Subscribe via RSS Feed

Bobo Wants Protestors Who Are Half Joe Camel and a Third Fonzarelli

[ 64 ] October 12, 2011 |

Jamelle has dealt with Bobo’s hilarious attempt to get in on Friedman’s radical centrist racket, but there’s a bit I can’t help but quote.     As Jamelle says, Brooks is contemptuous about the Occupy Wall Street supporters because they’re not radical — why, they don’t even seem to embrace Brezhnevomics.   They abjure new paradigms, have thrown boldness under the bus, and they’re certainly not thinking outside of my box.   We need a game-changer.  On steroids!   So who is the great sage Bobo would have us turn our lonely eyes towards?

Look, for example, at a piece Matt Miller wrote for The Washington Post called “The Third Party Stump Speech We Need.” Miller is a former McKinsey consultant and Clinton staffer. But his ideas are much bigger than anything you hear from the protesters: slash corporate taxes and raise energy taxes, aggressively use market forces and public provisions to bring down health care costs; raise capital requirements for banks; require national service; balance the budget by 2018.

Now that’s bold, new thinking — a bunch of reheated center-right mush featured seven days a week on Fred Hiatt’s crayon scribble page, married to third party dreaming that betrays a remarkable ignorance about how American political institutions function. Now that’s big!

Share with Sociable

Comments (64)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. actor212 says:

    Maybe he needs to head down to the Applebee’s salad bar and do some serious investigavtive journalism.

  2. So, pretty much the 2005 version of John McCain.

  3. Warren Terra says:

    No one could have predicted that BoBo’s bold centrist policy prescription would involve comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted – i.e., a plan that lowers taxes on the wealthy and raises them on the working classes.

    Oh, and magic mumbo-jumbo (likely consisting of reduced coverage for the poor) will make health care affordable, and we can draft their asses.

    I swear, the only real question left is whether we’re headed full-speed for the late 19th century as the Tea Party and Brooks want, or for the 14th century like the American Taliban want. This is the secret to Perry’s appeal: the way he numbers centuries he can split the difference.

  4. c u n d gulag says:

    Bobo’s an inane drone.

    If I have to read them, I prefer my members of the Conservative Clown Car Pundit Posse to be historically, hysterically wrong, like Bill ‘Wrong-again’ Kristol.
    At least he’s good for some shits and giggles!

    • Sounds like a National Review fan.

      Oh, Victor David Hanson, you’re so brilliant! Tell me again about how wining One Big Battle against Saddam’s military will make all the Muslims want to be just like us.

      • c u n d gulag says:

        My all-time favorite “Wrong-again” Kristol moment was when, despite almost 15 centuries of history and evidence, he assured everyone that there would be no sectarian violence between Shia and Sunni in Iraq after Saddam Hussein was deposed.

        Nope, not gonna happen!

        And there are no nervous lambs sleeping next to lions.
        Yankee and Red Sox fans are like brothers.
        And the Hatfields/McCoys are really all just one big happy family.

  5. CJColucci says:

    It’s probably too late, but what if we all just ignored David Brooks?

  6. david mizner says:

    It’s even worse than that. Those protestors are so tired in their thinking they embrace the oldest of ideas, Jew-hate:

    This uprising was sparked by the magazine Adbusters, previously best known for the 2004 essay, “Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?” — an investigative report that identified some of the most influential Jews in America and their nefarious grip on policy.

    I mean, not only don’t they want to scrap entitlements, they hate Jews!

  7. jsmdlawyer says:

    Matt Miller? THE Matt Miller? That guy makes oatmeal look all, like, razzle dazzle. I tried reading that column that Bobo loves in the dead tree edition of the Post, and I nodded off in the third paragraph. Seriously, it was a major face plant, right into the couch. And it was like 6:45 in the morning. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

    Someone needs to take all these Third Way, No Labels and whatever other BS organizations and put their 47 point plans in a blender, press puree and just get one mega pile of oatmeal. Won’t taste any better and won’t keep me awake, but at least I’ll only nod off once instead of every time Fred Hiatt decides to indulge his inner Bloomberg.

  8. Boudleaux says:

    They abjure new paradigms, have thrown boldness under the bus, and they’re certainly not thinking outside of my box. We need a game-changer. On steroids!

    Perhaps the best string of nauseating au courant cliches ever, especially with the paradigm abjuring. Can’t walk down the street without hearing that one.

    Oh well. It is what it is. I continue to look for an opportunity to disagree with someone when he says that. X does not equal x.

  9. IM says:

    Stop your discussion, it is decided.

    Even-the-liberal-New-Republic has weighed in:

    http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/96062/occupy-wall-street-zizek-lewis

    So listen to reasonable liberals and stay away from the rabble at Wall Street.

  10. Perfect description

    There are people who believe that the primary reason David Brooks has a newspaper column is to make George Effing Will read like Mike Royko. Turns out there’s another reason. David Brooks runs a sewage-treatment plant. He takes the unrefined excrement of the right, runs it through his delicate sensibilities, filters out the really awful bits, and produces a clear, neutral-smelling liquid that you can spread on your garden and watch the pansies grow. It is advisable not to drink it, however.

    Read more: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/#ixzz1ablP83gM

  11. Tom M says:

    The comments on Brooks’ article did let him have it and they were the ones that made it through the Times monitors. He likely doesn’t care. Gail Collins assured him it was another great column.

  12. Erik Loomis says:

    When I read Brooks’ column late last night I thought, this is the stupidest thing he’s ever written. And that’s not a low bar. I thought about posting something but realized that a) I had nothing more to say except that it was stupid and b) Lemieux would be more amusing in saying that very thing.

  13. MKS says:

    “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for!”

    “We are the 99%!”

    So, is the 99% waiting for the 99%? Is the search that hard? Is this the Silent Majority?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.