David Brooks's latest piece in the Times is a fine example of the Times hiring an idiot to be their new columnist, and that person showing himself to be an idiot by writing a moronic column.

The link I provide is sure not to last very long, so I'll provide some choice quotes.

"the Northeast is no longer a particularly important region of the country — we haven't sent a person to the White House in 43 years"

This is the measure of the "importance" of a region? Maybe that's because we're too big for the presidency, just like the Pope is "too big" for the Nobel Peace Prize, according to your last column. Yes, obviously Arkansas and Texas are the most important states in the country, since the last two presidents were born there. All that matters in a presidential campaign is where the president was born, of course!

"If a Martian came down and landed in the stands of a Yankees-Red Sox game, he would get the impression that human beings are 90 percent men and 10 percent women in tight T-shirts, and that we reproduce by loathing in groups."

This could be the most ridiculous statement in the column. If you take any social situation in isolation (except perhaps a New York City street), you'll get a bizarre representation of human demographics. And if you take any scene other than reproduction itself, you'll get a pretty odd picture of how we reproduce. That is, assuming you are a Martian who takes any situation to be an act of reproduction. This is an attempt at humour, but with nothing to back it up, it's just plain stupid.

"We know that our region is not the future. Every year, people move out of the Northeast to Scottsdale and other places where it is considered fashionable to coordinate your toenail polish with the color scheme of your Lexus."

What a utopia! How I have longed for a society with such priorities as these! Taken purely literally this statement is probably true, but that's about all. Suburban sprawl may be extant, but I'd wager there are still plenty more people who would like to move to the urban Northeast than would like to move away.

"during the game [the fans] experience long periods of contempt interrupted by short bursts of vindication."

Ah, of course. Everything that can be considered enjoyable consists only of mindless smiles. What you are seeing here is called caring, and being nervous about the outcome of the game. I'm not a big baseball fan but even I can tell you this is what it's all about, and even with teams that lose a lot, even the possibility of a change of fortune is enough to keep a hardcore fan going.

I'm so glad, Mr. Brooks, that you were able to survive the unbelievable boorishness of a baseball game to tell about it. How selfless of you to step down into this bog of society and report back to the rest of the elite so we know we're not missing anything. We northeasterners should really get with the times and start fighting wars, burning Dixie Chicks CDs and color-matching all of our beautiful belongings. And I do realize I'm to some degree confirming your argument, and sure, I do anger easily, at fools like you. Perhaps now that you are on the op-ed page of the New York Times, you should consider the concept of relevance when you choose a topic for your pieces. That's another thing we tend to like.

David Brooks, you suck.