Times columnist, he was the token liberal on the Weekly Standard. Calling David Brooks a conservative is like calling me a liberal.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Registration is currently closed. That means if you're not already registered, you can't comment. We will let you know if and when registration re-opens. 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
I hate to agree with a Huffpo commenter, but this one nails it:
jimmy the notable on October 8, 2008 at 3:08 PM
That bridge was pretty rickety already.
BadgerHawk on October 8, 2008 at 3:08 PM
The same Brooks that propped up McCain as the media darling candidate. LOL!
Fletch54 on October 8, 2008 at 3:08 PM
He’s a charter member of the ‘Georgetown Coffee club’, like McCain calls him. he’s an idiot and a dumbass.
Chudi on October 8, 2008 at 3:08 PM
I miss Bill Safire.
Slublog on October 8, 2008 at 3:08 PM
“The more I follow politicians, the more I think experience matters, the ability to have a template of things in your mind that you can refer to on the spot, because believe me, once in office there’s no time to think or make decisions.”
annnd Obama has WHAT EXPERIENCE?
marklmail on October 8, 2008 at 3:10 PM
Sarah Palin scorns ideas. Yeah, that has to be close to the dumbest thing I’ve read today.
But Brooks is right in the sense that she is a threat to the current leadership in the Republican party. Thankfully.
I find it ironic this piece is accompanied with Brooks in front of An Atlantic sign.
Spirit of 1776 on October 8, 2008 at 3:10 PM
This is a very odd mental ailment, going from right to left (or more accurately, from right to wrong). It’s hard to explain, why anyone would choose such a descent. Inner entropy? Emotional imbalance?
Halley on October 8, 2008 at 3:15 PM
um…isn’t making decisions kind of what a president and vice president do? the whole executive branch, “the buck stops here” deal? I know guys like Brooks are still horrified that hick Harry Truman actually won an election, and they see Palin as Truman redux, but c’mon.
You mean the gay gossip magazine? or whatever Ace calls it.
funky chicken on October 8, 2008 at 3:17 PM
“God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”
Reinhold Neibuhr.
420sniper on October 8, 2008 at 3:18 PM
In a wig and lipstick, Brooks might make a pretty good Maureen Dowdy, no?
MrScribbler on October 8, 2008 at 3:18 PM
In a few more years, Maureen Dowdy will make a pretty good Helen Thomas.
Blake on October 8, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Not really. The longer you are as a “gatekeeper” of information (media etc), the more inclined you are to see the world as either educated or ignorant. Once you reach that point it is a very small step to intellectually supported aristocratic governmental manifestations and degrading the populace.
That’s why it’s so important to purge pundits from time to time, and why I wish we’d stopp linking Parker and Noonan here. They have chosen a different path and are no longer worthy of recognition.
Spirit of 1776 on October 8, 2008 at 3:20 PM
Go to hell Brooks you turncoat scumbag.
WisCon on October 8, 2008 at 3:20 PM
Spirit of 1776 on October 8, 2008 at 3:21 PM
David Brooks was never really a conservative. Didn’t he suggest the formation of a McCain-Lieberman Party? Hasn’t he always gone against the small-government conservatism championed by Reagan on Goldwater? Brooks seems like a tool that the NY Times uses to make its readers think that it has a balanced editorial stance.
MedSchoolCatholic on October 8, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Brooks belongs on the Harvard faculty.
drjohn on October 8, 2008 at 3:26 PM
All Brooks proves with this is that elitism is not confined to the left wing. From this I’d say its safe to say its a coastal phenomenon. The Boston-Washington corridor and Seattle, San Francisco and LA with little outposts surrounding colleges and universities.
johnsteele on October 8, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Attacking the most popular (and smart) politician since Ronald Reagan? Dumb.
Implying that experience matters? Priceless.
Mcguyver on October 8, 2008 at 3:27 PM
If a nerd brings a knife to a gunfight the nerd will wind up stabbing himself.
This is my opinion of the intellectual conservative. If you consider yourself one all I have to ask is how does it feel to be the captain’s dog on the ship SS Liberal.
420sniper on October 8, 2008 at 3:27 PM
David Brooks burns last bridge to
the conservative basereality.FIFY.
McCain does understand foreign policy at least, but not domestic or economic. As for Dear Leader Obamassiah. . . yeesh.
rbj on October 8, 2008 at 3:31 PM
Parker, Noonan, Brooks…all should consider themselves Dead to me
jp on October 8, 2008 at 3:32 PM
.
You mean that’s not lipstick in his bio picture??
rhodeymark on October 8, 2008 at 3:33 PM
And this is surprising to …..whom?
*crickets*
He left the reservation a long time ago.
RedMindBlueState on October 8, 2008 at 3:36 PM
David GergenSarah Palin can kick his @$$ – I’d lash out in blind rage too.rhodeymark on October 8, 2008 at 3:36 PM
I’m sure Vladimir and Mahmoud would love to discuss Reinhold Niebuhr with Obama.
Amen, brother.
SAZMD on October 8, 2008 at 3:37 PM
Can we throw Brooks under our bus?
pseudonominus on October 8, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Brooks, I know conservatives, I’ve worked with conservatives. Conservatives are my friends.
Brooks, you’re no conservative.
lodge on October 8, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Oh by all means, let us elect Obama for life. In fact, I’ll only vote for a candidate who has a doctoral degree in theology, political science, philosophy, comparative literature, history, physics, biology, mathematics, sociology, forestry, education, English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Esperanto, psychology, and library science. In addition, he or she should be able to translate Beowulf, the Bible, the Iliad, the Koran, and the Bhagavad Gita into multiple languages. A medical degree would be nice as well.
Bill Ramey on October 8, 2008 at 3:43 PM
Mr. Brooks? Get in the coffin. You are dead to us.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 8, 2008 at 3:43 PM
Brooks was never a conservative.
MedSchoolCatholic on October 8, 2008 at 3:44 PM
“Hi! I’m David Brooks. I’m not a conservative but I play one on tv……….”
Nyog_of_the_Bog on October 8, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Hey Brooksy!!
Woodrow Wilson was an Ivy League PhD. He read alot. And was one of the worst Presidents in American history.
Harry Truman? Not so much.
Turncoat douchenozzle.
melkor on October 8, 2008 at 4:07 PM
David Brooks is just another elitist beltway neo-con that likes to pretend he is a real conservative.
I love this quote of Brooks…
There are certain ideas I reject out of hand as well.
I reject the idea that we should walk away from a war and concede defeat just because things get a bit tough.
I reject the idea that abortion is morally and ethically acceptable.
I reject the idea that government can do a better job with my money than I can.
I reject the idea that a police state is a better direction for social regulation than a voluntarily moral and ethical populace.
I reject the idea that it is the purpose of our government to redistribute wealth.
I reject the idea that there is not an individual right to keep and bear firearms.
I reject the idea that an education in an Ivy League school makes you more capable than other Americans.
I have many more, but these will suffice to say that there are a lot of ideas that I am not open to either. That is what defines me as a conservative. I will put forward one final example…
I reject the notion that David Brooks is in fact a true conservative rather than an elitist snob poser.
Hawthorne on October 8, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Brooks and Noonan belong to the same club.
obladioblada on October 8, 2008 at 4:13 PM
Won’t need a radio to hear Rush’s comments on this.
Blaise on October 8, 2008 at 4:19 PM
These people like being an emasculated minority party. They like being bullied and beaten by the Tip O’Neals and Richard Daleys. Just leave them to their books and their pointless, toothless screeds in the WaPo and NYT.
Sickening. You disgust me, David Brooks.
spmat on October 8, 2008 at 4:24 PM
you dont say
wise_man on October 8, 2008 at 4:32 PM
And I reject these ideas as well. Well said, Hawthorne. Very well said, indeed.
Brooks…you’re an arrogant, raised-pinky, poser, and we, as real conservatives, don’t give a rat’s hairy backside what you think. Period.
tickleddragon on October 8, 2008 at 4:37 PM
I’m still scratching my head over his assumption that a chief executive “doesn’t have time” to make decisions.
I know I’m not a smarty pants like David Brooks, but I just have always thought that was kind of the job of a chief executive.
funky chicken on October 8, 2008 at 4:38 PM
I think I meant “assertion” rather than “assumption”
see, I’m just not too bright I guess. that must be why I can’t appreciate the true brilliance of Brooks, Noonan, and Frum
/gag
funky chicken on October 8, 2008 at 4:39 PM
I hadn’t realized there were any bridges left. Had I known, I would have burned them for him.
MarkTheGreat on October 8, 2008 at 4:44 PM
I’m beginning to the Barack Obama shoots crack lasers out of his eyes, causing people to become unwittingly addicted to him.
Or he really is the Messiah, and I am very sadly not one of the chosen people.
MayBee on October 8, 2008 at 4:44 PM
You are indeed correct. I was mystified by that statement as well. The President has the very extensive executive branch of our government to perform administrative tasks. The President has only three jobs to perform in essence.
To sign bills into law or veto them. I would imagine this requires some thought and a decision on the part of the President.
To make decisions on how to pursue the business of the United States of America within the guidelines of law. I am pretty certain this requires some thought as well.
To make efforts to propose desired legislation and explain it to the American people. I would guess that this requires some thought too.
Apparently Mr. Brooks has spent too much time in philosophical contemplation of Reinhold Niebuhr to actually think about what the President does.
Hawthorne on October 8, 2008 at 4:54 PM
LOL OK, youse guys are teh funny
funky chicken on October 8, 2008 at 4:55 PM
It was probably 20 seconds. It only seemed like 20 minutes.
swampleg on October 8, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Wait.
This was at an event for the ATLANTIC?
The place that pays Andrew Sullivan?
Unbelievable.
MayBee on October 8, 2008 at 5:13 PM
It’s frankly difficult to follow the backward function of his brain. We have all commented ad nauseum about critics of Palin’s experience as a VP candidate, who find no objection to Obama’s experience as the Presidential candidate. It’s so blatantly stupid that we were calling her selection genius, just because no Obama supporter would be so myopic and stupid as to even raise the subject.
So much for that.
But this is just priceless:
Reasonable people can disagree about whether the selection of Palin is a cancer upon the ideal of “celebrating ideas and learning”, I suppose. But I don’t believe that fair-minded conservatives can disagree about whether Obama fits that ideal, and therefore becomes “a great candidate”.
Name an idea that Obama has expressed – just one – and held onto throughout the primary and this campaign, and I’ll show you it’s origin and death in 1960s and the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Like Lowry, Brooks is an effete Beltway RINO faaarrrrr too detached from anything like reality to be an effective commentator at this point. His commentary is surreal.
Jaibones on October 8, 2008 at 6:06 PM
David Brooks has never been a conservative. If you watch him on PBS’s News Hour, he almost always agree with Mark Shields. At most, when Shields says that Republicans are bad, Brooks will demur that Democrats may be equally as bad in some ways. Prior to his position as a NY Times columnist, he was the token liberal on the Weekly Standard. Calling David Brooks a conservative is like calling me a liberal.
tomsky on October 9, 2008 at 2:19 AM