Jerrydevil Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 (edited) David Brooks of the New York Times says Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, etc. have "illusory power." He also criticizes the Republican Party for pandering to the right-wing TV and radio commentators. "It is a story of remarkable volume and utter weakness. It is the story of media mavens who claim to represent a hidden majority but who in fact represent a mere niche even in the Republican Party. It is a story as old as The Wizard of Oz, of grand illusions and small men behind the curtain." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/opinion/02brooks.html?em Edited October 2, 2009 by Jerrydevil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 (edited) David Brooks of the New York Times says Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, etc. have "illusory power." He also criticizes the Republican Party for pandering to the right-wing TV and radio commentators. "It is a story of remarkable volume and utter weakness. It is the story of media mavens who claim to represent a hidden majority but who in fact represent a mere niche — even in the Republican Party. It is a story as old as "The Wizard of Oz," of grand illusions and small men behind the curtain." http://www.nytimes.c...2brooks.html?em Pot meets kettle? edit:Statement changed to a question. Edited October 2, 2009 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsadvoc8 Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 The premise isn't exactly too far-fetched (Beck, Hannity, Rush etc) don't speak for the Republican majority and listeners does not equal votes. It could even be 100% accurate but there is nothing behind his statements other than his vitriol and insults. It was as deep and supported by facts as a Beck or Hannity rant. So Kicksave Brodeur is right on the mark with his pot/kettle remark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 (edited) This column particularly caught my attention because David Brooks is a conservative ... a moderate conservative anyway. Actually, hard-line right-wingers probably deem him too liberal for their tastes. I just think he's sensible. Edited October 2, 2009 by Jerrydevil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 (edited) This column particularly caught my attention because David Brooks is a conservative ... a moderate conservative anyway. Actually, hard-line right-wingers probably deem him too liberal for their tastes. I just think he's sensible. "They are enabled by the slightly educated snobs who believe that Glenn Beck really is the voice of Middle America". Beck's paperback book has been #1 on the NYT bestseller list for fifteen weeks, who are buying all of these books? edit:forgot to add the "#1" Edited October 2, 2009 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 Beck's paperback book has been #1 on the NYT bestseller list for fifteen weeks, who are buying all of these books? Have you read it? I'm thinking about getting the book because I hear many parts of it are good. I'll bet that I agree with him on many points, especially if it's about the dangers of big government. Beck should stick to that stuff, by the way. Telling a TV audience that Obama is a racist who doesn't understand white culture just makes him look like a meathead who wants to drag Obama and the debate into the mud. That's no good. And I think that's what Brooks was complaining about ... the grandstanding and the nastiness. It doesn't help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 (edited) Have you read it? I'm thinking about getting the book because I hear many parts of it are good. I'll bet that I agree with him on many points, especially if it's about the dangers of big government. Beck should stick to that stuff, by the way. Telling a TV audience that Obama is a racist who doesn't understand white culture just makes him look like a meathead who wants to drag Obama and the debate into the mud. That's no good. And I think that's what Brooks was complaining about ... the grandstanding and the nastiness. It doesn't help. I have not read it. I know Beck is over the top and I'm not sure why. I think he is trying to wake people up and this is his way. I think if he could, he would have said it differently re: the racism comment,but it is not any different than what was said when bush was in offic ie: kartrina etc... i know it doesn't make it right so i reserve judgement on his (beck) strategy. I do think it is amusing to see how the left reacts to the very strategy it has so succesfully employed when bush was in office...again i'm not excusing bush for his failures.. i think he fvcked up big time on alot of things... all things being equal. edit: spelling and punctuation Edited October 2, 2009 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts