david brooks vs. thomas friedman vs. ross douthat

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (219 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

^^^ sounds like infidelity

also, aren't we voting for the worst?

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 00:46 (4 years ago) Permalink

yes

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 00:47 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

Brooks would win on photos alone

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 00:50 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

douthat's face def bothers me the most

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:00 (4 years ago) Permalink

motherfucker just looks SOFT

demolition with discretion (m coleman), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:02 (4 years ago) Permalink

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

bnw, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:04 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

Douthat still thinks it's 1995.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:07 (4 years ago) Permalink

Jonah Goldberg has the same delusion.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:07 (4 years ago) Permalink

i was hoping this thread title was something that happened.

goole, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:10 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

that's right

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:23 (4 years ago) Permalink

a concern troll then; how innovative

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:25 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

your doppelganger

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:26 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

krugman is a very good writer

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:38 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

lol ross douchehat

i don't believe in zimmerman (Hurting 2), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:47 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

douthat = least stupid/ most hateful

it's smdh time in America (will), Friday, 20 April 2012 01:57 (4 years ago) Permalink

krugman = shrill
brooks/douthat = reasonable

does this perception hurt k-thug or not?

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:57 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

haha otm

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:59 (4 years ago) Permalink

interested in reducing them to a catch phrase?

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 01:59 (4 years ago) Permalink

THE WORLD IS NOT FLAT; SHUT UP

mookieproof, Friday, 20 April 2012 02:00 (4 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 (4 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 (4 years ago) Permalink

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

iatee, Friday, 20 April 2012 02:05 (4 years ago) Permalink

yeah, poor phrasing on my part

balls, Friday, 7 February 2014 18:24 (2 years ago) Permalink

acc to the article linked the reporters don't like the op-eds or the editorial page

Mordy , Friday, 7 February 2014 18:25 (2 years ago) Permalink

balls, Friday, 7 February 2014 19:40 (2 years ago) Permalink

Murgatroid, that link is priceless.

Aimless, Friday, 7 February 2014 19:48 (2 years ago) Permalink

god the suffering that you have to be willing to endure to put something like that together

balls, Friday, 7 February 2014 19:48 (2 years ago) Permalink

"All my life I’ve been a successful pseudo-intellectual."

marcos, Friday, 7 February 2014 20:03 (2 years ago) Permalink

his lack of self awareness is breathtaking.

nothing a reincarnated ronnie james dio couldn't fix (brimstead), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:11 (2 years ago) Permalink

Said forty seconds ago on NPR: "This is the problem with democracies. If we lived in a country run by elites, which I believe we should, we would" etc

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 7 February 2014 21:17 (2 years ago) Permalink

woooowwwww

lag∞n, Friday, 7 February 2014 21:59 (2 years ago) Permalink

he shd be murdered not because he deserves it or anything just as a prank

lag∞n, Friday, 7 February 2014 22:02 (2 years ago) Permalink

"I was speaking out in Minnesota — my hometown, in fact — and a guy stood up in the audience, said, 'Mr. Friedman, is there any free trade agreement you’d oppose?' I said, 'No, absolutely not.' I said, 'You know what, sir? I wrote a column supporting the CAFTA, the Caribbean Free Trade initiative. I didn’t even know what was in it. I just knew two words: free trade.'"

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/opinion/sunday/friedman-start-up-america-our-best-hope.html

TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Sunday, 16 February 2014 08:17 (2 years ago) Permalink

"speaking out"

i want to say one word to you, just one word:buzzfeed (difficult listening hour), Sunday, 16 February 2014 18:31 (2 years ago) Permalink

Minnesota isnt a town iirc

lag∞n, Sunday, 16 February 2014 18:41 (2 years ago) Permalink

it's a village

mookieproof, Sunday, 16 February 2014 18:51 (2 years ago) Permalink

it takes a village to create friedmans

Bryan Fairy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Sunday, 16 February 2014 18:52 (2 years ago) Permalink

7 months pass...

unfuckingbelievable

zombie formalist (m coleman), Tuesday, 30 September 2014 12:12 (1 year ago) Permalink

spiritual experiments led by the charismatic and the zealous are essential to religious creativity and fruitful change. From the Franciscans to the Jesuits, groups that looked cultlike to their critics have repeatedly revitalized the Catholic Church, and a similar story can be told about the role of charismatic visionaries in the American experience. (The enduring influence of one of the 19th century’s most despised and feared religious movements, for instance, is the reason the state of Utah now leads the United States on many social indicators.)

challenge for ross douthat: name fruitful change or innovation resulting from outliers jim jones, reverend moon, l-ron hubbard, chas manson

zombie formalist (m coleman), Tuesday, 30 September 2014 12:17 (1 year ago) Permalink

this column is formulaic recycling, cherry-picked from others work (a time honored and lazy journalistic ploy when the till is empty come deadline). no surprise that douthat quotes philip jenkins who dismissed the 70s cult phenomena as hysteria fueled by secular media. i think jenkins argument is disingenuous and politically motivated. what's forgotten in this revisionist argument is the extreme psychological manipulation that was a defining characteristic of 70s-style charismatic cults. the human toll, lives ruined and personalities exploded, not to mention the suicide victims in jonestown who douthat somehow never mentions.

zombie formalist (m coleman), Tuesday, 30 September 2014 12:24 (1 year ago) Permalink

what has happened, from the post-moon unification church to the second-string cult a relative of mine is involved with, seems to be a backing off from the sick controlling nature of the groups (due to decades of bad publicity) and a subsequent mainstreaming of former fringe elements.

zombie formalist (m coleman), Tuesday, 30 September 2014 12:27 (1 year ago) Permalink

Thiel’s argument is broader: Not only religious vitality but the entirety of human innovation, he argues, depends on the belief that there are major secrets left to be uncovered, insights that existing institutions have failed to unlock (or perhaps forgotten), better ways of living that a small group might successfully embrace.

This means that every transformative business enterprise, every radical political movement, every truly innovative project contains some cultish elements and impulses — and the decline of those impulses may be a sign that the innovative spirit itself is on the wane. When “people were more open to the idea that not all knowledge was widely known,” Thiel writes, there was more interest in groups that claimed access to some secret knowledge, or offered some revolutionary vision. But today, many fewer Americans “take unorthodox ideas seriously,” and while this has clear upsides — “fewer crazy cults” — it may also be a sign that “we have given up our sense of wonder at secrets left to be discovered.”

correct implication to draw, that the tech-startup boom has evidently been trying to exploit our latent willingness to follow cults, and that 'managerial capitalism' is becoming (again) a cult that increasingly permeates all interactions at all levels of society

j., Tuesday, 30 September 2014 12:38 (1 year ago) Permalink

we have given up our sense of wonder at secrets left to be discovered, families left to be abandoned, life savings left to be handed over.

lag∞n, Tuesday, 30 September 2014 13:42 (1 year ago) Permalink

new flavors of kool-aid to have people wonder whether we have drunk

j., Tuesday, 30 September 2014 23:38 (1 year ago) Permalink

Ross DO THAT

calstars, Wednesday, 1 October 2014 02:01 (1 year ago) Permalink

ross DOUBT IT

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

fuck douting a hat

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

1 year passes...

tricky dick we hardly knew ye

where to begin

an emotionally withholding exterminator (m coleman), Sunday, 22 November 2015 14:16 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 months ago) Permalink

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

aaaaablnnn (abanana), Sunday, 22 November 2015 15:40 (8 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 (8 months ago) Permalink

3 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 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 (4 months ago) Permalink

such a fucking prig

rmde bob (will), Sunday, 6 March 2016 23:50 (4 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 (4 months ago) Permalink


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