Town Square

Post a New Topic

David Brooks says Palin a cancer

Original post made by Peter, another community, on Oct 8, 2008

David Brooks slams Palin and ruminates about Obama's intellect, high-quality advisors, and social intelligence. Worth reading, whatever side you're on. Remember, Brooks skews conservative, and just last week was praising aspects of Palin's run.

Comments (22)

Like this comment
Posted by Ming
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 8, 2008 at 2:02 pm

That is from the puffington post

David Brooks real view of Palin:

David Brooks: Palin gives better performance than even fans were expecting
David Brooks
The New York Times
Article Last Updated: 10/03/2008 08:24:33 PM MDTWeb Link

...."Still, this debate was about Sarah Palin.
She held up her end of an energetic debate that gave voters a direct look at two competing philosophies.
She established debating parity with Joe Biden.
And in a country that is furious with Washington, she presented herself as a radical alternative.
By the debate's end, most Republicans will not have been crouching behind the couch, but standing on it.
The race has not been transformed, but few could have expected as vibrant and tactically clever a performance as the one Sarah Palin turned in Thursday night.
It took her about 15 seconds to define her persona - the straight-talking mom from regular America - and it was immediately clear that the night would be filled with tales of soccer moms, hockey moms, Joe Sixpacks, Main Streeters, ''you betchas'' and ''darn rights.'' Somewhere in heaven, Norman Rockwell is smiling.

Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Oct 8, 2008 at 2:55 pm

Palin faces two major obstacles, Peter, in this order:

1. Obama

2. McCain

Like this comment
Posted by Palin Watcher
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 8, 2008 at 3:03 pm

"Blight" seems more appropriate than "cancer" to me when it comes to Pathetic Palin.
Can't wait to Nov. 5th (day after the election) when we'll finally stop hearing about her, as she slinks back to Alaska to become one again with the oily sludge left over from the Exxon Valdez spill.

Like this comment
Posted by tj
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Oct 8, 2008 at 3:14 pm

The mainstream media thought that the membership of Todd Palin,
who is not a candidate for any office,
in the Alaska Independence Party important enough to report in such outlets as the Los Angeles Times, MSNBC, and the New York Times, among others.
So now that Barack Obama's membership in the far left New Party has been unearthed, will they report his membership in that Socialist organization? Web Link

And there has been a cover up!!! an attempt to scrub the records and lies by Obama

Like this comment
Posted by link?
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2008 at 4:25 pm

Is there a link that goes with the original post?

Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2008 at 7:22 pm

Conservative columnist David Brooke has changed his mind on McCain/Palin. Last night on Charlie Rose he was extolling the virtues of Obama. In particular the leading national economic advisers like Warren Buffett he has picked to give him advise on the current global economic crisis. Meanwhile, McCain continues to take only his own misguided advice.

Like this comment
Posted by Peter
a resident of another community
on Oct 8, 2008 at 7:46 pm

link? Here's the link: Web Link

Sorry I left it out.

Like this comment
Posted by Lost Brooks
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2008 at 8:01 pm

Has David Brooks come out against the idea of a VP Palin? It seems so. "Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.”

“The idea that ‘the people’ will take on and destroy ‘the establishment’ is a utopian fantasy that corrupted the left before it corrupted the right. Surely the response to the current crisis of authority is not to throw away standards of experience and prudence, but to select leaders who have those qualities but not the smug condescension that has so marked the reaction to the Palin nomination in the first place."

Like this comment
Posted by Against Ideas
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2008 at 8:30 pm

Here's the video of David Brooks's Cancer remarks.

Web Link

Like this comment
Posted by Alice Smith
a resident of Green Acres
on Oct 8, 2008 at 9:23 pm

David Brooks points out quite aptly that Ms. Palin eschews ideas. This is fatal. She also has some funny notions (they can't be ideas) when it comes to who is the victim and the role of society defending victims and getting to the truth in Alaska: watch this Web Link

Like this comment
Posted by JSD
a resident of Palo Verde
on Oct 8, 2008 at 10:13 pm

Actually, to be picky, what Brooks said was that Palin _represents_ the "fatal cancer"-- the rejection of ideas in general, what he sees as the more populist tradition (the notion that we want a drinking buddy (W), a hockey mom, a six-pack Joe as head or 2nd in command of our executive branch). He thinks current President Bush is part of the fatal cancer too, not just Sarah Palin.

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 9, 2008 at 7:31 am

Can you all imagine the uproar if ANY Republican ANYWHERE spoke of Obama like the many Democrats do in the media of Bush, Palin, McCain?

Unbelievable hypocrisy. Actually, I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It is the usual persoanl destruction by smear and name calling on the part of the Dems. Imagine the lies and name calling about Obama and the results!

Ok, time for all you kool-aid drinkers to start claiming that is already happening with

+ Palin bringing up BOs long association and mutual support with Ayers, who blew up people and buildings in the 60s, wished he had done more of it in 2001, put $160,000,000 into "education reform" through the Annenberg, but didn't once put in reading or math classes ( the money went to "social indoctrination" classes), went to Venezuela 2 years ago and praised Chavez and the "revolution through education" Chavez was doing there. Hmmm, remember Chavez tossing out all the books that taught about democracy and capitalism in the public schools, then jailing private school directors and teachers who refused? But, of course, that alliance has nothing to do with how Barack really believes. He probably didn't know what Ayers really thought, even though he endorsed an Ayers book and worked with him on many projects. Or, maybe he just focused on the good parts of Ayers ( which are???), and ignored the bad parts.

+ Or his long association and mutual support with a racist "black liberation theology" "pastor" who damned America, calls for the destruction of whites, is arm in arm with Farakhan, has a master's in Islam ( he is a Christian preacher??? I have to still look it up, maybe he also has a Master's in Christian Theology). I guess that alliance is just smear also. Has nothing to do with how Barack really feels, I am sure. Just a lack of judgement,..or maybe he really didn't know what his church was like after 20 years in it.

+ Or, Barack going to Kenya a couple years ago WHILE SENATOR in Illinois and campaigning for a COUSIN for the Presidency of Kenya, who is an avowed Marxist, and who signed an agreement to put in place Islamic Rule if he was elected. He lost the election, then went on a campaign of terror until the ELECTED fella decided to "power share" to stop the killings and torture. But, of course, THAT alliance has nothing to do with how BO really beleives either. A little lapse in judgement, maybe..or maybe he didn't know what his cousin was like? Or, maybe just supporting family ties, that is all ( except, gosh, forgot to send $25 to a HALF-BROTHER in Africa to double his annual salary).

+ Or, the fact that NOT ONCE has BO voted for a tax cut for ANYONE, ANYWHERE, after promising tax cuts to get elected in Illinois both times. In fact, just the opposite. But, actually, I understand. He has seen the light and NOW understands that tax cuts stimulate our economy, so he is going to do it now. Unless he thinks its "not fair" that people have opportunities to go to school and work hard, then actually keep their earnings. I wonder if he gave any of his good grades to anyone else with bad grades?

Oh wait...we can't get his school records, we have no idea how and what he did in school. So, we can't know that either.

The fact that this guy has made it this far in our system is a very scary portent of where we are heading.

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 9, 2008 at 7:39 am

No, the real "rejection of ideas" cancer comes from those who absolutely refuse to allow any discussion of any ideas different from their own. Who would that be?

From those who completely reject any notion that maybe there ARE good ideas based on FACTS and HISTORICAL effectiveness that come from us conservatives. Instead, there is name calling, derision, and no ability whatsoever to LISTEN and learn.

What the left fails to realize is that we conservatives are much more informed that the left about all ideas. Why? Because we were educated in the leftist ideology in school, and we read and see nothign but leftist assumptions and ideology in the news, unless we specifically LOOK FOR different ideology.

So, we understand your ideas and positions a lot better than you understand ours.

And, the funny thing is, we reject them AFTER STUDYING THEM our whole lives, yet you reject conservative ideas with no education in them at all.

So, who exhibits the cancer of rejecting ideas? There is a difference between rejecting an idea after study and concluding it is wrong, and the knee-jerk rejection of ideas.

Ok now I will await the completely predictable name calling and onslaught..I have to take my meds, I am over the top angry, blah blah blah.

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 9, 2008 at 7:45 am

Debunking the Rape Kit Charging Lie. Has been proven false multiple times. Think about it, if it were true, wouldn't Obama and Biden be using it in their campaign?

Web Link

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 9, 2008 at 7:46 am

Alice, open your mind a bit. Think about what Obama is actually owning when he makes his charges. There are enough flat out lies coming from his campaign that it is hard to believe that if thought he could get away with it, he would tell this one also.

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 9, 2008 at 7:47 am

Sorry, NOT hard to believe.

Like this comment
Posted by Observer
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Oct 9, 2008 at 10:33 am


Ever get the feeling that you're just talking to yourself?

Like this comment
Posted by Sharon
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 9, 2008 at 10:39 am

Who is Barack Obama?

Barack Obama's affiliation with the New Party and the Democratic Socialists of America is now established.

Obama was a New Party member when he ran for the Illinois state senate.

Democratic Socialists of America, New Party, William Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, ACORN, Rev. Wright, Frank Marshall Davis, Tony Rezko — so many questions for the most liberal member of the senate, so little time.

Like this comment
Posted by OhlonePar
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Oct 9, 2008 at 11:09 am


It seems to me you think you know all about Barack Obama, so complaining that you don't is pretty ridiculous.

Almost as ridiculous as yours and Perspective's trying to paint him as a sixties radical when he was a small kid in Hawaii at the time.

Too bad you can't argue the issues. Perspective gives it a shot, but you obviously can't handle anything more involved than a popularity contest.

By the way, Troopergate's getting uglier. Todd Palin's admitted that he tried to get his ex-brother-in-law fired numerous times. And we're still supposed to believe Monegan's firing wasn't political payback?

Like this comment
Posted by Sharon
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 9, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Who is Obama?

From John HinderakerWeb Link

— Obama participated in the 1996 Young Democratic Socialists conference. The newsletter praised Obama's speech at the gathering, stating that what Obama had to say was "well within the mainstream" of European socialist theory.

— The suggested theme for the 2004 Annual Eugene V. Debs Dinner was Dump Bush and Elect Obama

— The Sept.-Oct. 1995 newsletter notes that Barack Obama, chief of staff to state senator Alice Palmer (whom Obama succeeded), urged New Party members to participate in Obama's voter registration drive.

Obama is identified as a member of the New Party.
There are photos of Obama with other New Party members also.

John states that the info was scrubbed from the New Party websites this summer and the Obama campaign has denied an affiliation with the organizations.
John, however, was able to find archived newsletters at the Internet Archive Organization.

Like this comment
Posted by Lost Brooks
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 10, 2008 at 12:26 pm

Back to the original topic, here is David Brooks in writing on the Republican war on ideas.

Web Link

P.S. Sharon, try to write in a different unique style for your different persona's. It's too easy to figure out which ones are you.

Like this comment
Posted by Just Wondering
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 10, 2008 at 12:44 pm


Given your prolific writings on this forum, I have to ask:
Do you come from family money, or are you living off the government dole? (I suspect the latter).

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Burger chain Shake Shack to open in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 5 comments | 2,620 views

Eat, Surf, Love
By Laura Stec | 3 comments | 982 views

Couples: So You Married Mom or Dad . . .
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 969 views

The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 2 comments | 605 views