Tuesday, October 30, 2012

David Brooks writes a column about why Romney is better than Obama:

 He says that because the Republicans in the House will oppose Obama, but Democrats in the Senate (and Republicans in the House) will work with Romney, that Romney should be president. That's triggered a lot of responses. Kevin Drum says it amounts to giving in to hostage-takers. Over at Twitter, there is this slew of tweets from Jamelle Bouie (that also review Brooks' earlier endorsements):

Shorter David Brooks: "We should elect Mitt Romney because he's actually lying to all of us."

Also, you should believe my unsubstantiated claim that he will be the most wonderful, moderate president ever.

David Brooks is paid a lot of money to develop ever more convoluted reasons for voting Republican.

More Shorter Brooks: “Yes, congressional Republicans are holding the country hostage, which is why we should *give in* and elect Romney.”

Dear New York Times — I can write the same inane endorsements of Republican politicians for a fraction of the cost of Brooks. Hire me!

If David Brooks is going to endorse a fictional politician, he might as well go with someone awesome, like Optimus Prime.

Optimus Prime is  is a character from the Transformers franchise.

Seriously, read Brooks’ column and replace all mentions of “Mitt Romney” with “Optimus Prime.” It sounds infinity times more plausible.

“To get re-elected in a country with a rising minority population and a shrinking Republican coalition…”

“Optimus Prime’s shape-shifting nature would induce him to govern as a center-right moderate.”

“Optimus Prime is more of a flexible flip-flopper than Obama.”

Verbatim David Brooks in 2000: We should elect Bush because he is “a very nice guy who likes people.” 

This is the head for Brooks' Salon article:

George W. Bush should be president
Forget his image as a callous, empty-headed frat boy. People like him, and that means he'll attract and retain the best minds.

And what is Brooks’ case against Gore, you ask? “He is a deeply un-nice man.” If only I could be so thoughtful and intelligent.

In 2004, David Brooks thought that John Kerry’s flip-flopping was reason enough to mock and ridicule him.

So, just so we’re clear: In 2000, Brooks wanted you to support Bush because he was a nice man with good advisors.

In 2004, he wants you to reject Kerry because he is a flip-flopper with too many advisers.

In 2008, we should go with Obama because c’mon, no one wants to side with losers.

And in 2012, we should choose Mitt Romney b/c he is a shameless, flip-flopping opportunist who might be lying to us about what he’ll do.

For his 2016 endorsement, David Brooks will just shit on your doorstep. And tell you to vote for Chris Christie.


One of Andrew Sullivan's arguments (pleas) to vote for Obama is to stick it to the Republicans that have been holding the country hostage.

Come on lets wipe the smirk off of McConnell's face.

By Anonymous Rockie the Dog, at 10/30/2012 4:20 PM  

Post a Comment