Column by David Brooks in the NYT.

None of us will agree with everything he says, and much of what he says is pretty vague to begin with. But I'll give someone credit for attempting to think outside the box a bit, and many will share his pessimism for the stale major-party "choice" the country will likely get to choose from in 2012.

David Brooks is usually as vanilla as youll get from an opinion writer so its surprising for him to write something so pessimistic(and true).

(06-15-2011 07:19 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  Column by David Brooks in the NYT.

None of us will agree with everything he says, and much of what he says is pretty vague to begin with.

Yes, very short on details.

And I think he seriously understimates the strife and contention around his four baskets.

Quote: Republican politicians don’t design policies to meet specific needs, or even to help their own working-class voters. They use policies as signaling devices — as ways to reassure the base that they are 100 percent orthodox and rigidly loyal.

Quote:(Democrats)They still have these grand spending ideas, but there is no longer any money to pay for them and there won’t be for decades. Democrats dream New Deal dreams, propose nothing and try to win elections by making sure nobody ever touches Medicare.

Q to the Fvvcking T and Amen Sister.

Quote:If there were a Hamiltonian Party, it would be offering a multifaceted reinvigoration agenda.

I find your detailed and well-reasoned argument both compelling and convincing. Do you have a button I could wear? /eyeroll