Posted on 10/08/2008 8:00:06 PM PDT by pissant
Does David Brooks even pretend to be a conservative anymore? Can we finally acknowledge that this man isn’t even remotely interested in what motivates outside the Beltway - or even inside the Beltway - conservatives? Here’s what Brooks had to say in a recent interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in the Atlantic:
[Sarah Palin] represents a fatal cancer to the Republican party. When I first started in journalism, I worked at the National Review for Bill Buckley. And Buckley famously said he’d rather be ruled by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. But he didn’t think those were the only two options. He thought it was important to have people on the conservative side who celebrated ideas, who celebrated learning. And his whole life was based on that, and that was also true for a lot of the other conservatives in the Reagan era. Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I’m afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices. I think President Bush has those prejudices.
What evidence is there that Sarah Palin “rejects ideas?” This is unquestionably one of the most snobbish opinions I have ever heard expressed by Brooks, or really anyone for that matter. He displays an absolutely irrational scorn for Governor Palin based on little more than his disapproval of what she represents. I am sympathetic to Brooks’ disdain for populism, but it is Brooks himself who has been promoting what can properly be called political populism. After all, it is Brooks who has done nothing but kiss Douthat and Salam’s asses over their “Party of Sam’s Club” thesis. It is Brooks who has continually called for a watering down of conservative principles over the years to the point where the views he upholds are barely distinguishable from moderate liberalism. Palin, on the other hand, expresses traditional conservative values - the values of Reagan and Buckley - more than anyone else currently running for President or Vice President, and it isn’t even close. In fact, other than Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter, she is arguably the most prominent traditional conservative to appear on the presidential scene in this cycle.
What’s even worse is that Brooks derides Palin’s lack of experience, and adds:
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.”
But yet he goes on to praise Barack Obama, who makes Sarah Palin look like Henry Clay in terms of experience. And why is Brooks so infatuated with Obama:
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.
Yeah, that’s right: Obama can regurgitate what an obscure political philosopher thought. Sure he also wants to provide federal funding for abortion, has no desire to protect children who survive abortion, promotes a socialist economic agenda, and formulated his political ideas at the knees of radicals and domestic terrorists, but hey - he reads Reinhold Niebuhr. What a guy.
Excuse me if I don’t find this all that persuasive. Then again, Brooks is also a guy who earlier in the interview said that John McCain and Barack Obama were “the two best candidates we’ve had in a long time.” Really? These guys are the best that we’ve had to offer in a “long time?” If your definition of a “long time” is four years, then yeah, maybe Brooks has a point. Otherwise, he just may be senile.
Conservatives have often fretted that other conservatives who go to work for institutions like the New York Times might “go native.” I don’t think we have to wonder anymore about David Brooks.
The homosexuals at the editorial board find it amusing to watch a feckless excuse for a conservative try to dance and prance around in a comical yet pathetic attempt at mimicking his liberal masters.
Sarah, God Bless her, is the future - the citizen public servant the Founders envisioned.
“Does David Brooks even pretend to be a conservative anymore?”
Sure he does—among liberal audiences.
No matter what happens during this election, Sarah will be president in four years and a few weeks.
It's the GOP who has cancer. She's radiation to GOP and Democrat corruption.
Hah! if *anyone should drop off the GOP ticket, it should be McCain. Romney should take his place. McCain is acting like a lion that is too old to fight for his pride. If he can’t/won’t fight for his pride, he should let a younger lion lead the way.
If the NYTs printed it, it’s likely a lie...or an act of treason.
“Go out and vote for Sarah. Drag McCain along with her, but elect Sarah as a big “SCREW YOU” to the Dems and the elitist conservatives who basically want you to live in a kind of cultural slavery, ruled by your “betters.””
BRAVO! THAT is exactly what I wish McCain would end his last debate with.
Wow. That must have taken the wave of a feather.
I believe that calling someone a “fatal cancer” is damn near an incitement to violence against that person.
I never really saw her so much as cancer-more like chemo or life saving surgery.
God, grant me the serenity
To accept the things I cannot change
Courage to change the things I can and
Wisdom to know the difference.
I have it written on my bathroom wall.
God grant me the self control to not backhand the little fairy David Brooks if I meet him.
Brooks is clueless. Sarah Palin's father was a school teacher and her mother was a school administrator.
You don't have to have connections with an elite school to celebrate learning, but it is worth noting that Sarah Palin has a deeper connection to Harvard than Obama, given that her 12-great-uncle was the first President of Harvard College (wayback in the 1600's when it was a decent school).
What really bothers Brooks is that Sarah is not a mealy-mouthed moderate like himself (and McCain).
Some of the most intellectually gifted individuals I have ever known are, for all intents & purposes, useless. Useless to themselves and useless to society.
Mr. Brooks fits nicely into that category.
I don’t understand how anyone can take Brooks seriously. I think The Atlantic was just looking for a fake Republican to interview.
A Governor who actually gets things done and helps the people of her State. That’s a fatal cancer, all right. That’s death to everything the Washington establishment holds dear.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.