Re: Brooks Birdcaged - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Re: Brooks Birdcaged

Jeri Thompson is right. David Brooks’ snobbery knows no bounds. Not only that, but he treats facts as malleable assets to be re-massaged by his own eminence without regard to their, well, actual factual-ness. For instance, Brooks writes:” “Before long, South Carolina looms as the crucial point of the race. The contest is effectively between Romney and McCain.”

Uh, well, no. Not even close. The South Carolina primary was effectively a contest between McCain and HUCKABEE, not Romney. Here are the results of that primary: McCain 33%, Huckabee 30%, Fred Thompson 16%, Romney 15%. Uh…. that sort of throws Brooks’ whole convenient narrative out the window. Fred Thompson, who had stumbled, still was able to relegate Romney to 4th place. Romney did not become a favorite of the talk radio until AFTER McCain became the clear front-runner, and then only in reaction to McCain — who already by then was close to a lock. But in South Carolina, the race was seen as one where McCain was the anti-conservative and the other three were splitting various portions of the conservative electorate (even though Huckabee really isn’t a conservative, and Romney is only partially one, but that’s another story). The real story was that McCain, coming off of his big win in New Hampshire, was held to 33 percent while the “conservatives” combined, with the backing of talk radio, garnered 61 percent.

There was a time when Brooks wasn’t such a cultural snob. There was a time when he liked Rush Limbaugh enough to include a piece by him in an anthology that Brooks edited. I wish I had a link, but here’s the summary: Backward and Upward: The New Conservative Writing, edited with an introduction by David Brooks (Vintage, $ 13). Rush Limbaugh the Falstaff of conservatism? And Brooks did not mean it as an insult; instead, to cite a Wikipedia analysis of Falstaff, it was in the sense that “Falstaff has a unique, and undeniable depth of character. Beneath Falstaff’s contagious panache, he is a Homeric burlesque, an iconoclast, a philosopher, and a paradox.”

Brooks was APPROVINGLY reprinting this Limbaugh essay: Why Libverals Fear Me. But that was before David Brooks got high and mighty, hobnobbing with the House Organ of the Left, the NYT. What a hypocrite.

Before I even saw Jeri Thompson’s blog entry, I already was in a rage at Brooks’ snotty column. She’s right: It ought to be birdcaged.

Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The American Spectator, 122 S Royal Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314, You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!