littleboxes
Squirrely you can't be serious?
David Brooks is at it again! Today he frames his article around the existence of two distinct groups. How can being a op-ed writer for the New York Times be so easy?
Apparently, unbeknownst to everyone but Mr. Brooks, the democratic party is divided into two groups, those that are inspired by Bill Clinton and those inspired by Newt Gingrich. If only they had known it was this simple they could have just locked those two in a room and the Dems could have reached a concensus. That is a pretty conservative democratic party!
Seriously, what is with David Brooks? Why, oh, why does he keep us awake at night with his incessant dichotomization (is that word?) of our lives?
Does anyone actually enjoy reading his articles?
Do people go about repeating such informative and incisive lines as "The Democratic Gingrichians are different." Or perhaps people fall more for lines such as "The problem with the neo-Gingrichians is that they have their history backward."
What does all of this mean?
"The truth is that Democrats probably need a leader who will make liberals feel uncomfortable, the way Clinton did, not someone who will make them feel righteous and good." Not so for the Republicans, Dave points out. We're glad we've had that clarified for us.
However, we don't really want anyone to feel righteous and good. Righteous and good about what? The Iraq war? Hating gay people? OK, not having to pay estate taxes?
NEW UPDATES TO LITTLEBOXES'S MUSIC AND LITTLEBOXES'S MOVIES
Meanwhile, people are still getting nailed in the nuts.
and...at the request of those staff members who are aroused by certain "members" of the male gender..
Apparently, unbeknownst to everyone but Mr. Brooks, the democratic party is divided into two groups, those that are inspired by Bill Clinton and those inspired by Newt Gingrich. If only they had known it was this simple they could have just locked those two in a room and the Dems could have reached a concensus. That is a pretty conservative democratic party!
Seriously, what is with David Brooks? Why, oh, why does he keep us awake at night with his incessant dichotomization (is that word?) of our lives?
Does anyone actually enjoy reading his articles?
Do people go about repeating such informative and incisive lines as "The Democratic Gingrichians are different." Or perhaps people fall more for lines such as "The problem with the neo-Gingrichians is that they have their history backward."
What does all of this mean?
"The truth is that Democrats probably need a leader who will make liberals feel uncomfortable, the way Clinton did, not someone who will make them feel righteous and good." Not so for the Republicans, Dave points out. We're glad we've had that clarified for us.
However, we don't really want anyone to feel righteous and good. Righteous and good about what? The Iraq war? Hating gay people? OK, not having to pay estate taxes?
NEW UPDATES TO LITTLEBOXES'S MUSIC AND LITTLEBOXES'S MOVIES
Meanwhile, people are still getting nailed in the nuts.
and...at the request of those staff members who are aroused by certain "members" of the male gender..
posted by littleboxes at 1:29 PM
2 Comments:
Is the hot guy a naked David Brooks? If so, I may be willing to forgive him for his idiocy. After all, there are guys who are hot, and those who are not. I like green eggs and ham, Sam I am.
Is the hot guy a naked David Brooks? If so, I may be willing to forgive him for his idiocy. After all, there are guys who are hot, and those who are not. I like green eggs and ham, Sam I am.
Post a Comment
<< Home