Tag: NYT

Member Post

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/23/realestate/not-everyone-is-jolly-about-christmas-trees-in-the-lobby.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fask-real-estate On a forgotten front of a forgotten war, a dedicated unit of troops – D (Dick) Company of the 41st Journalism Brigade, known as “The Old Grey Ladies” fights on. What we owe them for their sacrifice can never be repaid. Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Member Post

 

It’s pretty simple. Hillary can’t be prosecuted because she was only “extremely careless” (Comey), but not “grossly negligent” (the law), and the NYT can’t be prosecuted because it’s only grossly “negligent” (the judge), but doesn’t evince “reckless disregard” (the law). Liberals call this “nuance”, a French word meaning “Heads I win, tails you lose.” Preview […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Moderates in Paradise: David Brooks

 

David Brooks during a commercial break on Meet The Press.David Brooks, the reflexively moderate New York Times columnist, is at it again, this time lamenting those poor, confused Iowa Christians who believe that the Bible’s injunction “Do not show partiality to the poor” means, well … not showing partiality to the poor. According to Brooks, this idea should extend to both policy and political discourse, but the parlance employed by the likes of Ted Cruz is deemed un-Christian by the pant-crease impresario.

Brooks finds evangelical support for Ted Cruz inscrutable. They are supposed to respond to the reassuring tones of Mike Huckabee or the pleasantly sleep-inducing Ben Carson. This is why Brooks — whose column is characterized by his unfunny and, apparently, unself-aware tendency to lecture Christians about how they should comport themselves — is confused by Cruz’s lead in Iowa. These Iowa Christians don’t seem to know their place anymore. Trump? Cruz? Please! It’s not like Iowa evangelicals have witnessed much undesired change during Obama’s tenure.

Brooks sees little in America that has changed in Obama’s tenure for evangelicals to complain about. Why don’t they simply roll with it now that divorce law is deemed fit for basket cases likes Oregon and Illinois while while marriage be defined once-and-for by one man in a robe? It’s a play so absurd, Harold Pinter and Harold Becket together couldn’t have conceived of it.