Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Members have made 15 comments.

  1. Profile photo of Crow's Nest Member

    Oh, this is just too good! Ha!

    Hackneyed writing, superbly and appropriately mocked.

    Thanks for the link, Pejman.

    • #1
    • December 31, 2012 at 1:54 am
  2. Profile photo of Franco Member

    Hilarious!

    Can we have a Peggy Noonan generator next? That would be fun too!

    • #2
    • December 31, 2012 at 5:34 am
  3. Profile photo of Pseudodionysius Member
    Franco: Hilarious!

    Can we have a Peggy Noonan generator next? That would be fun too! · 1 hour ago

    I’d like to see a POTUS generator next:

    “Um, uh, um, uh,….”

    Rinse, blather, repeat.

    • #3
    • December 31, 2012 at 7:03 am
  4. Profile photo of KC Mulville Member

    The scary thing … the entire pundit class could be reduced to a mechanical generator. We pretty much know what they’re going to say before they say it.

    A couple of pundits will surprise now and then. George Will. Mark Steyn. WFBuckley was that way.

    All things considered, repetition isn’t necessarily bad. It’s probably natural. Well-established viewpoints respond in predictable ways. What makes Friedman such a special case is his self-delusion that he’s a brilliant, innovative thinker. The only one who doesn’t know exactly what Thomas Friedman is going to say is Thomas Friedman.

    • #4
    • December 31, 2012 at 7:39 am
  5. Profile photo of Group Captain Mandrake Inactive

    I wonder sometimes if these so-called pundits are very different from the average sports commentator. From time to time I watch ESPN with my son and there are various “talking heads” discussing a forthcoming game (NFL, MLB, NBA, whatever), and I realize that what they usually say can be reduced to analytic statements of the following form:

    1. Team A will win or they will lose.

    2. Player B will play well or not play well.

    3. This is going to be a good game or it won’t be a good game.

    I think that if you write down a sufficient number of analytic statements for pretty much any topic and then link them with conjunctions and disjunctions, you probably can replicate a significant amount of punditry. I detect the same sort of stuff in economic reports.

    “The price of copper may rise or it may fall or it may ‘move sideways’ ” (a fine piece of sophistry).

    • #5
    • December 31, 2012 at 7:47 am
  6. Profile photo of Neolibertarian Inactive

    That Mwambe sure does get around!

    • #6
    • December 31, 2012 at 7:53 am
  7. Profile photo of Jimmy Carter Member

    Quoting or referring to Friedman I’d warn about the dangers of “second-hand stupid.”

    • #7
    • December 31, 2012 at 9:37 am
  8. Profile photo of Group Captain Mandrake Inactive

    Remarkable. It seems to be a variant on this (after loading the page hit refresh for a new article) or even this.

    • #8
    • December 31, 2012 at 9:47 am
  9. Profile photo of Mollie Hemingway Contributor

    This is brilliant.

    • #9
    • December 31, 2012 at 9:51 am
  10. Profile photo of Reckless Endangerment Member

    This is too good and yes. You did find the most hilarious one. I now just as soon skip his op-eds but I forget a sizable portion of the country still will read what’s put in front of them. Ugh.

    • #10
    • December 31, 2012 at 9:55 am
  11. Profile photo of KC Mulville Member

    The man is just so “precious,” and the parody captures it.

    Imagine … just imagine … that’s hilarious.

    • #11
    • December 31, 2012 at 10:06 am
  12. Profile photo of MBF Member
    MBF

    I think Rush calls it “mental [expletive] with no climax.”

    • #12
    • December 31, 2012 at 10:40 am
  13. Profile photo of drlorentz Member

    Wonderful, though beware of close contact with Friedman, as Jimmy Carter warns. Even Superman was vulnerable to kryptonite.

    Jimmy Carter: Quoting or referring to Friedman I’d warn about the dangers of “second-hand stupid.”

    Be careful, you guys.

    • #13
    • December 31, 2012 at 11:56 am
  14. Profile photo of kesbar Inactive

    They need to follow this up with one for Krugman too.

    • #14
    • January 1, 2013 at 3:06 am
  15. Profile photo of Pejman Yousefzadeh Inactive
    Pejman Yousefzadeh Post author

    I disagree mightily with Krugman on the issues, and there are certain elements of his writing that lend themselves to parody, but Krugman, to give him his due, is the best writer of the bunch. The other really tempting target for parody at the Times is Maureen Dowd, who perpetually writes like she is 12.

    kesbar: They need to follow this up with one for Krugman too. · 1 hour ago
    • #15
    • January 1, 2013 at 4:19 am