Posts
Look, I am on record as having hated David Brooks ever since "National Greatness," his idiotic 1997 expedition into asinine Big Government Republicanism. No one could ever exceed my limitless contempt for that elitist four-eyed neurasthenic wussyboy.However, "many hands make light work," and the Brooksian capacity to inspire enmity has spawned a legion of emulative Brooks-haters, including one praiseworthy Red State diarist:
"For the life of me, I cannot understand why all of those bitter, xenophobic, Bible-thumping clingers love O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Beck and Hannity so much—particularly Limbaugh and Beck. I mean, why do hayseeds love those two chubby, former addicts more than me?! Don't they all know that I am the favorite "conservative" of the liberal elites? Sure, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck might all have sky-high ratings and millions of listeners/viewers (and Beck has unheard of ratings for an afternoon slot), but I write for The New York Freaking Times!! And, I'm frequently on Meet the Press and PBS (shows so prestigious that they do not need actual viewers) -- and people who listen to NPR love me (they can listen to me and get a free tote bag). That's got to mean something . . .Read the whole hilarious thing. And hit my tip jar, for I am the Professor who tutors these neophytes in the advanced art of Brooks-hating.
Loved that!
ReplyDeleteYou know, Brooks' blathering about "national greatness" reminds me of the Zucker/Abrahams 1984 (!) spy spoof "Top Secret Nation," starring Val Kilmer. The same lunatics who brought us "Airplane!" created an eeeevil East German regime that was both Nazi and Communist. That farcical regime is what Neocons like Brooks envision for America, a parody of a real, historical nation that blends communist egalitarianism with Nazi-style "national greatness." The result, of course, will be the "energetic government" Brooks dreams of (what we would call a tyranny) that is both militaristic and embraces tolerance. That's why Brooks just adores open borders as much as he supports continuous war in the name of "benevolent global hegemony." Yuk!
I thought you said you were the Andrea Mitchell Professor of Progressive Gynecological Studies at Harvard Medical School and a finalist for a 2009 Lasker Prize for a paper titled 'Pussy and Peanut Butter'.
ReplyDeleteWas that some other McCain?
Suzi is a phenomenal blogger, she consistently hits it out of the park.
ReplyDelete