A Maureen Dowd in every pot

A Maureen Dowd in every pot
: Well, now the right has one, too. It has its very own Maureen Dowd.

Read David Brooks’ column today and tell me that it (a) makes one damned bit of sense, (b) is worth the price of the ink in his periods.

It is an amateurish exercise in what I call speculative humor: trying to find jokes where they don’t (yet) exist.

He’s trying to be funny, but he fails. He’s trying to be cute, but he fails. He’s trying to say something but he fails.

It’s just like the worst of Dowd.

Equal-opportunity twittery.

  • C Bennett

    There is that old quote from Johnny Carson — when asked in an interview about the talent of being funny, he said that it wasn’t a great talent but he had found it to be a relatively rare one.
    I’m a big admirer of Brooks but a couple of times since he started with the NYT, his column has made me, all alone in my office, feel embarrassed and want to stop reading — and it’s always when he is trying to be funny and also make a point, all in one column.
    Someone close to him should call him aside for a private moment. Maybe he reads this blog.
    And if his column were in a blog, people would say it’s just one more example of the value of editors. And the foolishness of having yourself as your editor.

  • There’s a great article in Phillymag where the reporter checks Brooks’ sources for a few of his articles and comes up way short. The reporter then gets quotes from Brooks.
    My respect for Brooks is through the floor. The dude is a poseur.

  • sol

    This was a good line on the liberals:
    “in case of a water landing, your moral vanity may be used as a personal flotation device . . .”
    And how ’bout a special discount on the liberal airline for pariticularly loathesome busybodies…?

  • bob

    I really liked the first paragraph. If he’d just stopped there and made something useful of it, instead of dragging out the silly fantasy, I might have liked the rest.

  • I kind of liked all of it.

  • Mike

    I don’t think this column can be compared to the horribly partisan, nonfactual, and sometimes nonsensical writings of Maureen Dowd.
    At least he attempts to poke fun at both sides of the major political parties.

  • It’s just too much. I was fond of his Atlantic Monthly columns, maybe because they were *monthly.* The Weekly Standard stuff started to bug, and I can’t believe the NYT magazine let him write that goddamned “patio man” story AGAIN. (In Sunday’s issue. It is a parody of David Brooks, by David Brooks.)

  • Perhaps not the stupidest thing he’s ever written, but by far it’s the stupidest thing he’s written that someone has read.

  • Paul A’Barge

    Comparing this guy’s column to any of Maureen Dowd is just ludicrous.
    Yep, it was not Brooks’ best, and it certainly was not hilarious, even though it tried to be, but they guy actually gored both sides.
    Jeff, are you off the vitamins and viagra these days? It’s not like you to descend into such puerile, inaccurate moral equivalencing.

  • Paul: Even you admit it wasn’t “his best.” I’ve quoted approvingly and admiringly many of Brooks’ columns. But I’ve also noted that when he’s off he’s off. And boy, was this off. You admit it. It was as bad as a Dowd. It would have been better to take the day off.