david brooks vs. thomas friedman vs. ross douthat

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (243 of them)

i assume that brooks and douthat have a sinister purpose behind everything they write, so while i no doubt disagree, it at least makes sense.

friedman just seems clueless and is a terrible writer. 'my cab driver in cairo' etc good lord.

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 00:39 (four years ago) Permalink

well the clueless head in the clouds thing is what makes it marginally more defensible, like he's just this crazy guy talking to you on the bus

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 00:41 (four years ago) Permalink

Friedman the crazy guy on the bus talking nonsense whilst drooling on his overcoat also has the ear of the President and a shockingly large number of Democratic movers and shakers. that's why i voted for him.

a big fat fucking fat guy in a barrel what could be better? (Eisbaer), Friday, 20 April 2012 00:44 (four years ago) Permalink

I'll be the contrarian and say Douthat, the only one who creates the blip of an impression that he's read other things besides editorials and policy statements. Also, I saw him in the queer part of Dupont Circle in 2009 in the company of what looked like a Provincetown bartender.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 00:45 (four years ago) Permalink

^^^ sounds like infidelity

also, aren't we voting for the worst?

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 00:46 (four years ago) Permalink

yes

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 00:47 (four years ago) Permalink

Friedman's latest column is a masterpiece of cowardice and stupidity:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/opinion/friedman-one-for-the-country.html?_r=1

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 00:47 (four years ago) Permalink

I'll vote for Friedman as worst because he's taken most seriously. The right wing doesn't even take Brooks seriously.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 00:47 (four years ago) Permalink

voted Douthat cause i hate the way he couches intolerant/ugly sentiments in the deceptive rhetoric of "reason" and "balance"

demolition with discretion (m coleman), Friday, 20 April 2012 00:48 (four years ago) Permalink

alfred OTM on what makes Friedman the worst of this entire sorry lot.

a big fat fucking fat guy in a barrel what could be better? (Eisbaer), Friday, 20 April 2012 00:50 (four years ago) Permalink

Brooks would win on photos alone

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 00:50 (four years ago) Permalink

ross is "known" in conservative circles for his impeccable sense of style

demolition with discretion (m coleman), Friday, 20 April 2012 00:56 (four years ago) Permalink

douthat's face def bothers me the most

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:00 (four years ago) Permalink

motherfucker just looks SOFT

demolition with discretion (m coleman), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:02 (four years ago) Permalink

brooks is the worst. friedman is ok minus the globalization shtick.

bnw, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:04 (four years ago) Permalink

Douthat looks like a late 30-something version of Paul Dano's character from the extra man.

a big fat fucking fat guy in a barrel what could be better? (Eisbaer), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:06 (four years ago) Permalink

Douthat still thinks it's 1995.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:07 (four years ago) Permalink

Jonah Goldberg has the same delusion.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:07 (four years ago) Permalink

i was hoping this thread title was something that happened.

goole, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:10 (four years ago) Permalink

what is douthat's shtick, as compared to brooks' red/blue staters are like *this* and friedman's absurd metaphors that lead nowhere?

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:10 (four years ago) Permalink

He's a Christian whose hands shake at the suspicion that libs might think he hates gays and women.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:13 (four years ago) Permalink

he's not one of those republican extremists - heavens - tho he takes pains to diplomatically point out how liberals/women/gays/muslims/etc bring problems on themselves

demolition with discretion (m coleman), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:18 (four years ago) Permalink

that's right

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:23 (four years ago) Permalink

a concern troll then; how innovative

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:25 (four years ago) Permalink

if forced at gunpoint to read one of the three every day for the rest of my life i'd still choose douthat

friedman... just pull the trigger

yologram (J0rdan S.), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:26 (four years ago) Permalink

your doppelganger

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:26 (four years ago) Permalink

while we also talk about their merits as writers, how about we also turn this into a MFK thread?

yologram (J0rdan S.), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:27 (four years ago) Permalink

when i was working a (very good and non-depressing) temp job at a financial planning group, the well meaning 50 something jewish libs frequently discussed friedman columns in reverent hushed tones... first time i'd ever heard anyone irl bring dude up as a serious columnist

yologram (J0rdan S.), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:29 (four years ago) Permalink

voted Douthat cause i hate the way he couches intolerant/ugly sentiments in the deceptive rhetoric of "reason" and "balance"

― demolition with discretion (m coleman), Thursday, April 19, 2012 8:48 PM (43 minutes ago)

^^

pleural eff u son (k3vin k.), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:34 (four years ago) Permalink

i still find that less distasteful (or at least more garden variety) than friedman's schtick

yologram (J0rdan S.), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:36 (four years ago) Permalink

all three are vile of course

NYT doesn't really have any 'very good' writers as columnists. i mean krugman's always worth a read but even following charles m blow on twitter has tempered my like of him

pleural eff u son (k3vin k.), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:37 (four years ago) Permalink

krugman is a very good writer

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:38 (four years ago) Permalink

i'd heard that 'from beirut to jerusalem' was good, but find it a little hard to credit now -- perhaps the subject matter restrained him from making it an archetypical global fable, as with everything else?

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:38 (four years ago) Permalink

yeah i changed my mind after i wrote his name and didn't bother to change my first statement haha xp

pleural eff u son (k3vin k.), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:39 (four years ago) Permalink

charles m blow seems ripe for display name puns, now that i think of it

pleural eff u son (k3vin k.), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:39 (four years ago) Permalink

The late William Safire was the only one who could occasionally write a sentence I'd read twice.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:45 (four years ago) Permalink

i agree that krugman is worth reading and i always do but i am often smh at the way he seems to be preaching to the choir, he takes such a hard line that even though he's right he sort of paints himself into an ideological corner that just inflames the right instead of engaging him

obv that's not entirely or even largely his fault but i feel like he's wielding a battle axe when should be using the rapier

the late great, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:46 (four years ago) Permalink

lol ross douchehat

i don't believe in zimmerman (Hurting 2), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:47 (four years ago) Permalink

brooks is like the bill gates looking dude in the back of newsweek who even though i am on the other side of the political spectrum i find myself agreeing with or at least appreciating the differing view cause his tone is measured

really love the loyal opposition guy though

the late great, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:49 (four years ago) Permalink

Krugman has given up on trying to talk w/ the shit-throwing baboons who call themselves conservatives these days. i don't blame him at all, it's really the most sensible approach.

i'll also stan for Nicholas Kristof.

a big fat fucking fat guy in a barrel what could be better? (Eisbaer), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:52 (four years ago) Permalink

Krugman is a classic example of a pundit with whom I agree often but whose prose is pedestrian at best (boy, does he love his rhetorical questions).

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:53 (four years ago) Permalink

douthat = least stupid/ most hateful

it's smdh time in America (will), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:57 (four years ago) Permalink

krugman = shrill
brooks/douthat = reasonable

does this perception hurt k-thug or not?

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:57 (four years ago) Permalink

friedman at the very least seems interested in interesting things

it's smdh time in America (will), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:59 (four years ago) Permalink

haha otm

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:59 (four years ago) Permalink

interested in reducing them to a catch phrase?

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:59 (four years ago) Permalink

THE WORLD IS NOT FLAT; SHUT UP

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 02:00 (four years ago) Permalink

^^haha fair enough. still, the other two (esp Douthat) are kind of just dicks. if you're going to be a dick, you'd better be right and/ or interesting

it's smdh time in America (will), Friday, 20 April 2012 02:02 (four years ago) Permalink

I feel like I could get thomas friedman to change his mind on a lot of things if you just framed it in the 'interesting thoughts about interesting things' way, and maybe if you dressed up a a taxi driver

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 02:03 (four years ago) Permalink

"what if universal health care...was an app?"

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 02:05 (four years ago) Permalink

ross DOUBT IT

lag∞n, Wednesday, 1 October 2014 02:50 (one year ago) Permalink

fuck douting a hat

my jaw left (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 1 October 2014 02:54 (one year ago) Permalink

one year passes...

tricky dick we hardly knew ye

where to begin

an emotionally withholding exterminator (m coleman), Sunday, 22 November 2015 14:16 (ten months ago) Permalink

reading the headline, i thought maybe ross would call for watergatesque sabotage of trump and/or carson

an emotionally withholding exterminator (m coleman), Sunday, 22 November 2015 14:18 (ten months ago) Permalink

as if the politics of racial division as practiced by republicans in 2015 isn't 100% pulled from the nixon playbook

an emotionally withholding exterminator (m coleman), Sunday, 22 November 2015 14:20 (ten months ago) Permalink

lmao douthat is so far out in left field, a devout catholic millennial who hates college but loves philosphy and nixon, this really is what the times shdve been looking for in its token conservative all along total irrelevance

lag∞n, Sunday, 22 November 2015 14:26 (ten months ago) Permalink

ikr!eagerly awaiting catholic convert ross "defender of the faith" douthat's review of spotlight

an emotionally withholding exterminator (m coleman), Sunday, 22 November 2015 14:44 (ten months ago) Permalink

Got really depressed when I saw the popup tell me that was my 10th free NYT article of 10 for this month

welltris (crüt), Sunday, 22 November 2015 15:00 (ten months ago) Permalink

pray to God, he'll give you an 11th free NYT article. Bishop Doutaht will intercede.

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Sunday, 22 November 2015 15:21 (ten months ago) Permalink

what's with the not-quite-austen first line

aaaaablnnn (abanana), Sunday, 22 November 2015 15:40 (ten months ago) Permalink

I thought it was a truth universally accepted that Democrats who want to be president want to be Ronald Reagan.

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Sunday, 22 November 2015 15:44 (ten months ago) Permalink

three months pass...

nope sorry this human-sized ambulatory scrotum is still The Worst

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/opinion/sunday/from-obama-to-trump.html?mwrsm=Email

rmde bob (will), Sunday, 6 March 2016 22:16 (six months ago) Permalink

Reminds me of Addison DeWitt: "You have a point. An idiotic one, but a point."

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Sunday, 6 March 2016 22:21 (six months ago) Permalink

no question the Obama people, understanding how social media works, have sold an image of the man that does correspond to every loathsome thing about the imperial presidency since 1945, but boomcrashpow 'that's how we got to Trump' is terrible fiction. I can imagine the delight on Brooks' editors face as they thought of the sharing/click possibilities.

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Sunday, 6 March 2016 22:23 (six months ago) Permalink

boomcrashpow 'that's how we got to Trump'

IN THAT PRESIDENT...

denies the existence of dark matter (difficult listening hour), Sunday, 6 March 2016 22:24 (six months ago) Permalink

If Obama proved that you can run a presidential campaign as an aspirational cult of personality, in which a Sarah Silverman endorsement counts for as much as a governor or congressman’s support, Trump is proving that you don’t need Silverman to shout “the Aristocrats!” and have people eat it up.

iatee, Sunday, 6 March 2016 23:46 (six months ago) Permalink

crazy that political kingmaker Sarah Silverman didn't even get an ambassadorship after all she did for Obama

iatee, Sunday, 6 March 2016 23:49 (six months ago) Permalink

such a fucking prig

rmde bob (will), Sunday, 6 March 2016 23:50 (six months ago) Permalink

James K. Polk wasn't on snapchat i'll tell you what

Option ARMs and de Man (s.clover), Monday, 7 March 2016 01:20 (six months ago) Permalink

five months pass...

Chapo Trap House picking apart Douthat's book is just wonderful.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Thursday, 1 September 2016 10:50 (four weeks ago) Permalink

That sounds fun, there a link?

6 god none the richer (m bison), Thursday, 1 September 2016 11:12 (four weeks ago) Permalink

Not updated nearly often enough, but hilarious: https://twitter.com/ralphdouthat

a 47-year-old chainsaw artist from South Carolina (Phil D.), Thursday, 1 September 2016 13:13 (four weeks ago) Permalink

They don't get to the book dissection for a little while, but the opening bit is good too.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Thursday, 1 September 2016 15:28 (four weeks ago) Permalink

This Chapo Trap House ep is excellent. Douthat is far more of a hyper-Catholic version of a David Mitchell character than I ever expected.

Sentient animated cat gif (kingfish), Monday, 12 September 2016 16:25 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Their earlier ep covering this is here:

https://m.soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-house/episode-3-freeway-ross-douthat-sailboat-dope

Sentient animated cat gif (kingfish), Monday, 12 September 2016 16:31 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Yeah listened to that one too, amazing.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 12 September 2016 17:06 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Honestly I've been listening to Chapo episodes like every day lately, so going through the old ones when there isn't a new one (I even signed on for the premium eps).

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 12 September 2016 18:38 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Ever since the internet I've kind of scratched my head at why these particular individuals, of all people, get paid so much money to opine about stuff every week

― Burt Stuntin (Hurting 2), Thursday, February 6, 2014 10:17 PM (two years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lol I feel like this kind of gets at what's good about Chapo, actually, it's like there's finally someone giving articulate voice to my bafflement at the punditocracy

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 12 September 2016 18:42 (two weeks ago) Permalink

was considering just starting a chapo thread. I feel like in the current ilx climate it wouldn't be very active though.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Tuesday, 13 September 2016 17:15 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Just incorporate it into the comedy podcasts thread? That's what I'm going to do

Sentient animated cat gif (kingfish), Tuesday, 13 September 2016 17:16 (two weeks ago) Permalink

yeah that makes sense

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Tuesday, 13 September 2016 17:17 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Oh boy:

OP-ED COLUMNIST
Clinton’s Samantha Bee Problem
963
SEPTEMBER 21, 2016
Ross Douthat
Ross Douthat
When the histories of the Trump era are written from exile in Justin Trudeau’s Canada, they will record that it was none other than Jimmy Fallon who brought down the republic.

Or so you might have thought, at least, listening the furious liberal reaction to Fallon’s willingness to treat Trump like any other late-night guest last week: kidding around with him, mussing up his combover and steering clear of anything that would convey to late-night television viewers that Trump is actually beyond the pale.

But the Democratic Party’s problem in the age of Trump isn’t really Jimmy Fallon. Its problem is Samantha Bee.

Not Bee alone, of course, but the entire phenomenon that she embodies: the rapid colonization of new cultural territory by an ascendant social liberalism.

The culture industry has always tilted leftward, but the swing toward social liberalism among younger Americans and the simultaneous surge of activist energy on the left have created a new dynamic, in which areas once considered relatively apolitical now have (or are being pushed to have) an overtly left-wing party line.

On late-night television, it was once understood that David Letterman was beloved by coastal liberals and Jay Leno more of a Middle American taste. But neither man was prone to delivering hectoring monologues in the style of the “Daily Show” alums who now dominate late night. Fallon’s apolitical shtick increasingly makes him an outlier among his peers, many of whom are less comics than propagandists — liberal “explanatory journalists” with laugh lines.

Some of them have better lines than others, and some joke more or hector less. But to flip from Stephen Colbert’s winsome liberalism to Seth Meyers’s class-clown liberalism to Bee’s bluestocking feminism to John Oliver’s and Trevor Noah’s lectures on American benightedness is to enter an echo chamber from which the imagination struggles to escape.

It isn’t just late-night TV. Cultural arenas and institutions that were always liberal are being prodded or dragged further to the left. Awards shows are being pushed to shed their genteel limousine liberalism and embrace the race-gender-sexual identity agenda in full. Colleges and universities are increasingly acting as indoctrinators for that same agenda, shifting their already-lefty consensus under activist pressure.

Meanwhile, institutions that were seen as outside or sideways to political debate have been enlisted in the culture war. The tabloid industry gave us the apotheosis of Caitlyn Jenner, and ESPN gave her its Arthur Ashe Award. The N.B.A., N.C.A.A. and the A.C.C. — nobody’s idea of progressive forces, usually — are acting as enforcers on behalf of gay and transgender rights. Jock culture remains relatively reactionary, but even the N.F.L. is having its Black Lives Matters moment, thanks to Colin Kaepernick.

For the left, these are clear signs of cultural gains, cultural victory. But the scale and swiftness of those victories have created two distinctive political problems for the Democratic Party.

First, within the liberal tent, they have dramatically raised expectations for just how far left our politics can move, while insulating many liberals from the harsh realities of political disagreement in a sprawling, 300-plus million person republic. Among millennials, especially, there’s a growing constituency for whom right-wing ideas are so alien or triggering, left-wing orthodoxy so pervasive and unquestioned, that supporting a candidate like Hillary Clinton looks like a needless form of compromise.

Thus Clinton’s peculiar predicament. She has moved further left than any modern Democratic nominee, and absorbed the newer left’s Manichaean view of the culture war sufficiently that she finds herself dismissing almost a quarter of the electorate as “irredeemable” before her donors. Yet she still finds herself battling an insurgency on her left flank, and somewhat desperately pitching millennials on her ideological bona fides.

At the same time, outside the liberal tent, the feeling of being suffocated by the left’s cultural dominance is turning voting Republican into an act of cultural rebellion — which may be one reason the Obama years, so good for liberalism in the culture, have seen sharp G.O.P. gains at every level of the country’s government.

This spirit of political-cultural rebellion is obviously crucial to Trump’s act. As James Parker wrote in The Atlantic, he’s occupying “a space in American politics that is uniquely transgressive, volatile, carnivalesque, and (from a certain angle) punk rock.” (The alt-right-ish columnist Steve Sailer made the punk rock analogy as well.) Like the Sex Pistols, Parker suggests, Trump is out to “upend the culture” — but in this case it’s the culture of institutionalized political correctness and John Oliver explaining the news to you, forever.

Trump’s extremism also limits his appeal, of course. But if liberals are fortunate to be facing a Johnny Rotten figure in this presidential campaign, they are still having real trouble putting him away … and if he were somewhat less volatile and bigoted and gross, liberalism would be poised to close its era of cultural ascendance by watching all three branches of government pass back into conservative hands.

Something like this happened once before: In the 1960s and 1970s, the culture shifted decisively leftward, but American voters shifted to the right and answered a cultural revolution with a political Thermidor.

That Nixon-Reagan rightward shift did not repeal the 1960s or push the counterculture back to a beatnik-hippie fringe. But it did leave liberalism in a curious place throughout the 1980s: atop the commanding heights of culture yet often impotent in Washington, D.C.

By nominating a Trump rather than a Nixon or a Reagan, the Republicans may have saved liberalism from repeating that trajectory. But it remains an advantage for the G.O.P., and a liability for the Democratic Party, that the new cultural orthodoxy is sufficiently stifling to leave many Americans looking to the voting booth as a way to register dissent.

(Pasted in full b/c fuck their paywall)

One of the better responses to this is from mr Andy Richter

(rocketcat) 🚀🐱 👑🐟 (kingfish), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 18:41 (one week ago) Permalink

When the histories of the Trump era are written from exile in Justin Trudeau’s Canada, they will record that it was none other than Jimmy Fallon who brought down the republic
When the histories of the Trump era are written from exile in Justin Trudeau’s Canada, they will record that it was none other than Jimmy Fallon who brought down the republic

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 18:47 (one week ago) Permalink

Richter tweeted a link to Douthat’s article on Wednesday morning, calling it “a tub of horses—”

andy is very good at succinct summary

dr. mercurio arboria (mh 😏), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 18:59 (one week ago) Permalink

Douhat seems concerned about something, but I'm damned if I can figure out what kind of a problem he is trying to define that needs to be solved, other than that Hillary Clinton and the democratic party are not as reactionary as much of the electorate and he kind of wishes they'd pander more to voters who feel asphyxiated by granting equal rights to blacks or gay people.

a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 19:02 (one week ago) Permalink

imo the problem is people who uncritically follow one news source and sit there sharing that as the only perspective, even if it's a comedy show that is based on commenting on news and politics, not being a primary reporter

it's an issue among many groups but pointing at a single comedy central show is even more reductive than pointing at fox news

not even going to attempt to imagine someone who only bases their opinion on douthat articles

dr. mercurio arboria (mh 😏), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 19:07 (one week ago) Permalink

Hey Ross

http://www.census.gov/popclock/

Anacostia Aerodrome (El Tomboto), Wednesday, 21 September 2016 19:09 (one week ago) Permalink

sadly just a stupid fallon "satire"

Mordy, Friday, 23 September 2016 21:11 (one week ago) Permalink

david thomas vs. brooks friedman

a confederacy of lampreys (rushomancy), Friday, 23 September 2016 21:21 (one week ago) Permalink

I follow Ross on twitter now, and it's fun. He's eminently clownable but less hateable than the other two.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Friday, 23 September 2016 21:26 (one week ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.