Left Behinds

The anti-andrewsullivan.com. Or, the Robin Hood (Maid Marian?) of bright pink Blogger blogs.

Friday, October 06, 2006

Somebody around here claimed David Brooks wasn't as dumb as Thomas Friedman

I propose that when he appears to be even a little smart, he's just coughing up Washington-cocktail-party CW. When he thinks about things on his own, it comes out really stupid. Remember, he's responsible for the whole Red America/Blue America idea, which is substantively false even if it appears superficially compelling.

Either that or he's deliberately disingenuous all the time. I don't think that's a distinction that matters. Both are performatively stupid.


  • At 4:06 PM, Blogger Solomon Grundy said…

    i'm going with deliberately disingenuous.

    btw, sorru i've been silent, but just moved and don't have home internet until next week...

  • At 1:51 PM, Blogger Antid Oto said…

    That's why I compared him to Friedman. Both are shills to roughly the same swath of intellectuals for ideas with little popular support: neoliberalism for Friedman, neoconservatism for Brooks. Both have sold that swath of intellectuals ideas that are idiotic on their faces but that serve some need of that elite. Both have prose styles that set the teeth on edge. One could argue that Friedman is in fact merely a better propagandist than Brooks because he's convinced even you that he believes his own tripe. I prefer to argue that they're both simply dumb.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com