David Brooks Reveals His Problem With Republicans

New York Times columnist David Brooks debated Republican Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) at an American Enterprise Institute forum Thursday and, amid a large degree of back-patting, the writer came to the conclusion that the GOP, in its current legislative form, is exhibiting a sort of obstinate "rigidity" that is damaging to the political process.

Here's what Brooks had to say about the current debate over deficit control by cutting taxes and spending (transcript via ThinkProgress):

BROOKS: And my problem with the Republican Party right now, including Paul, is that if you offered them 80-20, they say no. If you offered them 90-10, they'd say no. If you offered them 99-1 they'd say no. And that's because we've substituted governance for brokerism, for rigidity that Ronald Reagan didn't have.

And to me, this rigidity comes from this polarizing world view that they're a bunch of socialists over there. You know, again, I've spent a lot of time with the president. I've spent a lot of time with the people around him. They're liberals! ... But they're not idiots. And they're not Europeans, and they don't want to be a European welfare state. ... It's American liberalism, and it's not inflexible.

Brooks also explained his vision of the Democrats' ideology. "They have much greater faith in planning than I do, and the health care plan that came out of that, it reflected their faith in planning that bunch of smart guys sitting around in Washington can plan the health care system in this country," Brooks said. "They want to have -- if you read what they've written for the past 20 years -- a more actively planned society which does a little more redistribution."

WATCH (via ThinkProgress)

Comments

[John Stopple]

04:17 AM on 12/07/2010

There are two types of people, those who like Brooks and those who don't.

Let's call the people who like Brooks "babblers". "Babblers" tended to be taught from a very young age that if you don't know a fact, you should make it up as you go along because the Great Debate waits for no man. Of late "Babblers" have been very fond of armchair sociology.

Let's call the people who don't like Brooks "streams". Streams seem to think that accuracy is the number one goal in life. Streams would never respond to the stat that 62% of streams agree with 25% of babblers 84% of the time because they would want to know that the denial of such a stat was in fact based in reality. So streams are people who would not respond to Brooks columns even in one Friedman Unit's worth of time.

[Morgantheaxe]

10:33 PM on 12/06/2010

Anyone else really hoping for a primary challenge in 2012 as much as I am? Im telling you I caucused for Obama. I don't say this lightly. My missunderstanding or his misleading demeanor in 2007/08 it's irrelevant. Fact is my expectations just havent been met. I expected audacity. What I have seen is an over reaching respect for the legislative process. I get it Mr. Obama. You understand the constitution as completely as few others in this country do, but your respect for the seperation of powers and your velvet hand in congress is just not what we voted for. Yes it's a quality some find admirable. I don't. Not in these times. I wan't a president carrying a hickory club not an olive branch.

[legalloon]

07:08 PM on 12/06/2010

My husband and I are the owners of a small (very small) business and we are suffering horribly in this economy. We were just discussing the fact that these people are enacting legislation which does not affect them at all. We are both over 60 and pay $2,000 per month for health care. The rethugs want to repeal health care reform? What do they care? They don't pay for their health care, yet I have to scrap to pay for mine. They want to extend tax cuts for wealthy people? What do they care? It's the only legislation that affects them, as they're wealthy. My husband and I will be lucky to not end up living in the box the refrigerator came in - these arrogant bastards need to get some empathy and start working for the average citizen.

[southingtonian]

07:33 AM on 12/07/2010

except for your current financial difficulty, you could be describing my husband and me. We avoided the financial problem because we knew the historic result of a legislature/executive controlled by self-styled conservatives. In Dec. 2000, we began preparing to close the business, and began looking for jobs with (then) secure employers. History (even the most recent)evinces that Republicans despise us 'hoi-poloi' and are not about to put our concerns on their agenda.

[sarabono]

05:46 PM on 12/06/2010

My problem with Brooks is that he is still being published .....

[cdecisneros]

05:27 PM on 12/06/2010

They breath air, they can breed and they can vote.

[Rita Foster]

04:14 PM on 12/06/2010

You don't see wealthy people in the streets with signs asking for tax relief. They are out yachting somewhere while poor people fight on their behalf....LOLOL

[Francois Bergeron]

04:59 PM on 12/06/2010

It's fantastically weird.

[Raw Ron]

02:52 PM on 12/06/2010

The problems with republicans is that they have forgotten about the middle class. They have settled on policy positions that only benefit the wealthy and has managed to convince a significant portion of the electorate that by giving more to the rich will some how trickle down like somehow their pockets can only carry so much. We have seen this theory to be utterly false, as the rich have taken more and the middle class has for the first time ever lost money. Reaganomics is choking the life out of this country and the republicans want to squeeze even more.

[AncientTerp]

02:26 PM on 12/06/2010

Um, Brooks is just another RINO with no clout in Republican circles. Too elite, uses big words, writes for the NY Times. The self-styled 'conservative' tide continues to roll in and the forthcoming primaries promise to provide an even more extreme kind of Republican on offer in 2012. It'll be a great time for second amendment enthusiasts.

[rh654]

02:15 PM on 12/06/2010

As long as Democrats are afraid to stand and fight - and will rollover whenever the Republicans tell them to - why in the world would Republicans want to compromise on anything?

[Rastaman1967]

02:03 PM on 12/06/2010

I hate to sound ignorrant, but please excuse me. I'm at the point now where I no longer have confident in the Dems or Republicans. While both sides are ready to kill one another...the "country" is left out of the discussion. The conversation has now become more about the parties. So what is my solution (this is personal), get u each day, take care of my family, work hard to make my small business work and to hell with Government, Washington and all politicians, because at the end of the day, they really could careless about the everyday guy. i would like the Dems and Republicans to ask a family who just lost their home, if they really care about taxes going up or down or if they care about the US Deficit?

[GeorgeP922]

01:41 PM on 12/06/2010

Um I thought we had no respect for him.

What happened to Jason Linkings tearing him apart.

Maybe Danny Shea owes favors again.

[Exit]

01:29 PM on 12/06/2010

Brooks can not compete with the Rush Limbaughs of the world keeping Republicans stupid. The over 65 generation that make up the Fox News/Limbaugh audience will soon not be with us and maybe intelligent Republicans can take over.

[sarabono]

05:49 PM on 12/06/2010

Hay, I resemble that remark. You to will be over 65 some day (if you luck holds out)

[southingtonian]

07:39 AM on 12/07/2010

Hey my husband and I are + 65 Dems. Not every senior is senile.

[DazedandConfused]

12:15 PM on 12/06/2010

I don't know if I'm a Dem. I have more principles than most Dems apparently do (and that definitely includes Obama). I would NOT give tax breaks to the wealthy. Period. And if that means that there are no unemployment benefits and no tax breaks for the middle class, then that's what will happen. I really think the Dems need to force the issue.

[madatnewsmedia]

02:29 PM on 12/06/2010

And you're not the president either! It's always easy to be a backseat driver.

[CommonSensePlease]

10:51 AM on 12/06/2010

The progressive democrats should vote against the Bush's tax cut extension deal to make a point that they cannot be pushed around by the GOP or Obama. It is time to do it! After that, I assure you that we can get a better deal. If the Republicans can filibuster, the Progressive democrats can do it and should do it!

[Broderick Crawford]

12:53 PM on 12/06/2010

If the democrats filibuster that means that no action is taken. I wish the Progressive democrats would filibuster everything and stp damaging the country...

[brantl]

01:18 PM on 12/06/2010

The only time I saw them damage the country was when they caved to Republicans.

[Gussmith]

10:42 AM on 12/06/2010

So this is how democracy, or is it capitalism, works. In glee the Republicans hold the U.S. hostage until the president capitulates to their agenda.

I don't want our government to take peoples' money but that is what taxation is if we are to have a functioning government and economy. We can argue forever about what is fair, who should pay how much and what the government should spend on what. Objective criteria are required, not political rantings to support a party's positions. Where has the money come from and where has it gone? Who benefits from government expenditures? How much does taxation pay for the infrastructure that allows the wealthy to become wealthier? How much defense? How much for social services? Let's get agreements and goals.

[TiredOfTheLies]

11:15 AM on 12/06/2010

Yes it is a really terrible thing we are seeing. Our democracy reduced to rantings and allowed to be held hostage by the minority. Nothing will move forward and those that can will take advantage of everyone else. Having or expecting to have fair, honest, delibrate debate does not appear to be in the cards for our government or its citizens and that is a shame - no that is a crime against our (now seeming lost) democracy.