Michelle Malkin » David Brooks’ Ivy League ejaculations

David Brooks’ Ivy League ejaculations

By Michelle Malkin • November 21, 2008 10:35 AM

Compare:

“I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.”

– William F. Buckley, Jr.

And contrast:

Jan. 20, 2009, will be a historic day. Barack Obama (Columbia, Harvard Law) will take the oath of office as his wife, Michelle (Princeton, Harvard Law), looks on proudly. Nearby, his foreign policy advisers will stand beaming, including perhaps Hillary Clinton (Wellesley, Yale Law), Jim Steinberg (Harvard, Yale Law) and Susan Rice (Stanford, Oxford D. Phil.).

The domestic policy team will be there, too, including Jason Furman (Harvard, Harvard Ph.D.), Austan Goolsbee (Yale, M.I.T. Ph.D.), Blair Levin (Yale, Yale Law), Peter Orszag (Princeton, London School of Economics Ph.D.) and, of course, the White House Counsel Greg Craig (Harvard, Yale Law)…

… Already the culture of the Obama administration is coming into focus. Its members are twice as smart as the poor reporters who have to cover them, three times if you include the columnists. They typically served in the Clinton administration and then, like Cincinnatus, retreated to the comforts of private life — that is, if Cincinnatus had worked at Goldman Sachs, Williams & Connolly or the Brookings Institution. So many of them send their kids to Georgetown Day School, the posh leftish private school in D.C. that they’ll be able to hold White House staff meetings in the carpool line.

And yet as much as I want to resent these overeducated Achievatrons (not to mention the incursion of a French-style government dominated by highly trained Enarchs), I find myself tremendously impressed by the Obama transition.

– Smarty pants/panting smarty David Brooks, NYT, 11/21/08

Get a room, David. Your public displays of Obam-affection are bordering on criminal indecent exposure and gross lewdness.

Ew.

Posted in: Barack Obama

Regular View

comments (112)

trackbacks (16)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

« Older Comments

#553980

On November 21st, 2008 at 4:26 pm, WarEagle82 said:

If this is the “change” we can expect then Barry O should have just given the nomination to Hillary.

Obama IS stupid for offering and Clinton IS stupid for accepting. This is the biggest “lose-lose” proposition in American politics since Carter-Mondale!

How in the world is Hillary qualified to be SecState? Maybe IF she had acutally been shot at in Bosnia….

Why would Obama invite these two snakes into his administration? Does he NOT remember Vince Foster?

This eclipses “ignorant” and goes straight to “STUPID” on both parts.

For goodness sakes, “Keep the change!”

On November 21st, 2008 at 4:06 pm, jsr said:

Ok smart guy, exactly what has he delivered?

I hate to break this but it looks like Hillary is accepting SoS. Obama is delivering his own undoing, as well a high drama for the next 4 years. I cannot imagine what he is thinking. Without even going into her foreign policy credentials he should be able to see what a disaster this can/will be for him. This nomination just about completes the forming of new Clinton administration.
#553988

On November 21st, 2008 at 4:30 pm, John Deaux said:

On November 21st, 2008 at 3:44 pm, AlohaGuy said:

Ok smart guy, exactly what has he delivered?

The biggest shopping day in the history of firearms in the US.

You don’t see anyone in the firearms industry asking for a bailout, do you?
#554008

On November 21st, 2008 at 4:45 pm, purealchemy said:

I’m not convinced Brooks didn’t mean all that sarcastically. Checked on his own education which is a degree in history from University of Chicago.
#554018

On November 21st, 2008 at 4:55 pm, purealchemy said:

p.s. I suggest everyone go to the full article link at the beginning of the thread. Brooks appears envious of the educations of all these people but his real reasons for applauding the selections are about other characteristics.
#554025

On November 21st, 2008 at 5:03 pm, swmntman said:

haha… Alohaguy, you are ON today.
#554047

On November 21st, 2008 at 5:25 pm, RealImmigrantChick said:

The dean of my laws school used to clerk for a Justice on the US supreme Court, I forget which one, but I believe it was one of the conservatives. He told us once in class that many if not most Supreme Court Justices will not use Harvard Law Grads as clerks because they saw that Harvard may be hard t get in, but did not produce very good lawyers, the education was less than excellent. So, that says a lot to me that many of these folks went to Harvard and other “ivy league” schools.
#554082

On November 21st, 2008 at 5:57 pm, WarEagle82 said:

Maybe Brooks was being sarcastic. Nobody could possibly compare these clowns to Cincinnatus and be serious.

As far as i can tell there has only been 8 years in his entire life when Bill Clinton has held a government job.

Most of Clinton’s advisors have been on the revolving door between government or the MSM or lobbying for decades. These people are NOT Cincinnatus!

He had to be sarcastic!

They typically served in the Clinton administration and then, like Cincinnatus, retreated to the comforts of private life — that is, if Cincinnatus had worked at Goldman Sachs, Williams & Connolly or the Brookings Institution.
#554137

On November 21st, 2008 at 7:00 pm, zorro said:

David Brooks sounds like some sort of sick groupie.
#554180

On November 21st, 2008 at 8:01 pm, flaming_o said:

I find myself tremendously impressed by the Obama transition.

I find myself tremendously impressed by David Brooks’ ability as a one-handed typist.
#554200

On November 21st, 2008 at 8:24 pm, flmom said:

Lifeofthemind

I knew exactly what he meant, the irony/sarcasm was obviously lost on you.
#554202

On November 21st, 2008 at 8:29 pm, beenthere said:

Mark Steyn commented recently, in response to Brooks’s nasty comment that Palin is a “deadly cancer on the Republican Party,” that he could not say what Brooks believed. As near as I can determine none of the other manners mavens at the NRO criticized Brooks even to that extent. So what is Our Miss Brooks? Is he a republican, a conservative, or what? As near as I can determine he is a Maoist. He is obsessed with Obama and his cult of personality. He believes fervently in China as an ideal that will become the “America of Collectivism.” Finally, his loathing of the conservative base is without limit. Combined in one person who almost boasts of his ignorance of economics, and the result is not a good sign.

But what is even worse is the degree to which the pseudo-cons at the NRO circle the wagons if any of the lowly (that’s you and me) dare protest regarding him. Wasn’t it the late Buckley the Younger who broke with Nixon because of his toadying to China? What would he have said then about someone like Brooks? This is all quite disturbing and good for Michelle for highlighting the jerk. It’s just one more indication that the conservative base is on its own.
#554356

On November 22nd, 2008 at 12:16 am, robert537 said:

I find myself tremendously impressed by David Brooks’ ability as a one-handed typist.

flaming_o – great comment (and I think you’re on to something).
#554519

On November 22nd, 2008 at 10:50 am, rocketman said:

General George Patton said it pretty well. “Give me a general from West Point and I will win the battle. Give me a general from Texas A & M and I will win the war!”

President Harry Truman said, “It’s not the size of the dog in the fight that counts–It’s the size of the fight in the dog that counts!”

Ditto for Ivy League schools and the schools most of the rest of us of attend. We get fine people from both types of school, and also get some real dummies from both. Educating a fool doesn’t make him any smarter–you just get an educated fool instead.

The orgasmic praising of the no achievements O’Bummer by the LWM (not MSM) really freaks me out. Go SarahCuda!

John Bibb
#554581

On November 22nd, 2008 at 12:05 pm, vickisoup said:

As far as i can tell there has only been 8 years in his entire life when Bill Clinton ~~has~~ hasn’t held a government job.

Fixed it for ya.

Seriously, this man and his wife have been on the public dole (and I do mean “dole”) since graduating from college. Chappaqua was the first private residence they’d owned, I think, and they didn’t even pay for it themselves. They bought it with donations from their adoring fans.
Yuck.

I find myself tremendously impressed by David Brooks’ ability as a one-handed typist.

Very, very funny comment.
#554791

On November 22nd, 2008 at 9:13 pm, PrestoPundit - Greg Ransom said:

Note well:

The economic disaster which was the FDR government was full of Harvard grads.

And of course, the one man economic disaster Herbert Hoover was a Stanford egghead.
#554792

On November 22nd, 2008 at 9:15 pm, PrestoPundit - Greg Ransom said:

I really wish bloggers would stop writing about the idiots being published in the NY Times. I don’t read them, and I’d never be bothered by their certified idiocy if people would simply ignore them.

Ignore them. They will go away.
#556428

On November 24th, 2008 at 10:13 pm, L.N. Smithee said:

I see that on the football team at Florida State University, there is an aspiring neurosurgeon who has been granted a Rhodes scholarship (like Bill Clinton and Bobby Jindal, among others) and will be attending Oxford.

I’m sure David Brooks is wondering why 1) He’s playing defense instead of quarterback, and 2) He isn’t coaching the team rather than noted sub-genius Bobby Bowden. I mean, he’s so smart!