Oh, Sh*t. I May Have To Start Reading David Brooks in the NYTs

[stopbush]

simply to be in on the reason that his ass gets handed to him in a sling the following day. For example:

To the Editor:

While "spreadsheet people'' may be Republicans by and large, George W. Bush is not a spreadsheet person; his fiscal policy cannot withstand a quantitative analysis.

Nor is he a paragraph person - one could not find the prose to justify his conflation of Iraq with the war on terror. So what is President Bush?

David Brooks's framework leaves out an important group, what we label the PowerPoint or bullet-point people.

Bullet-point people traffic in the meaningless business-speak of the management consultant, language that eschews equally the nuance and hard numbers of reality. Bullet-point people can get by when confined to the ranks of mediocrity, but as the leader of our country, this bullet-point person is woefully ill equipped.

Stephen Caldwell
Laurel Tripp
Cambridge, Mass., Sept. 11, 2004
The writers are, respectively, a management consultant and a sociology professor.

more here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/14/opinion/l14brooks.html

[glitch]

1. The other letters are good too - worth the read - thanks for posting. nt

[athena]

2. Hey, read What's the Matter with Kansas by Thomas Frank:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0805073396/qid=1095140151/sr=ka-1/ref=pd_ka_1/103-7052383-4006246

He explains how Brooks was one of the major figures who created the stereotype of the democrat as a "latte-drinking, Volvo-riding" snob.

I personally can't stand Brooks, so I just read the letters in response to his disgusting columns. Almost all of his columns draw sharp criticism from readers.