tvashtarkatena Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Brooks on the budget Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I like Mr. Brooks. Always have enjoyed his pragmatism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 6, 2009 Author Share Posted March 6, 2009 (edited) I was sad when Safire retired from the Times pages, then Brooks came along... Â I like and respect guys like Krugman, but I don't really enjoy reading them like I do these two. Â Â Edited March 6, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmo Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I find it disturbing that within a day of criticizing the administration he was contacted by four senior staff members. Â Here is an alternate opinion from a reputable source. Â http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561551065378405.html?mod=djemEditorialPage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I find it disturbing that within a day of criticizing the administration he was contacted by four senior staff members. Â Â As opposed to having his wife's identity as a secret agent exposed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I find it disturbing that within a day of criticizing the administration he was contacted by four senior staff members. Â Indeed. Sounds like something straight out of Orwell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 It sounds as if those people at the White House are doing their job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmo Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 (edited) I find it disturbing that within a day of criticizing the administration he was contacted by four senior staff members. Â Â As opposed to having his wife's identity as a secret agent exposed? Â Both are an inappropriate response to criticism. Faults of one administration do not in any ways justify the faults of the next. Â One person contacting him, would be doing their job. Maybe two. but FOUR? Edited March 6, 2009 by jmo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 6, 2009 Author Share Posted March 6, 2009 Guys, stow it. I mean, come on. The guy is probably the top columnist in the country. When he says something, the White House is reading it, and should respond. Jebus, just read the piece, then draw your conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmo Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Guys, stow it. I mean, come on. The guy is probably the top columnist in the country. When he says something, the White House is reading it, and should respond. Jebus, just read the piece, then draw your conclusions. Â I did read the piece. Some makes sense. Some I agree with. Some I'm not sure of. That why I offered an alternate opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 The problem with the banks/economy is that no one, not the last administration, not this administration - no one - wants to mark the value of the 'toxic' assets to market, run a balance sheet, and publicly read the results out loud. If they did, all the banks would have to declare bankrupcy yesterday. Â The problem? Everyone is trying to pay lip service to 'capitalism' and the 'power of free markets' by trying - in any and all conceivable ways - to avoid nationalizing the banks and honestly acknowledging the complete and total failure of both our ideology and our regulatory system. The only way to avoid that is by the government buying toxic assets at above market prices thereby rewarding bad players and behavior - it's a lose-lose scenario however you look at it and has resulted in a bi-partisan paralysis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 Despite their claims, free marketeers like Brooks aren't centrists. The political center recognizes the fundamental role of government in the economy and acknowledges the necessity of welfare both to the have nots and business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el jefe Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 david brooks calls himself a "moderate", but he's just a limp, conservative apologist for republican policies. i'd say he is certainly my least favorite n.y. times columnist after airhead william kristol and an extremely disappointing substitute for the retired safire. i didn't agree with safire's politics, but i respected his analysis and enjoyed his writing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 7, 2009 Author Share Posted March 7, 2009 Safire had more raw intellectual firepower, and he was obviously a master wordsmith and work lover, but i like Brooks (does he describe himself as a moderate? Never heard him peg himself that way) because he's a mellow guy who hangs out with the Kahunas and so is usually able to report inside statements and opinions (adding his bent, of course). I don't agree with him much of the time, but enjoy reading his commentary. Â I don't recall reading any apologist pieces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el jefe Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 read brooks' column from earlier this week (3/3/09) "moderate manifesto": he clearly believes he is speaking from the "center". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 7, 2009 Author Share Posted March 7, 2009 That soft, chewy center. Can anyone find it? Â It's like trying to find the centroid of a padded room full of psychotics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 I don't recall reading any apologist pieces  After 30 years of conservative "big government", soaring deficits, and unprecedented corporate welfare, he wrote that Obama's budget is a "big government document" yet you think he isn't an apologist for the rightwing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 7, 2009 Author Share Posted March 7, 2009 (edited) It is a big government document. A very, very big government document. Â I'm so far left I believe marriage should be the union between one man and a herd of sheep, but this budget is pretty scary. I believe in sustainable policies. This budget is clearly exactly the opposite, and it as an extreme shot in the dark. Edited March 7, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el jefe Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 since when is the 'wall street urinal' a 'reputable source'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 That soft, chewy center. Can anyone find it? Â The center is where it has always been. Free marketeering however has always been pretty far to the right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 It is a big government document. A very, very big government document. Â sinking $1 trillion a year in the military is no less big government, so let's quit with the rightwing ideological framing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el jefe Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 well said, j b! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 7, 2009 Author Share Posted March 7, 2009 It is a big government document. A very, very big government document. Â sinking $1 trillion a year in the military is no less big government, so let's quit with the rightwing ideological framing. Â Get a clue, freak. I've argued here for years for a massive reduction in military spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 We were talking about Brooks, not you, which must be difficult to accept for someone with an ego as large as yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted March 7, 2009 Share Posted March 7, 2009 It is a big government document. A very, very big government document. I'm so far left I believe marriage should be the union between one man and a herd of sheep, but this budget is pretty scary. I believe in sustainable policies. This budget is clearly exactly the opposite, and it as an extreme shot in the dark.  Yes. Um, 'cept for the part about the sheep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.