Brooks on Jindal’s rebuttal: ‘It’s just a disaster for the Republican Party’

Brooks is another pseudo conservative in the George Will mold. The Washington insider who likes his cocktail parties, his sartorial indulgences (like a bow tie), and who views conservatism as an academic discipline, to be debated at with his “more liberal” colleagues over drinks and smoked salmon canapes.

His main purpose is to make darn sure his “more liberal colleagues” like everyone at PBS or the other” media networks” keep inviting him on and listening to him. He is really a liberal at heart.
He has no idea of the conservative movement sweeping this country after the country went nuts and voted themselves into socialism. He is, like George Will, a pseudo conservative. I don’t attach any credence to what he is saying.

“He has no idea of the conservative movement sweeping this country after the country went nuts and voted themselves into socialism. He is, like George Will, a pseudo conservative. I don’t attach any credence to what he is saying.”

Last time I checked, there was no conservative movement “sweeping” this country. There is a disgruntled (and vocal) minority who view TARP as Marxism and still think that Obama is a Muslim. Will and Brooks aren’t conservative? They might not walk in lock-step with the rest of the republican party, but that makes them more conservative as often as it makes them more liberal.

I think that this problem stems from the word conservative not meaning what it used to. Conservative doesn’t mean jingoistic, imperialistic, or militaristic (contrary to correlation). So keep electing your “conservative” politicians in the Palin model. The Dems will thank you for it.

At least Brooks responded to what Jindal said instead of how he delivered his speech, which has been the criticism from other conservatives that I’ve seen. Even taking up the ideologically blind arguments about small government wasn’t as offensive as the sheer idiocy of his specifics. He repeated the grossly misleading and debunked claims about the Republican planning creating more jobs for less money, and that the recovery act included a levitating train from Las Vegas to Disneyland. He used the Republicans-made disaster of New Orleans as proof government can’t work (can anyone verify his story about the sheriff and the boats? sounds made up to me). In a sign conservatives don’t get science (or maybe it’s irony they don’t get, or both), after criticizing the response to Katrina, he picked out volcano monitoring as an example of waste. That’s right, after saying the government was unprepared for natural disaster, he criticizes a program to allow the government to warn in case of natural disaster.

What strikes me as odd about all of this is that no one on the right seems to understand that what they think, what they do, how they adhere to “conservative ideals” (one of those terms the right like to throw around and redefine every four years) or not–all of this is irrelevant. They are no longer in the game or in the discussion of the game. They are outsiders because that’s where they placed themselves and where they most certainly belong. Their opinions don’t matter, their votes don’t matter. Jindal is irrelevant, Brooks is irrelevant. The entire Republican menagerie is irrelevant. Irrelevant. I like that word–it suits the situation so wonderfully well. And as for “The conservative movement sweeping this country”? You jest. No? You’re irrelevant. Get used to it–your party is over.

“Brooks is another pseudo conservative in the George Will mold. The Washington insider who likes his cocktail parties, his sartorial indulgences (like a bow tie), and who views conservatism as an academic discipline, to be debated at with his “more liberal” colleagues over drinks and smoked salmon canapes.”

Next thing you’ll be saying that his former boss at National Review, William F Buckley, was also a ‘liberal at heart’. If you do even the smallest bit of research about the late Mr Buckley you’ll find that he fits the same description you’ve given of both Mr Will & Mr Brooks.

Your criticism of Mr Brooks & Mr Will is beyond laughable and it is truly sad that you think intelligent thoughtful people have no place in the conservative part of the political spectrum. Without them and similar intellects, it would be reduced to blowhards (Limbaugh) and morons (Palin).

Whether you are a liberal or conservative, whether Jindal appeared nerdy or timid in the rebuttal to Obama, one thing Jindal is not is a fool. He is a Rhodes scholar with an advanced degree in biology, and at 37, is the youngest Gov. in the country with am impressive professional resume.

When was it uncool for an intellectual to appear “nerdy”? Bill Gates appears to be nerdy in most of his public appearances. Style without substance is just an empty suit.

Listen, with a 60% favorable rating for Obama, anyone addressing the rebuttal for the GOP would be cast in a poor light. Unfortunately, Bobby Jindal got the call from his party. Certainly dissenting opinions will only make the country stronger, despite party affiliation.

Jindal has done a tremendous job in Louisiana, despite all its problems, including high crime, poverty, and corruption. I, for one, applaud Jindal and wish him continued success.

[...] 2009 It seems like Conservatives in general are being hoodwinked by David Brooks, whom recently attacked Bobby Jindal’s speech.  While your resident blogger thought the Governor’s speech was [...]

I also said “Oh God” when I saw BoJi slump around the corner. He looked horrible and walked like he had a broomstick shoved were the Sun never shines. He was the quintessential, nervous high school dork making his first speech before the student body as to why he and not the smart, cool, popular kid should be student body president.

Sorry, dork boy. You can be a Rhodes Scholar ’til you’re blue in the face, but if you don’t have the sense God gave a goose, you’re not going to be anything more that the girlfriendless president of the chess club.

Jindal is Brilliant! His speech was his off day. He will be back.

When David Brooks says “the country is in a panic right now” to justify supporting what’s going on in Washington shows he has absolutely no idea about leadership. Panic makes bad decisions. Panic is anti-intellectual. When the rest of the country is panicing, we need our leaders to be calm and make smart, intellectual decisions that will benefit the country in the long term, not to throw together gigantic spending bills as fast as they can under the belief that doing anything is better than doing nothing. Because the situation is so dire, it is imperative that decisions that are made are the right decisions that we arrived at through intellectual thought, not thrown together out of panic. Obama is a wonderful speech maker, but he has poor leadership skills. It seems to me that Pelosi is running this country, not Obama.

For all you liberals out there who wake up everyday wondering and hoping how the government will take care of you and your family, and what government program you can benefit from today, you go ahead and live that sad pathetic life. For me, I wake up everyday and I earn a living. I take care of myself and my children. I do not rely on the government for my survival, I rely on me. It is hard and it’s scary, but it is the most free and empowering way to live life. I do not want the government to take care of me, I can take care of my self. I love liberals, the more the merrier. The world is a competitive place. You have to compete to survive, and I know when I compete against someone who depends on outside entities for their survival, I will beat them everytime. You keep sucking the government tit, and I’ll kick you butt everytime.

joseph… i admire your independence, but you need to understand the concern of liberals is not for themselves it is for fellow human beings. It is about a willingness to pay more taxes so that some child somewhere can get heathcare, a poor family can eat, a kid can get a pell grant to go to college. why is this so offensive to you ? i make 6-figures and don’t rely on the gov’t but as a christian i am concerned about others… if conservatives tend to be republican, and tend to be strongly christian, how do such folks not have this some concern ? maybe they are not really christian in the true sense….

Iam surrounded daily by Republican reactionaries who cannot/will not get over the fact that they lost the field of play because they didn’t connect and didn’t compete. I love the word “irrelevant” because they have, indeed rendered themselves so. You lost your opportunity to lead. Get over it.

Bobby Jindal. Too bad, pal!

Yeah, lets hear it for Bobby Lee Jindreaux, the true native son of the South. I don’t care if his grandma was Huey Long’s Hindu concubine. Go Bobby Lee! Tell them Libbber-als that they can just go f*** themselves. Who needs welfare, who needs medical care, who needs education. All we need is the Catholic church to tell us what to do, right ??