This trash is supposed to be what NYT readers think is intellectual humor?
It is such a parody, that I was half-expecting Brooks at the end to break through into some reality but he didn’t. His essay is just fantastic nastiness imagining itself to be clever.
Is it really funny to disparage someone because of what he wears, or because he happens to have nice hair? Or make fun of a person merely because he is rather normative in his behavior?
I found the comments following the column also very illuminating: most of the readers thought the column was great! We are in different worlds, because I can’t see that there is anything admirable or illuminating about this drivel, and yet Times readers seem to relish it, and it resonates with their “thinking.” And, I guess, that does (after all) tell me something!
There are a lot of people out there who look human to me, but are so different from me that they might be members of a different species.
I went and read Dowd’s screed the other day. The comments are completely from a different world, and they cut it off on her column without approval and it appears they only allow liberal comments to make it through. I read through them all and maybe there were a few light approaches at different views but they were so mild it was hard to tell.
Different worlds no doubt, and sometimes I feel the same; that there is a whole different species amongst us. And the new Prez there says there is no bias. Pfft.