Skip to content

Shorter David Brooks:“Gee Mr. President, is That a Crease in Your Pants, or Are You Just Happy To See Me!?”


Via Ed Driscoll

“Oh the fun we’re all going to have when Brooks discovers Fast & Furious, the IRS Scandal, “Richard Windsor,” and the ramifications of the deal with Iran sometime in February of 2017.”

Brooks’ reputation isn’t helped by his “cordless bungie-jumping into the abyss of self parody.” [Is that Dan Riehl’s phrase?]  Neither is the Old Grey Lady’s, who abjectly failed to vet and then report over the last decade that which was staring them in the face.

Our point being, we’re observing historical revisionism occur in real-time.  Look forward to the gulag archipelago, comrade.

29 Comments leave one →
  1. 2016/02/12 17:09

    Cordless bungie jumping…I like that. May be I can pack David Brooks parachute:

  2. ccoffer permalink
    2016/02/13 02:48

    Pretty sure twas that cretin P.J. O’Rourke who coined the “cordless bungee jumping” term. I’ve stolen it a few times over the years. Everyone should read everything he’s ever written.

  3. ccoffer permalink
    2016/02/14 14:18

    The democrats are going to nominate a Stalinist. Because I don’t despise my country, I’ll vote for whoever the other party nominates. I have children whose futures I care about.

    • 2016/02/14 14:38

      The senate won’t confirm anyone Obama puts up. At least that would be my plan if I was McConnell. They don’t have to.

  4. 2016/02/14 14:32

    I think there are too many people on both sides that want the job too badly and that’s a dangerous thing. I get a sense of entitlement and conceit from many of them. I mean bush is out spending all of them and getting 3-4%. The only reason I’d like to see Trump win is to stick it to the GOP machine, but I won’t vote for him. It’s not a long video, but it’s true or as Mark Twain said, if voting mattered, they’d make it illegal.

  5. 2016/02/14 14:39

    And if we cared about our children’s future, we wouldn’t be voting for the narcissistic psychopaths that we do. We’d also pressure our leaders not to confirm the likes of Boehner and Ryan. But we believe all the fairy tales and want to be on the winning team.

  6. ccoffer permalink
    2016/02/14 14:57

    Recognizing there are only two possibilities and that one is wildly better than the other is nothing but simple sanity.

    • 2016/02/14 15:10

      Chuck’s point is sound. Even when the choice is bad, one must note that one is voting for an administrative team.

      There are bound to be many choices made by a bad Republican president that are infinitely superior to those made by Hillary.

      Even if it’s Kasich – the lowest of the Republican low, IMHO – one could rationally vote for his team against Hillary’s any day.

      • 2016/02/14 15:40

        That assumes that there are no other choices that can possibly be made. There are The problem is that people aren’t willing to disconnect from tribal thinking and think for themselves and think rationally. They don’t have the balls to say none of the above.

      • 2016/02/14 15:48

        It isn’t about tribalism or balls. It is rational to choose the lesser of two evil choices, especially when one choice lacks good of any kind. There isn’t anything gutsy about walking away from a bad situation.

      • 2016/02/14 16:00

        It’s more gutsy than following the crowd. Ask the germans about it.

      • 2016/02/14 16:09

        For me, I’m not voting to be popular with the crowd, nor with anyone. I’m voting to defeat an evil, even if my vote is statistically garbage. I am doing what is rational in what I perceive to be in my own long-term self-interest. Hell, if more people in Europe had given a cr@p, the 20th century might have been a lot different, no?

        In any case, that puny vote isn’t a true discharge of responsibility. Next up: Article Five Convention of the States.

      • 2016/02/14 16:23

        If you wanted to defeat evil, either you wouldn’t vote or you’d write in. Neither party is without evil, if that’s your cause. It depends on how they apply it. GOP≠Good or Bad. Same with the Dems. It’s not a white hat/black hat situation. Getting elected is their highest goal, following through on promises and fairy tales are down the list.

      • 2016/02/14 16:29

        Fine, so I’ll write *you* in.

        : ]

      • 2016/02/14 17:27

        That’ll be two votes for me. 🙂 Oh yeah, I am writing in Scalia.

      • 2016/02/14 17:29

        I’ll switch my vote to Goldwater!

        ; ]

  7. ccoffer permalink
    2016/02/14 15:27

    I don’t mean it in jest when I say the only reason I vote is to vote against democrats. I’d love to have republicans that excite me and who I’m gung ho to get behind and support, but when it comes down to the reality we face, to require that in order to make a choice is childish in my view.

    • 2016/02/14 15:38

      And you are childish to believe your vote makes a difference in the general direction society and government are going. I don’t belong to either party. It’s superfluous. The only winners in an election are the politicians. Nothing major changes in my life for the most part. I still go to work and still have bills to pay. What I find facile is that Jeb says he’s going to make us secure and safe like his brother did. I don’t need that from uncle sam, certainly not in the way it’s been done, which was a power grab by the government with republicans in charge I might add. I’d like to see less government in my life, not more and I’ve gotten more regardless of whom is in the white house or congress/senate.

  8. ccoffer permalink
    2016/02/14 16:17

    Then why not simply find another hobby? You seem unable to grasp the logical implication of what you’re saying. It comes across as more a tantrum than any sort of coherent strategy.

    • 2016/02/14 16:27

      My strategy is that no matter what I vote, it doesn’t make a hill of beans. Not on the national level. In general, politicians are for themselves, first, second and third. Why should I support that? That said, this isn’t a hobby. More like the comics section of the newspaper.

  9. ccoffer permalink
    2016/02/15 17:29

    Solipsism isn’t just a river in Egypt, apparently.

  10. 2016/02/27 11:30

    Brooks is still alive?

    • 2016/02/28 01:40

      … and still being paid?

      Brooks’ comments come across as surreal: “Obama radiates an ethos of integrity, humanity, good manners and elegance that I’m beginning to miss, and that I suspect we will all miss a bit, regardless of who replaces him.” One almost expects Rod Serling to interrupt and tell us that Brooks is caught in a permanent waking dream.

      Great to hear from you Steven!

      • Libertarian Advocate permalink
        2016/03/11 00:21

        Permanent waking wet dream that is and we can certainly hazard a guess as to who stars in it with him [cough, cough].

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s