|"He said my prostate was|
about this big."
Sometimes in life we have to look back and say to ourselves, "life is so rich and so complex that no one can understand it." So that's why I wrote my new book--to explain the ways in which we cannot understand it. Moreover, I substantiate my book with results of research. (Of course, getting your science on with me (Mr. Brooks) is a lot like getting advice on STDs from John Holmes. Buyer beware.)
First of all, let me prove that I'm a moderate by saying that some regulations are necessary. None of the ones we have now, of course. And even more moderately, I will cite examples of psychological research that will exonerate my ludicrous support for George Bush.
Now ordinarily, you would think, "Surely a Real American such as David Brooks would not stoop so low as to read academic journals produced by the out-of-touch-Asian-Jewish-Meritocrats-Who-Rule-America-And-Live-On-The-Public-Dole-And-Might-Even-Belong-To-Unions?" Don't be silly. There are plenty of non-Asian-and/or-Jews out there.
For example, a study of email versus in-person communication found that 2 Dachsund hounds were much better at sniffing one another's feces when in the same cage. But when using email, these dogs were completely unable to recognize each other! The results were literally ZERO. None at all. It's almost as though dogs have evolved sensori-perceptual capacities which can't be duplicated with ASCII text-based communication.
Even more amazingly, the dogs showed reactions to other dogs, but when sent Twitter messages, the dogs displayed no reaction WHATSOEVER.
In other words, what we feel is often right. For example, if you feel a hot needle sticking in your foot, your natural reaction is the correct one. Just as carrying a sign that reads "Nazibama" feels right. Or as Hemingway said, "Just do it." (Pretty sure he said that.) "If you can't put in 30 minutes a week, you don't deserve a hot date."
For example, in one study, people were given pictures of people to determine which would be more competent. In just one second, they were able to determine which one was more likely to determine which one would be 'elected'. [Yes, David Brooks actually really seems to believe this.]
This is why an elderly white person can look at a photo of--say--a black president and know whether or not he'll be a good president. Now you know. In other words, 'competent' = 'electable', just like 'attractive' = 'great actress' or 'breasts' = 'boner'.
Some skeptics might accuse me of once again indulging in the worst kind of specious thinking: The one that feigns reasonableness and moderation while supporting a political party that has shown no desire to do anything but fight wars to prove that America must be special--no matter blighted our inner cities become, how deeply and permanently indebted our citizens become in trying to attain the American Dream, no matter how often the so-called principles of the Constitution are tossed out like a used diaper the moment the election is over and it's time for Cheney to have his own personal Bastille, etc. etc. Nope, no matter purported moderates support this party, we're not responsible for anything that went wrong. Because we did what we FELT was right. And who cares about body counts when you do what's right?