Posted on 01/13/2016 5:11:24 AM PST by Kaslin
Hey Brooks. Obama said if they bring a knife, we bring a gun. He also said he was getting good at killing people.
The left/media cartel has declared that if the Washington Post has not declared it a scandal, then it is *not* a scandal.
That is exactly what their definition of a scandal is - something that the Washington Post declares.
Nothing to do with reality - just what a liberal paper says.
Cruz and Trump are performing an invaluable service to the nation merely by driving our loathsome pundit class batdung looney.
Brooks is one of the most dangerous people out there. He convinces liberal New York Times readers that they are making a conservative choice when they are picking the most demonic of traitors.
Media types who are straight-out hateful are not nearly as dangerous.
Agreed.
They have exposed so much.
It is like having a nagging feeling about your spouse’s fidelity, then being presented with irrefutable proof of infidelity.
The GOP has been exposed as unfaithful to us all, and they have been in bed with the Dems the whole time.
We just couldn’t believe it.
But that last budget bill proved it.
Now there is no doubt, and a new political future must be forged for America to survive.
It’s time for many of these so called journalists to leave the business.
They sure are. B. Obama showed his fear of Trump and so did Nikki Haley.
And then there are the mouth foaming goofballs we have on the Cruz team. Everything said by anyone is a plot by Trump. They don’t help Cruz and they reflect poorly on those of us who are rational Cruz supporters.
Brooks is another Jewish Canadian, like David Frum. Both are fixtures at NPR, as the “guest conseravtives”. Both are less supportive of Israel than Senator Cruz. Brooks would be an odd choice to select to reflect on the Christianity of Sen. Cruz.
Brooks was a senior at the same college I attended when I was a Freshman. We likely had some of the same teachers. So, if he should decide to “dismiss his [Cruz’] followers as the ‘poor, uneducated and easy-to-command’ types.” I’ll be happy to offer myself as a counter-example.
No no, you misunderstand the meaning of "moderate." "Moderate" means a leftist camouflaging himself in the hope of infiltrating some leftist ideas into the minds of less observant non-leftists.
Recalling his 1st up close meeting with Obama, Brooks drools out "I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant and I'm thinking, a) he's going to be president and b) he'll be a very good president" [LINK]
Chris Matthews eat your heart out! All you got was 'thrill up your leg' - from a distance.
David Brooks is a pillow-biter.
David Brooks still wears a fanny pack too.
This is standard let's-throw-their-Christiantiy-in-their-faces stuff. Anyone can do that. "If you're such a great Christian, why don't you [insert what the person writing wants you to do]." These people who have never read the Gospel in their lives.
I'm a Trump supporter but I hate the Times and Brooks and can't stand this kind of attack.
Gender issues? What are we talking about here? Brooksie has gayness issues? I never heard that about him. He just keeps saying stuff about pants legs and creases and manly hotness, but I've never heard anyone out David Brooks. The way Frank Rich did David Brock, for example, in the pages of The New York Times back when Brock was writing for American Spectator and working on a book about Hildebeast.
Apologies to Brooks. I conflated his name with David Brock. Know nothing about David Brooks, and withdraw my comment. (Except from what you wrote, maybe it was a good guess.)
Oy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.