Look at This NEW LIE David Brooks is Trying to Peddle >>>

[Stephanie]

He presumes to identify four different camps in the question of Iran. The Pre-Emptionists (McCain), The Sanctionists (Hillary), The Reformists (BushCo), in which he drops this bombshell :

Privately, some administration officials believe there is no way to prevent Iran from getting the bomb; we might as well try to make the regime as palatable as possible.

But then he comes to the part where he gets to libel Democrats with a fiction of his own creation. The fourth group is:

The Silent Fatalists. Mainstream Democrats have been remarkably quiet on this issue. Their main conviction is that American-led military action would be disastrous. This shapes their definition of the problem. A nuclear Iran may not be so cataclysmic, they privately say. Why shouldn't Iran have as much right to the bomb as any other nation? The regime may be nasty, but it's containable with deterrence and engagement.

What utter bullshit. Notice that these supposed Democrats go unnamed. They speak privately, i.e., they are figments of David Brooks imagination.

WHY do I have to see this liar every Friday night on Lehrer, every Saturday night in the paper, and every Sunday morning on McLaughlin? Did they run out of pundits? Why are they constantly shoving him in my face? And why isn't he held to a minimal standard of substantiated facts before he can make a charge like that against anonymous Democrats on the Op-Ed page of the New York Times?

The rallying cry of the Democrats this year needs to be ETHICS. That is what is lacking in every aspect of this Republican machine. They bleat about morals but they have no ethics. None of them live up to their professional obligations. They're dishonorable. As a journalist David Brooks should hold himself to a standard of truth. But as a Republican shill he has no ethics. Just like the rest of them.

[liberalhistorian]

1. Brooks is a tool of the highest order and

has been for a long time; therefore, none of this surprises me in the least.

[bluerum]

2. Well hell,,, we should invade them ASAP! It worked out pretty

well in Iraq didn't it?

Iran should be even easier since they really do have nuke facilities and we know where they are.

I think * should lead the charge carrying a great big American flag and wearing second hand body armor.

:banghead:

[underpants]

3. Memory hole: this administration was SURE they had Iran turned around

oh about 2 years ago they had all their talking heads talking about how WINK WINK they had things turning around in Iran and that reformers would take control, that there would be a populist uprising.

Basically they openly hinted at CIA and psy-ops type actions in Iran.


No one wants to mention that anymore.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Brooks works for unnamed Republicans who privately advocate

the replacement of American democracy in favor of a totalitarian regime.

[Stephanie]

5. Amen.

He learned his disregard for ethics from the disciples of Leo Strauss.

[Stephanie]

6. WHICH Dems, Brooks? Name names.

Put up or shut up. There is no such person.

[seabeyond]

7. i have heard a couple dems timidly speak on iran. this board has

jumped on them calling them,....... siding with bush, war mongers.

he is right. and we have made damn sure we have pinned our dems down so they cant address this issue. and it is a real issue in our world today. my hope would be our dems could speak out, in responsiblity and problem solving, without the need to resort to war. but they are given no space to do this. so yes, it is yet another tool rove has on the dems, that we ourselves have created for our party