It's a brilliant piece of writing!

a cyborg afterall....

it's priceless whoever wrote it! a roast of the first order. if it's brooks, guess he's not really on the "bandwagon" haha!!

though he has shown flashes of acerbic wit re romney.

David Brooks really wrote that and it is the most damning thing anyone could do to Romney.

Brooks is very conservative and probably almost always votes republican, was a strong defender of Bush/Cheney, yet he tears Romney apart.

Obviously he sees Romney the same way most of us do: a complete phony, gutless, unprincipled, and a terrible candidate.

I think some people are mentally preparing themselves for a big loss, and they'll put all the blame on Mitt rather than themselves and their policies.

Does he still appear on PBS every weekend? If he is on any talk shows I am sure he will be asked about it.

For that matter, his piece will certainly get a lot of attention in general on the talk shows. Maybe even intrude on the convention coverage.

Whoa!!! Brilliant....

Brooks has been hiding a gut busting sense of humor or the site was hacked.

Amazing.....

It's good.

The only thing remarkable about the parody is that it's coming from Brooks, one of the professional weather vanes of what's acceptable to talk about in the cocktail parties of Washington and New York political/media elites. And if it's ok to chortle like this about him in public...

I think it is pretty funny. actually, I think it's quite funny and you have to be humor impaired not to find it funny.

Yes, it's funny, but I've read plenty of things like it over the months of the Republican primaries. The real remarkable thing here is that it's coming from David Brooks. Which makes me wonder what is being said about Romney inside the social bubble from which he generates his usual self-serving blather.

We'll see if he keeps it up, or not.

said in the social circles that Brooks operates within.

Won't anyone give a rich dude a break?

But good for him. Lol.

I wonder why he hates Mittens so much???

DeLorean. "

"Some have said that Romney’s lifestyle is overly privileged, pointing to the fact that he has an elevator for his cars in the garage of his San Diego home. This is not entirely fair. Romney owns many homes without garage elevators and the cars have to take the stairs. "

Turns out that in addition the humerus, he has several.

Great stuff, but perhaps David Brooks is actually angling for a job in a potential Romney administration - as his parody of William F. Buckley landed him a job with that iconic conservative.

Now here's a parody of David Brooks!
http://satiricalpolitical.com/2010/07/11/parody-david-brooks-ideological-parity/

Make no mistake about the purpose of this article -- to make it okay to "joke" about Obama and birtherism. Brooks is saying 'see, we can joke about Mitt, you need to lighten up about Obama.' But I see a big difference in a purely satirical column, and a mean-spirited dog-whistle to the worst elements of the Tea Bag party. Romney's joke was not a joke at all, but Brooks' column was obviously intended to be humorous.

Brooks has been nothing but disdainful of birtherism.

It's not specifically about birtherism, it is about softening up the audience for their onslaught of Obama jokes. Now, next time someone on the left gets upset at one of Romney's lame attempts at humor, they'll all just be able to point to this article, by a know Republican.

This was totally hilarious. And totally true.

What Brooks is really doing is making it OK to attack (make jokes) against President Obama.

Two peas in a pod.

I'm no fan of Brooks, (until now) but they're entirely different.

They are more alike than you think.

I'm always somewhat amused by the verbs we use on here (destroys, tears a new one, wipes the floor with) to describe interactions when the attacked person wasn't even there.

and an opinion column. And what does Mitt reading it have to do with whether or not it "shred" him?

And actually it does shred him in the sense that it mocks everything about him.

Sounds like I'm missing a good one.

Then again, I have a busted watch in the other room that's right twice a day.

So.

I don't like the guy. I don't care for his commentary (this column excepted) but I don't have the kind of loathing toward him that I have for, say, Rich Lowry.

harder and better than any other opinion-maker.

Speaking as the person who wrote the first book saying all the proffered reasons for invasion were bullshit, Brooks has a special place in my heart as the antithesis of what needed to happen during that time. He was among the head cheerleaders for war, and time has shown him to have been 100% wrong about everything...but oh, he writes so well, and he's so reasonable, etc etc etc. As late as 2006 and 2007, he was getting lavish treatment from NPR and other media outlets, despite the fact that his words went a long way towards consigning millions to death and maiming, and helped hurl us down into the financial shit pit we still wallow in.

Fuck him.

he was one of many. from, sadly, both the left and the right. I personally think Hitchens pushed it "better". Hell, Senator Franken spoke out in support of the Iraq invasion- though of course he wasn't yet a Senator. And a couple score of dem senators voted for it and agitated for it vocally, not to mention all those dem congress critters. And hundreds of other "opinion makers", some more influential than Brooks. He was no more the "head cheerleader" for the war than Hitchens. He was one of many.

I don't think he writes terribly well. He's not that influential except within a certain small cadre.

As I said, I don't get the visceral hatred of him when compared to others on the right who are a lot more influential and a lot viler.

but whatever. we all have our pet peeves.

I understand your dislike of Brooks, the shill for the Iraq war and other odious things.

"He's making fun of US, not of Romney."

If this was an attempt at caricature, it was a miserable FAIL. Everything he wrote was funny and TRUE.

underestimated his talents before today. Priceless!

they were passing the paper around expressing their dismay, asking each other where they thought David Brooks was going with the piece. LOL

this was written by THAT David Brooks, and if so, I'm even more mystified as to what his intentions/motivations may be. It is uncharacteristically funny though.

Cmon, this can't be real!

I linked to the NY Times, but I still don't believe it. Someone from a)The Onion b) Funny or Die or maybe even c) College Humor hacked the NY Times site...

By noon tomorrow the RepubBorg will get him to retract this, if it even notices during the the Convention Orgy in Tampa.

Hilarious!

Is Brooks not enthused about the Romney/Ryan ticket? I'd have assumed he would very much on board with the big business candidate.

Molly Ivins would be so proud. She once called him "the spaniel-eyed David Brooks" and I am sure that she (like the rest of us) never suspected that the man had unplumbed depths of humor and wit.

Siduri