Skip to main content

Normally, I can't abide the pompous David Brooks in the NY Times, but today he wrote a genuinely funny piece about Romney...definitely worth a read.  It is quite biting and I interpret it to mean that Brooks, down deep, is conceding the election. Otherwise it is difficult to image him ridiculing the candidate just as he is about to be officially nominated. And I believe "ridicule" is the operative word.

A sample:

Some people say he retreated into himself during these years. He had a pet rock, which ran away from home because it was starved of affection. He bought a mood ring, but it remained permanently transparent. His ability to turn wine into water detracted from his popularity at parties.

There was, frankly, a period of wandering. After hearing Lou Reed’s “Walk on the Wild Side,” Romney decided to leave Mormonism and become Amish. He left the Amish faith because of its ban on hair product, and bounced around before settling back in college.

Here's another sample:
Romney also went on a mission to France. He spent two years knocking on doors, failing to win a single convert. This was a feat he would replicate during his 2008 presidential bid.
What makes the piece lethal is that between the laughs, the picture Brooks paints of Romney has the ring of truth.  

Here is the full article:
Brooks roast Romney

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  What the hell? (10+ / 0-)

    Why would Brooks pen such an hilarious take-down of Mitt? I mean, I love it, but WTF?

    This is vicious. What on earth got under Brooks' skin? I'd expect this from someone like Olbermann but Brooks is a center-right Republican for God's sake.

    I thought this was pure snark, so I went to the NYT site and drilled into their opinion pages to confirm it wasn't.

    It isn't.

    It's apparently real.

    It just gets stranger and stranger...

    •  Not quite vicious, but he does (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      uciguy30, OooSillyMe

      get in some surprising zingers, like Romney's five sons Bip, Chip, Rip, Skip, and Dip and their "identically tanned wives".

      Maybe he wrote this to promote the idea that Republicans just love to add a little levity to the campaign- like Romney with his oh-so-hilarious birther "joke".  Maybe he'll follow up with an Obama parody about watermelon and Obama's mom the welfare queen.  Then he could say "Racist? How silly!  Everyone knows Republicans are just a bunch of good-natured kidders!"

  •  I love it! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, uciguy30, codairem

    Posted a link to the Brooks article on Facebook.

    It smells like something from the Onion, however. Or maybe Brooks lost a bet with a friend and had to let the friend write something under his name.

    But the angle said to them, "Do not be Alfred. A sailor has been born to you"

    by Dbug on Tue Aug 28, 2012 at 12:31:28 AM PDT

  •  Did he hit the "send" button by accident? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, uciguy30, OldDragon

    We've all done that, right?

    That's damn funny.

    Now, will he be doing the same shtick next week for President Obama? If he doesn't, he will be permanently banned from Conservative Island, no?

    How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

    by BenderRodriguez on Tue Aug 28, 2012 at 02:48:22 AM PDT

  •  ummm, but is there any substance to it? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Is he being sarcastic in the same way that people are sarcastic about the outrageous things said about the President.  If it's a real take down it would focus on romney's policy proposals.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

    by noofsh on Tue Aug 28, 2012 at 03:39:17 AM PDT

  •  I suspect Brooks is on late-summer vacation... (0+ / 0-)

    ...and left his column to an intern.

    Romney '12: Berlusconi without the sex and alcohol!

    by Rich in PA on Tue Aug 28, 2012 at 03:41:47 AM PDT

  •  Craven Brooks tests the wind, then piles on. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    codairem, futilitismo

    I mean, let's be serious here. David Brooks is a smug, pampered, privileged piece of crap who normally would be sitting at the same table with Mitt down at the club.

    The only reason Brooks wrote this snarky "Heathers" hit piece is because he can tell which way the wind is blowing, and wants to take credit for his brilliance when Romney/Ryan crash & burn come November.

    •  Brooks has written some excellent (0+ / 0-)

      pieces on the decline and fall of the republican party.

      Just because he supports the GOP doesn't mean he's evil.

      (I'm associating your 'smug, pampered piece of crap' line with evil.)

      •  All that is required for evil to triumph is... (0+ / 0-)

        for good men to do nothing.

        David Brooks has been one of the Kewl Kids™ for over a decade now, writing from his comfy sinecure at the Times about the "salad bar at Applebee's" and other figments of his imagination, trying to act like just a regular suburban Joe. But Brooks instead is a full-fledged card-carrying member of the Villagers™; he's one of the 'very serious people' who earn millions, dine on caviar, and pontificate about how we need to gut social security and Medicare to deal with "Teh Deficit".

        David Brooks is absolutely part of the problem. He continues on a weekly basis to lend support to the bullshit narrative that the deficit is all that matters, that the war in Iraq was a great idea, and that income inequality is some kind of head-scratcher, instead of the predictable result of tax cuts for billionaires and the destruction of unions.

  •  I don't care why he wrote it (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bevenro, OldDragon, codairem

    I just thought it was completely hilarious.

    And to the point another poster made, that  it is funny because it has the ring of truth...  that is why jokes are funny, because you see something real in them. Which is why Romney made his birther joke...  because  he knew his audience sees something real in the falsehoods about the president's birth, and he was playing directly to that.  Unless you know your audience sees the ring of truth in what you're saying, you can't call it a joke. That's why most of us didn't find Romney funny, unless you mean "funny peculiar."

  •  I suspect (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon, flycaster, codairem

    David Brooks has been body-snatched. I'm gonna need to see his birth certificate!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site