See Dick Spin

NY Times ^ | March 27, 2004 | DAVID BROOKS

[ThePythonicCow]

Amazing - utterly amazing. Did the NYTimes really print this?

If so, then Clarke is toast -- burnt and charred.

[ThePythonicCow]

There's plenty of blame to go around.

Well, at least it still has a token nod to the moral equivalence of the left. Good. My faith in the NYTimes has not been destroyed ;).

[Unam Sanctam]

David Brooks is their new token conservative.

[inkling]

David Brooks and Wm. Safire are the token conservatives in the Times stable.

[ThePythonicCow]

ah so

[neverdem]

For maybe more than a quarter century, Safire was there by his lonesome.

[MEG33]

How about David Brooks? He might be receptive to your research,too.We may hate it but the NYT has a big readership.

[MamaLucci]

It's about damn time the Bush Administration got in the mud with them, Mr. Brooks....that's where the pigs operate. What would you have Bush and Co. do, be slandered by this Clarke character and his cohorts at the DNC (and that includes most of the press)and continue to turn the other cheek? This is war, and our side had better learn to street brawl.

[MEG33]

Brooks does Clarke in.

[nopardons]

Ahhhhhhhh...goody! Will now go read the article. :-)

[LdSentinal]

Amazing - utterly amazing. Did the NYTimes really print this?

Yes, but they printed it for Saturday's edition. Saturday is usually the lowest circulation of any day of the week.

It would have been amazing if the Al-Queda Times printed it for it's Sunday edition.

[nopardons]

Holy cow....THIS is in the N.Y. Times? What a blockbuster!

hey raloxk, your LIBERAL pals don't find little Dickie Clarke any more credible than I do. LOL

[Qwinn]

Are you guys kidding? Did you miss this bit?

"Most important, the administration deserves blame. Instead of focusing on the substantive commission reports and treating Clarke with the back of its hand, the Bush administration got right in the mud with him."

MOST IMPORTANT, THE ADMINISTRATION DESERVES BLAME.

Yes, in the end, it was still mostly Bush's fault.

One does have to wonder, exactly how one would treat Clarke "with the back of its hand" in any way that would not also be interpreted as getting "right in the mud with him".

Qwinn

[neverdem]

your LIBERAL pals don't find little Dickie Clarke any more credible than I do.

David Brooks is no liberal. Before the Times and not long after the Jayson Blair affair, he wrote for The Weekly Standard. His opponent on PBS's The News Hour, every Friday for at least a couple of years, is Mark Shields, the well known rat cheerleader and honcho on CNN's Capital Gang.

[Fledermaus]

Brooks is their "token conservative" they brought on a few months ago to blunt the criticism they are nothing but left wing shrills after the Jayson Blair fiasco.

And even he's more a David Gergen "moderate" conservative.

I guess it's better than nothing but it's like a bandaid on a cracking dam of bias.

[Fledermaus]

Brooks is no liberal, but he's not a conservative. He's more of the David Gergen type. They think they are "moderate" and "pragmatic" and skewer both sides like they are the same.

Many times Brooks can't see the difference when it's clear.

[nopardons]

But he's in the ultra/ubber lefty Liberal N.Y.Slimes and it was to that I was referring. But thanks for the head's up and background on Brooks.I haven't watched Mark Shields in many years.

[Fledermaus]

Shields is a joke. He consistently foams at the mouth with his arrogant lies. I wish Bob Novak would reach over and b-slap him on the "Capital Gang" (and I wish Kate O'Beirne would kick Al Hunt in the balls and beat Margaret Carlson silly and wipe that smug smirk off her face when she thinks she's being clever).

Shields is a two-faced liar. On the year-end show in 1995 he predicted Clinton would NOT get re-elected in 1996 and every year after that he tried to pretend he never said it.

He's a worthless scumbag...oh wait, that would be degrading to bags full of scum.

[nopardons]

You've mentioned shows that I haven't watched in years and years. I see that NOTHING has changed,at all, since I stopped watching them.:-)

And I share your feelings about those you've mentioned;but then, we do tend to be in complete agreement about so much.