Letters to the Editor
-
His Hopeness..........LOL
"For example, His Hopeness tells rallies that we are the change we have been waiting for, but if we are the change we have been waiting for then why have we been waiting since we've been here all along?"
Now that is rich.
-
Waste of ELectrons
Boy, do I miss Lenny Bruce.
-
Once again,
David Brooks reveals that he somehow survives on a constant diet of sour grapes and re-swallowed bile. It always annoys me his hateful spew is quoted on Salon.
-
Big surprise
The usual Brooks bilge. Like Maureen Dowd, except even less funny.
-
yep
The War Room sure does have a Pro-Obama bias don't it?
(not that I think it has a Pro-Hillary bias either...in fact koppelman et al have been fairly even-handed throughout this whole scene. I get a little tired of those who see bias everywhere they look is all)
-
Brooks sounds frightened.
He should be.
-
I never read Brooks' blather
David Brooks is one of the most content-free columnists I've ever seen. He tries to sound reasonable, but it comes off to me as mealy-mouthed blather. I don't waste my time reading him.
-
How Insightful!
What a tool. One could say pretty much the same thing about any presidential candidate in the history of Democracy. Clearly, all campaign rhetoric and promises will meet with a harsh dose of reality about five minutes after the swearing-in ceremony. Should McCain win in November, there are going to be a lot of people who are disappointed when he isn't able to deliver as advertised on every issue.
-
Babbling Brooks
As if any more proof was needed that Brooks is a POS, here you have it. Isn't it funny that the elites (both the Republicans and Hillary's inner circle) who Brooks so sorely wants to be thought of as one, got us into the myriad messes we are in today: the economy, with its ever-increasing global shift of capital to the very very rich (Friedmanomics), to unprovoked wars of aggression (neocon wargame fantasizers). Their unrealistic views of how the world actually works are the ideological bases for many of our current ills; yet the Obama supporters who think it's not good to keep repeating the same mistakes over an over (Einstein's definition of insanity) are painted as starry-eyed dreamers. Sorry, this older white male has his feet firmly planted on the ground - even while I am inspired by Obama's eloquent calls for us to take a different path.
-
Question Answered
"but if we are the change we have been waiting for then why have we been waiting since we've been here all along?"
Answer: Because people used to listen to mindless shits like you, Brooks. Your irrelevence brings a new day of hope to us all.
-
Brooks Does Have A Point...
Lord knows, I find Brooks' low-fi operations on behalf of the Republican party to be repellant. But on the Obama issue, I can't see how a reasobable person could disagree. Brooks' writing is overblown and obviously biased, but who can't see the inevitable backlash? Earlier in his candidacy, Obama seemed to be letting others--surrogates, media, etc.--engage in the deification. Now, however, the airwaves are sick with Obama's declarations of his innocent purity and outsiderness. Many people feel--including me, and I voted for him in California--that one can only toot the holier than thou whistle so many times. Pretty soon, the history of Obama's very political votes and strategies will become apparent, and the hang-over will begin. The only thing that seperates Obama from Hillary and others is that he hasn't had as much time to get as barnacled as they have in the brackish waters of legislative politics.
-
Yes
As I said earlier the act will become tedious and weary in a general. But his Hopeness and his Hopelings can still hope.
-
By The Way
I got "His Hopeness" from David Brooks. He said it was okay.
-
Obama is more than just "hope"
Those who cast Obama's supporters as cult devotees are doing them a great disservice - it implies his supporters cannot think for themselves and are not rational people who have made an intelligent decision on which candidate they believe best represents their interests and can best lead our country.
I made my decision to support Obama long before I attended a rally. I read his book, I read his policies. I compared his voting record against Hillary's and other leading candidates. I asked friends. I thought about it. After deliberation I made a rational decision to support Obama because I believe he best represents the kind of leadership I want to see in the White House
It also implies Obama himself is only pretty words and a nice voice, discounting that he and his team have put together a platform of ideas and policies which people believe in.
-
Is David Brooks delusional
Considering that Obama's supporters appear to smarter than the average bear, it would seem to suggest we do our home work and are not easily hood winked by hope alone.
A week ago Brooks seemed to be pretty high Obama hope himself. Maybe it is he who has descend to the dark side. I don't take much stock in that psychological bull anyway. I too practical for that.... Why I support Obama.
-
aND WHAT WILL THE PROPOGANDISTS DO WHEN OBAMA IS THE NEXT PRESIDENT
I know it's funny now. You are probably giggling like elementary school girls when you attack obama's supporters. Guess what Salon. It's quite possible We are the majority. What does that make you? Who will come to this site when you are labeled as gop propogandists. I'm trying to help you guys at salon. I think glen greenwald is the best writer we have out there. It's the rest on this site that are weirdos.
Giggle, laugh. enjoy yourselves. Just know that to divide your country for money is treason. This is not a threat. i'm just saying, there are risks and rewards to becoming a fox like outfit propogating for profit. Money is the reward but irrelevance and loss of credibility is the risk. No reward without the risk. True patriotic americans are not going to forget the slaon clinton sabotage attempts. Think about the future.
-
Useless
Honestly, this kind of stuff really pisses me off, and I see it pretty equally from both sides. Instead of speaking in support of one's candidate, or at least attacking the other, just call the candidate's supporters idiots. Politically, it's a useless argument that says nothing about the qualifications of one or the other for president. That it has figured so heavily in our current political discourse, I think, speaks to how little difference between the two candidates there really is to fight about.