Emetic of the day: The David Brooks-Barack Obama love story
David Brooks caught swamp fever a long time ago — and I’ve been chronicling it for the past five years. But his symptoms have grown most acute in the Age of Obama. Last fall, his ejaculations about Obama’s “achievatrons” inspired the nausea-inducing introduction to Culture of Corruption.
Get out another airsickness bag.
The New Republic has a lurid, inside look at the “the story behind the Obama-Brooks bromance.” If it’s turned into a movie, it’ll need an “NC-17″ rating for obscene content.
Watch Brooks get titillated by the sight of Obama’s pants:
That first encounter is still vivid in Brooks’s mind. “I remember distinctly an image of–we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant,” Brooks says, “and I’m thinking, a) he’s going to be president and b) he’ll be a very good president.” In the fall of 2006, two days after Obama’s The Audacity of Hope hit bookstores, Brooks published a glowing Times column. The headline was “Run, Barack, Run.”
Watch Brooks get intoxicated by Obama’s physical and intellectual presence:
He recognizes something similar in the current president. “Obama sees himself as a Burkean,” Brooks says. “He sees his view of the world as a view that understands complexity and the organic nature of change.” Moreover, after the Bush years, Brooks seems relieved to have an intellectual in the White House again. “I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us,” he explains. “Of recent presidents, Clinton could sort of talk like us, but Obama is definitely–you could see him as a New Republic writer. He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics. I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room. So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t fuck this up.”
Watch the incestuous media-politics love affair between Brooks and Obama’s reporter-turned-Astroturf master David Axelrod:
White House officials have gone out of their way to cater to Brooks recently. Take Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, whose career Brooks kept a close eye on after he graduated from the University of Chicago in 1983 and took a job at the City News Bureau, a Chicago wire service. At the time, Axelrod was the lead City Hall reporter for the Chicago Tribune. “I followed his career because he was who I wanted to be,” Brooks told me. “He was a hero.” The two finally crossed paths in 2004, when Axelrod was working for John Edwards. And, this April, as the keynote speaker at The Week magazine’s opinion awards ceremony–where Brooks was honored–Axelrod showered the columnist with praise, calling him a “serious public thinker” in an era of “insipid, instant commentary and one-hour news cycles.”
They don’t make drool buckets big enough…
***
Paging T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII!
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.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
The abysmal incompetence of the non-Romneys; Huntsman, Gingrich, Perry all go Occupier; Santorum declines
January 9, 2012 10:36 AM by Michelle Malkin
370 Comments
MSNBC Leans Forward to Apologize to Mitt Romney
December 15, 2011 04:33 PM by Doug Powers
41 Comments
Lib media journos punked by fake SEIU press release
December 7, 2011 09:41 AM by Michelle Malkin
31 Comments
Charge: Fishwrap of Record virtually outed Sandusky rape victim
November 30, 2011 01:27 PM by Michelle Malkin
32 Comments
Michele Bachmann: By Now, Michelle Obama Would Have Gotten an Apology From NBC; Update: Apology Received
November 23, 2011 02:18 PM by Doug Powers
91 Comments
Did Newt Gingrich Say the Worst Thing Any Presidential Candidate Has Ever Said?
November 21, 2011 01:02 PM by Doug Powers
159 Comments
Nina Totenberg: No Evidence of Anything Political About Solyndra
November 19, 2011 04:21 PM by Doug Powers
45 Comments
Media Seminar: How to Silence an MSNBC Panel 101
November 16, 2011 11:45 AM by Doug Powers
205 Comments
‘Smug Shot’ from the GOP Debate
November 14, 2011 02:01 PM by Doug Powers
143 Comments
Categories: Media Bias,New York Times
Pundit & Pundette
» Bishop Jenky, Nicki Minaj, and the "98%"Sister Toldjah
» Obama’s new budget is a bad jokeJustOneMinute
» We Hear From The Department Of Good Ideas And False Choices
I just projectile vomited on my computer screen a little bit.
My collie says:
TNR pulled the link. I can’t find it on their website anywhere.
Where I’m from, we don’t call what you were looking at a ‘crease’.
Please don’t lower yourself to this level. You’re better than this.
Update … here’s the article via NPR (what a shocker there).
Who knows how long it will stay up? I think the may be running away from this turd as fast as they can.
Actually, by that standard, shouldn’t Obama’s dry cleaner be president?
Between Brooks and Chris Matthews, I’m not sure which has the bigger homo-erotic crush on Hope-a-Dope. Bizarre.
What did you say David? I can’t hear you because of that thing in your mouth….
Clearly, Brooks is experiencing a groovy kind of love.
I don’t think you want to criticize Michelle on her choices of words. She is who she is and it is her blog.
Hey spacey!
We are closing in on 10,000 on the monster thread. We want you to show up for the milestone event.
Did you get offended by something?
What happened to Joy?
Okay, I don’t want to criticize now. Thanks for setting me straight!
My pants creases are slightly mussed. I guess I’ll never be president.
Why is anyone surprised by things like this anymore?
What IS it with these Obamaniacs!?!? They talk about him the same way I, as a hormone charged teenager, used to talk about Christie Brinkley and Cheryl Tiegs!
It speaks well of Brooks that he admires a fit thoughtful articulate leader like Obama rather than, say, a fat slob ranting hatemonger like Limbaugh.
par for the coarse of nyt readers. ‘I CAN TELL BY THE CREASE OF YOUR PANTS YOU WILL BE PRESIDENT’. the newspaper of birdcages, cat boxes, and crap collectors of all forms.
The page for The New Republic for the bromance isn’t there, Page Not Found.
Meanwhile, back in Kenya, half brother George Obama is asking himself, how should I spend my one dollar of income for this month?
That’s the underlying reality of the Dear Leader.
OK, now, someone tell me: is Brooks gay? Not that there’s anything wrong with that….
I apologize for my bad choice of words! What I meant was…why are you criticizing Michelle’s choice of words? It is her blog, after all. And it is time to take off the gloves. Is that a litte more clear?
Yeah, Laree. The link doesn’t work because it is ” tnr.com/article/ environment-energy /the-courtship ” when it should be ” tnr.com/article/ politics /the-courtship ”
Ahh I hope this was okay top point out. Or should I not have done that, happyscrapper?
No hate in that sentence at all….
Hi, spacey!
Not sure where you saw previous post. Leaving bread crumbs,
Thanks. I remember that.
Don’t blame you not letting zero have the satisfaction of seeing you crawl back.
Thomas, you are a bad boy. You are GROUNDED!!!!
Sorry you are misunderstanding my point. Say whatever you want. That is why this blog is so great. Because we can. I was merely making a point. And you have made yours. Friends??
fight!!! fight!!! fight!!! fight!!! fight!!! fight!!! fight!!! fight!!! fight!!! fight!!! fight!!! fight!!!
LOL
With apoligizes to the Aryan Brotherhood, from whom this is now probably plagerized.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKGVpEJ9ESk
Looks like the troll is all wee-weed up again. If only everybody here would show proper obeisance for Obama the way David Brooks does we could avoid these ugly outbursts.
HAHAHAHAHA! BWAHAHAHAHA!
AH, that’s a good one, lgm!
But, he’s not just admiring him. He sounds as if he’s looking at him the same way most of us men look at Eva Longoria when she’s wearing a bikini.
perfesser lgm in class going over test answers at the whiteboard:
He said “A”
He wrote “B”
He meant “C”
…
(should have been “D”)
Typical liberal flaws… confusing cause and effect, and stressing intentions over action/results.
Name any liberal position, and you’ll see the same flaws in action…
My apologies happyscrapper.
aaawwwww no fight…
damn
Hey,Thomas. Look up he word and get your mind out of the gutter
Articulate leader
I’m amazed at all the people who refer to Obama as hightly intelligent or as an intellectual. What are they basing this on? There is no written or factual data to back this up outside of subjective speculation.
I don’t recall ever seeing any records that have been made public of Obama’s intellecual veracity – unless being a Community Organizer or being President of the Harvard Law Review counts. Has nnyone seen his college transcripts from either his community college days or his days spent at Columbia or Harvard?
Charismatic, yes. That’s been evident during an easily observable public life. But highly intelligent? Does having the ability to read from a teleprompter and giving a good speech that was probably written by someone else lend credence to his intellect?
Gag me with a trowel.
I don’t know for sure but Mr Brooks had better go back to P.C. school. If he was conservative that would definitely be racist.
“Uhhh… uhmmm… uh…” –The Precident
When I see slobbering posts like this, it makes me think that AP set up a dummy account to post liberal drivel just to drive views and comments. No one could possibly be this brainwashed! Could they?
I know Rush is not a commenter here and subject to the same protections afforded all of us from name calling by the terms of use policy, but come on…does the LGM Collective’s exercise in vile posting really need to stand?
tre, I want to “thank you” for putting that vision in my head and shattering any chance of my focusing on anything substative the remainder of the day beyond three seconds.
My wife is going to wonder why I asked her to slap me hard across the face.
Yeah, it’s called BS’ing.
He ran a campaign talking in circles and offering no real substance. It doesn’t take an intelligent or brillant person to do that.
Go look at the slums where Obama was a community activist, they’re still slums. The best he did was organize some people to get asbestos removed from a few buildings and moved a summer job recruitment center to another building. That’s it, nothing else.
He didn’t encourage or show people a way out of the slums through education. Did he start by encouraging the children to stay in shcool? Did he encourage people to organize and clean up the area where they live, or start any after school programs? No, he didn’t start anything like this because they could have been started without money, and money was what he and his cohorts were after. Money to funnel to other projects or pockets.
Yeah, we sometimes say things that were not what we intended. I do that fairly often (just ask my husband)!The important thing is that we should save our “fight” for the enemy. Small “squabbles” in the family are normal. The Fight is with the marxists and communists who are trying to destroy our constitution. I have been a bit touchy lately. And, I have been a bit weepy. Things are startng to get to me. Happyscrapper is not as happy as she once was. Being one of the “awakened giants” is sometimes very hard.
Bingo!! There has to be a reason why he is hiding his past “accomplishments” during his college days. Could our illustrious leader have dropped out because of bad grades or drug dealing? Or did he take an IQ test that scored below average? There is some reason for his coverups!! Otherwise, why do it???
This is all the more reason I call Brooks and everyone like him as a member of the “WAD”
Happy, do you mean like saying, “I am committed to a single payer healthcare plan.”
Actually, Rush has lost quite a bit of weight and is getting very svelte, and he damn well doesn’t need a teleprompter!
David Brooks: (singing) “There’s a party in Obama’s pants and I’m invited!”
What a
useful idiotamazing fool, Brooks is, only life under a rock can obscure Obama+reality=Obameality.In other words, they be screwed Dude.
The only achievement libs can make is to take the country down with them.
I’ll counter with the Rx for the 4-hour erection in the Cialis commercials … Janet Reno in a thong. Does that counter the Eva Longoria in a bikini visual?
No punctuation, either.
Mercy good sir – I beg of you, Please! No more Janet Reno mental images.
Ford Fairlane: “Roseanne Barr naked!”
O.K. I am officially “cheered up”. Thanks guys!!
Do I hear “Uncle!”? Could have gone with Helen Thomas or Rosie O’Donnell … the Ford Fairlane was one I had forgotten about.
Ever notice that our side has all the hot women and theirs is stuck with, well …. ?
DBNinKY said (#41):
What I said about Limbaugh is less insulting and more true than what what MM wrote about Brooks. A “monger” is someone who sells something. A hatemonger earns money inciting hatred, which he openly admits that he does (what does he want you to think about liberals?). He also is fat, as you can still see on TV.
LGM is not a collective.
LGM:
Hatemonger? As in similar to a race baiter? Good examples would be Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and now the Democratic Party?
Remember, when a liberal points a finger, there are three pointing right back at them.
the Brooks/Obama twosome doesn’t have the literary heft of Romeo and Juliet, but perhaps of Bonnie and Clyde..
Actually, Limbaugh has lost a good deal of weight, a fact that has been the topic of much clucking in the state-run media.
But we are far beyond expecting anything remotely resembling accuracy from lgm.
Wellll, maybe he hasn’t seen Rush in a speedo lately….eh?
On August 31st, 2009 at 2:02 pm, lgm said:
Words fail to describe the hilarity.
@Thomas:
Just FTR:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ejaculation
There are, in fact, two definitions. The two are often alliteratively interchangeable. Hope that helps.
Michael Moore
spaceycakes said (#64):
Touche!
LGM is not a collective.
For once you were funny. Then would you say you are a piece of the WAD?
LGM, obviously you missed the latest lefty talking-point on Rush’s weight: he’s lost a lot of it in a relatively short period of time and you’re supposed to be saying a) he’s lying about how he did it or b) he’s on a very unhealthy diet and no one should be praising him or looking to him as a role model.
Get with the program.
My god Brooks, do you even go back and re-read what you wrote? The gushing is sickening, and it really is the type of admiration that a guy should be doing about a chick.
The tone of his words remind me of a fan letter I wrote to Alyssa Milano when I was like 16. I actually still like to think of her as the future Mrs. Frontierguy.
Seriously Brooks, grab a drool cup and look for your manhood, wherever you may have left it.
LOL, I’m thinking about it, I believe I told Alyssa that “you are so hot that everyone else on the planet should thank you for allowing them to live on it with you.” Awesome, huh. I really thought that I would get a response.
Hey Brooks, if you need any help writing your next obsessive article, give me a call.
David Brooks has a crease in his brain.
Said one of nine!
lgm said ‘I am Legiom, for we are many who cannot spell’
Running a forum and resolving the tension between free expression and disruption is difficult. (We have the sad example of Free Republic which was for years ridiculous in its fever to purge “disruptors” and finally devoured itself with the megalomania and paranoia of the owner.)
That being said, it is still a reality that a very few active participants in a forum who are broadly in opposition to the beliefs of the community and who constantly seek to provoke others and disrupt the conversation…a relatively few such posters, even just one or two, if left unchecked, can destroy a forum.
Day after day after day, LGM comes here and become the total focus of the thread. MM is foolish to let this happen. And posters who engage with LGM are enabling the disruption.
I have absolutely no interest in daily arguments with someone like LGM. I want to challenge and be challenged from within a generally conservative frame of reference. The world is full of lunatic lefties; I do believe in paying some attention to what they are saying but I definitely do not want them in the middle of my daily conversations with actual conservatives.
I’m outta here.
I looked up the defition of troll and found a picture of lgm.
Did you say something LGM? I couldn’t hear you because of that thing in your mouth.
That’s is unfortunate, however, I believe MM has taken the appropriate non action by allowing dissent among the rational. To overly edit and filter that rantings of the Borg, treads too close to censorship. We tolerate by example, the left only speaks of toleration. We ignore or engage the likes of lgm and others at our peril, but the alternative is beige and onesided thinkspeak, and will die on the vine.
Rush Limbaugh is HOT. And I am serious.
AoSHQ hit upon a simple and elegant solution. A few regular commenters were secretly “deputized” to edit posts from trolls. Instead of tiresome leftist talking points, troll posts were altered to, for example, describe their love of wattles on mature overweight women.
Is David Brooks an adult,or an adolesent?
I love the “I divide people into those who talk like us and those who don’t”.Typically Liberals use ten thousand useless words to make a point that Consevatives make in five hundred or so.So,I guess Brooks means he prefers people who are full of Bs.
The New Republic article at issue here can be accessed from its home page.
The good news is we haven’t seen ILMC in quite some time. Perhaps s/he was finally removed.
Garth Algar: Uhm, Wayne? What do you do if every time you see this one incredible woman, you think you’re gonna hurl?
Wayne Campbell: I say hurl. If you blow chunks and she comes back, she’s yours. But if you spew and she bolts, then it was never meant to be.
And I thought Hugh Hewitt’s man-crush on Mitt Romney was unseemly.
Ignatius–say it ain’t so.
Brilliant!! OFS!!!
TNR reposted the link here.
Hmmmm… just judging from the photo, looks like he’s had his fangs surgically removed. And is that a forkéd tongue I see?
Here Rush Limbaugh has lost 40 pounds and his #1 fan didn’t even notice. Now if Rush has a Crease (that is what they call it now?) in his pants I do not know. He is always sitting down on the DittoCam
David Brooks: get a room. Chris Mathews and Obama will be up shortly or you can call Dial A Man.
“His perfectly creased pant,” apparently. Although some are equally impressed by his articulate teleprompter.
ArizonaNeanderthal said (#88):
A headshot is not evidence of this. Follow the belly.
David Brooks writing, speaking or even thinking about Barack Obama seems vaguely libidinous. But that puts him in good company at the NYTimes. On the Imus program a few days ago, Imus played a video of Obama telling a not very funny story at some dull function. Nobody but Tom Friedman thought it was funny. But Tom Friedman began to laugh with such hysteria that he sounded just like a laughing hyena. As Imus pointed out, Friedman’s need to suck up to Obama was so overwhelming that Friedman was willing to bust a gut laughing at what Imus desribed as a weak joke barely worthy of a smile. So Obama worship is contagious at the Times. David Brooks was coopted a long time ago. For Brooks, being invited to the Charlie Rose Show and to sit with left wing colleagues Friedman and Cohen is worth selling his soul for. And that is exactly what David Brooks did.