i can't stop picturing him doing it in his socks help
― sent from my butt (harbl), Sunday, 16 March 2014 02:48 (ten years ago) link
no judgements here this is a safe space
― lag∞n, Sunday, 16 March 2014 02:49 (ten years ago) link
lol I was staring at his NYTimes photo and thinking how disturbing it would be if his face just stayed that way all the time, during sex, at dinner, on the toilet, at a baseball game, etc., and then I was like "no, that can't be, it's probably just a weird photo," but then I GISed him and it's true.
― james franco tur(oll)ing test (Hurting 2), Monday, 17 March 2014 02:45 (ten years ago) link
There are pictures of him having sex and on the toilet?
― brains hangin (GOTT PUNCH II HAWKWINDZ), Monday, 17 March 2014 02:58 (ten years ago) link
i don't think his appearance, voice, or mannerisms are creepy fwiw. don't like his columns at all though.
― Treeship, Monday, 17 March 2014 03:03 (ten years ago) link
not creepy, definitely a dick
― purposely lend impetus to my HOOS (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Tuesday, 18 March 2014 06:27 (ten years ago) link
Sting reminds us all that sometimes you have to gaze back into the past in order to move forward.
Saw this in a NY Times email this morning but have yet to force myself to read the article. Can see Brooks admiring and/or being envious of Sting.
― curmudgeon, Friday, 21 March 2014 13:16 (ten years ago) link
Saw an excerpt that describes songs exploding from sting's head iank.
― a nation filled with lead (Hunt3r), Friday, 21 March 2014 13:37 (ten years ago) link
http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/04/20/3428792/brooks-obama-manhood-problem-middle-east/
New York Times columnist David Brooks on Sunday claimed that President Obama’s foreign policy isn’t “tough” and that he has a “manhood problem” in the Middle East.
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 23 April 2014 18:43 (ten years ago) link
yeah
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 23 April 2014 18:46 (ten years ago) link
Trying to visualize Brooks looking tough and macho
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 23 April 2014 19:19 (ten years ago) link
shall I post that photo again
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 23 April 2014 19:22 (ten years ago) link
Oh Noooooooooo
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 23 April 2014 19:23 (ten years ago) link
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/25/opinion/brooks-the-piketty-phenomenon.html?hpw&rref=opinion
Many people join the political left driven by a concern for the poor. But, over the past several years, the Democratic Party has talked much more about the middle class than the poor. Meanwhile, progressive political movements like Occupy Wall Street directed their fervor at the top 1 percent. Progressive movies and books have focused their attention on conspiracy and oligarchy at the top, not “Grapes of Wrath” or “How the Other Half Lives” stories at the bottom.This is natural. The modern left is led by smart professionals — academics, activists, people in the news media, the arts and so on — who tend to live in and around coastal cities.If you are a young professional in a major city, you experience inequality firsthand. But the inequality you experience most acutely is not inequality down, toward the poor; it’s inequality up, toward the rich.
This is natural. The modern left is led by smart professionals — academics, activists, people in the news media, the arts and so on — who tend to live in and around coastal cities.
If you are a young professional in a major city, you experience inequality firsthand. But the inequality you experience most acutely is not inequality down, toward the poor; it’s inequality up, toward the rich.
― j., Friday, 25 April 2014 14:46 (ten years ago) link
idk wtf he is tryina say exactly
― smooth hymnal (m bison), Friday, 25 April 2014 15:21 (ten years ago) link
this bloke is seriously a professional writer?
― it definitely wasn't designed to be a pants pocket player (stevie), Friday, 25 April 2014 15:25 (ten years ago) link
that middle class/bourgie status anxiety is unworthy of whatever legacy Dems have, and it is the face of the new elitist left? just by looking at the quote, not the article
― Hunt3r, Friday, 25 April 2014 15:34 (ten years ago) link
because rich assholes haven't had their asses kissed and their taxes cut enough in the past 15 years . . ."This is a moment when progressives have found their worldview and their agenda. This move opens up a huge opportunity for the rest of us in the center and on the right. First, acknowledge that the concentration of wealth is a concern with a beefed up inheritance tax. Second, emphasize a contrasting agenda that will reward growth, saving and investment, not punish these things, the way Piketty would. Support progressive consumption taxes not a tax on capital. Third, emphasize that the historically proven way to reduce inequality is lifting people from the bottom with human capital reform, not pushing down the top. In short, counter angry progressivism with unifying uplift." . . . a la sean hannity and rush limbaugh
― reggie (qualmsley), Friday, 25 April 2014 15:51 (ten years ago) link
fuck david brooks forever, how does such a simple man have such influence in the world
also fuck the rich forever, tax them into poverty then redistribute some of it back to them as welfare
― smooth hymnal (m bison), Friday, 25 April 2014 15:55 (ten years ago) link
he doesnt have influence
― idontknowanythingabouttechnlolgeez (waterface), Friday, 25 April 2014 15:55 (ten years ago) link
nope, no influence whatsoever. meanwhile in the US
― reggie (qualmsley), Friday, 25 April 2014 15:57 (ten years ago) link
tell me how he has influence
― idontknowanythingabouttechnlolgeez (waterface), Friday, 25 April 2014 15:59 (ten years ago) link
aside from people talking bout his dumb ideas--how does david brooks promote real change and help enact it
*folds hands together in a steeple, leans back in chair*
― idontknowanythingabouttechnlolgeez (waterface), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:00 (ten years ago) link
he teaches at yale, he writes two op-eds a week for the ny times, he squares off with david shields on a regular basis, he's on the sunday talk shows every weekend. i realize that's less influence than we here at ILX wield, but it's still something
― reggie (qualmsley), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:00 (ten years ago) link
the gop will never ever ever repeal the estate tax. it was a massive cause celebre during the bush administration when they cut it down to what it is now.
― panettone for the painfully alone (mayor jingleberries), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:01 (ten years ago) link
yeah that isn't influence
― idontknowanythingabouttechnlolgeez (waterface), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:01 (ten years ago) link
First, acknowledge that the concentration of wealth is a concern with a beefed up inheritance tax. Second, emphasize a contrasting agenda that will reward growth, saving and investment, not punish these things, the way Piketty would. Support progressive consumption taxes not a tax on capital.
This is so bizarrely contradictory that I can only read it two ways: (1) he doesn't understand what the fuck he's talking about or (2) he's saying "let's throw them a bone with the inheritance tax while not actually addressing concentration of wealth"
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:01 (ten years ago) link
x my own p
also realize brooks is on npr all the time and some people only get there news and opinion from it
he does all those things but how do we know everyone he comes into contact with isn't saying "this dude is full of it"
― idontknowanythingabouttechnlolgeez (waterface), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:02 (ten years ago) link
yes, everyone he comes into contact with says "this dude is full of it"
― reggie (qualmsley), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:03 (ten years ago) link
David Brooks talks out of like three to five different sides of his mouth in any given column
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:04 (ten years ago) link
I thought I saw somewhere Obama reads Brooks' column regularly and values his viewpoint, it was a depressing moment, hope I was imagining it
― anonanon, Friday, 25 April 2014 16:04 (ten years ago) link
Obama does read it, I wonder how he feels about being called a wimp by noted hardcore alpha male David Brooks
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:18 (ten years ago) link
sad that he reads/"values" Brooks's opinion, but somehow that makes sense to me, maybe even explains something about Obama
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:21 (ten years ago) link
this guy reminds me of when the onion runs one of those editorial/thinkpieces on politics by a seven-year-old or whatever.
― espring (amateurist), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:25 (ten years ago) link
xpost
i think that's obama in populist mode, i.e. "i, too, read these brazenly mediocre columns in the NYT."
"I'm just a regular guy, I read the same smug priveleged assholes as joe lunchpail!"
― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:29 (ten years ago) link
lol reading
― Hunt3r, Friday, 25 April 2014 16:32 (ten years ago) link
I give credit to Brooks for even supporting the inheritance tax. I also think he has a fair point that if the inequality issue is nothing more than the upper-middle-class envying the upper-upper-middle class, then maybe it's not such a big deal. However, obviously the inequality issue is about a lot more than that. Brooks doesn't mention anything about how this dynamic affects the distribution of political power, or the social dynamic in a society in which inherited wealth begins to play a large role. Maybe because he doesn't buy Piketty's arguments that we are headed that way. But his breezy dismissal of Piketty's careful arguments lacks substance.
― o. nate, Friday, 25 April 2014 20:15 (ten years ago) link
I also think he has a fair point that if the inequality issue is nothing more than the upper-middle-class envying the upper-upper-middle class, then maybe it's not such a big deal.
How is this a "fair point" given no real evidence that that's the case?
However, obviously the inequality issue is about a lot more than that. Brooks doesn't mention anything about how this dynamic affects the distribution of political power, or the social dynamic in a society in which inherited wealth begins to play a large role.
But this is the big DUH point about the whole issue that every conservative pundit DELIBERATELY glosses over, reducing inequality to "I eat at Per Se you eat at Outback, I drive a Rolls you drive a Ford, what's the big deal?"
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Friday, 25 April 2014 20:48 (ten years ago) link
also I'd quibble with "begins to play a large role"
basically stop being "fair" to david fucking brooks
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Friday, 25 April 2014 20:49 (ten years ago) link
Another signature Brooks attempt to incisively analyze "the left" that is almost wholly projection
Also lots of clunky half-hearted 8th grade book report prose in here
Well, of course, this book is going to set off a fervor that some have likened to Beatlemania.
The book is very good and interesting, but it has pretty obvious weaknesses.
Piketty predicts that growth will be low for a century, though there seems to be a lot of innovation around.
― anonanon, Saturday, 26 April 2014 08:55 (ten years ago) link
I don't know why it's hard for me to hate Brooks as much as he clearly deserves.
― o. nate, Friday, 2 May 2014 02:03 (ten years ago) link
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2014/05/i_dont_know_whether_this_point050439.php#
Brooks says Simpson-Bowles-like commissions push populist reforms. Author of the piece questions Brooks' understanding of populism and democracy
― curmudgeon, Thursday, 22 May 2014 14:35 (ten years ago) link
Author of the piece questions Brooks' understanding of populism and democracy
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 22 May 2014 14:41 (ten years ago) link
No surprise. Brooks said a month ago on NPR with one of his trademark embarrassed chuckles that he wished we were ruled by elites.
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 22 May 2014 14:42 (ten years ago) link
His favorite books: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/23/opinion/brooks-really-good-books-part-i.html?rref=opinion&module=Ribbon&version=origin®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=article
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 23 May 2014 14:54 (ten years ago) link
David Brooks has taken his valuable NYTimes column inches to inform his readers that George Orwell and Leo Tolstoy are good writers.
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Friday, 23 May 2014 14:57 (ten years ago) link
His other lesson for writers, even opinion writers, is that it’s a mistake to think you are an activist, championing some movement. That’s the path to mental stagnation. The job is just to try to understand what’s going on.
But I digress, next on my list of white male writers...
― bnw, Friday, 23 May 2014 15:05 (ten years ago) link