AMAZING NYT's TWOFER!
Conservative voters are acting like liberals!
And an equally amusing tale of conservatives revolting against their principles.
David Brooks of the New York Times pens a liberal Mainstream Media member's wet dream of the opposition in today's MSM flagship.
It's hard to know where to begin on this one. Brooks' take on McCain is a MSM equivalent of a sloppy kiss. No tongue this time; but there's plenty time for that later.
Brooks' talks yet again of the splintering of the conservative movement. To the David Brooks in the MSM, conservatism is just like the flip side of liberalism: just a bunch of people trying to get their hands on the levers of powers, no principles needed.
An oppositional mentality set in: if the liberals worried about global warming, it was necessary to regard it as a hoax. If The New York Times editorial page worried about waterboarding, then the code of conservative correctness required one to think it O.K.
Apostates and deviationists were expelled or found wanting, and the boundaries of acceptable thought narrowed. Moderate Republicans were expelled for squishiness. Millions of coastal suburbanites left the party in disgust.
Ah, to be David Brooks.
Ah, to write for the Times.
Where everyone who disagrees with your opinion of the world doing it for the sheer joy derived from opposing a liberal viewpoint.
That, of course, is just an interesting side benefit of thinking independently of the New York Times' party line.
Just because liberals can shift in the course of years from believing the Earth is threatened with Global Cooling to their latest fad, Global Warming, doesn't mean that those who take a more reasoned, longer look at the cycles of climate are of similar bent.
Conservatives have heard the Global Warming sideshow before: when it was Global Cooling. Because we don't want the liberal's favorite fix for everyting--more taxes, more government, more regulation--we are, in David Brooks' eyes, opposing Global Warming for the sheer contrariness of it.
But this article is more. It's also about the favorite Republican of the Moment for the MSM: John McCain.
David Brooks sees hope for conservatives because--surprise!--they aren't acting like conservatives!?!?
Yet a funny thing has happened this primary season. Conservative voters have not followed their conservative leaders. Conservative voters are much more diverse than the image you’d get from conservative officialdom.
David Brooks' fondest dream: that conservatives re-invent themselves as liberals!
Who to lead this exciting Renaissance?
Time for The New York Times' favorite, John McCain, to step up to the plate.
McCain’s winning coalition in South Carolina was pretty broad. He lost among the extremely conservative but won among the somewhat conservative and the moderates. He lost among those who go to church more than once a week, but won among weekly churchgoers. He won among those who strongly support the Bush administration and among those who are angry at the Bush administration, among those who strongly support the war and among those who strongly oppose it. He won every income group over $30,000.
McCain's winning coalition in South Carolina was pretty broad, for sure. It included Independents and Democrats.
It's a quiet secret that the MSM hasn't reported that no Republican primary yet has featured voters of only the Republican persuasion.
McCain is David Brooks' favorite Republican because so many of McCain's positions echo those of David Brooks.
Brooks takes to task conservative leaders (Rush Limbaugh) that supposedly are irrelevant now. Of course, Brooks doesn't cite Limbaugh's ratings numbers versus the continually-declining circulation numbers of the New York Times.
If all conservatives aren't listening to Limbaugh in Brooks' view, it's hard to see just who is listening to David Brooks, outside of the NY metro area and some Washington insider subscribers.
Brooks finishes up with a liberal's fondest wish: "And McCain’s success has raised an astonishing specter: Republicans may actually have a shot at winning this year."
David Brooks is right. If the the election were held today, John McCain might surely be the winner.
If the only voters were the New York Times' Editorial writers.
And that's another liberal wet dream.
[images: healthinaction; NYTimes;
* The Voters Revolt
Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page