Who is the worst columnist at the New York Times?

I love Paul Krugman, I wish the Congress was listening to him. He advocates government borrowing at record low interest rates now, to use for spending to get people to work! We'd have had much fast job growth if Congress was listening to him!

I think Gail Collins would be fun to meet for a drink, but her conversational gee-whiz writing style is irksome. And she needs to cool it with the quizzes. However, I will always love her for throwing in a reference to the dog on the car roof every time she mentioned Mitt Romney in the 2012 campaign.

I usually always agree with Frank Bruni, but his columns are very shallow. They belong in a college newspaper, not the paper of record. However, he's a million times better than the faux-deep, faux-moderate David Brooks.

Ross Douthat is the church lady with a column. He is also one of the dumbest, I mean low IQ type dumb, the NYT has ever hired. But with the conservative writers there isn't alot to choose from I guess.

Read Friedman's nemesis Robert Fisk in the Independent. He describes Friedman as "empirical" and "messianic."

R4: Do you mean imperialistic?

Bruni tries too hard to be the other Frank (Rich), and usually flames out. He was a good restaurant reviewer, but as a cultural critic, he's small fry.

Still, he's not as egregious as most of the other contenders.

Brooks, Friedman and Cohen. All of them. Dreadful neocons.

If you want a good laugh look up Matt Taibbi's review of 'The World Is Flat'.

Friedman on anything in the emerging world, Dowd on anything Clinton, Bruni on anything other than food, Brooks on anything sociological, and Douhat on anything.

Rank amateurs, every one of them. In my day, we had more regard for accuracy and fairness.

Brooks is more insidiously bad because he sounds more reasonably but actually follows the party line.

Kristof, of course, is blatantly nuts.

Why does ANYONE in their RIGHT MIND read David Brooks' column!? Lunacy!

Ross Douthat is one of the most retarded human beings ever to live.

Maureen Dowd, since her columns veer on stream of consciousness drivel inspired by Peggy Noonan

Maureen Dowd should capture more of my attention. But she's a boring writer, kind of like George Will. Not to say they're political equivalents, just that I lose interest in almost everything either of them writes by paragraph three, and turn the page.

Plus: Collins, Kristof, Krugman

Minus: Mo Do, Brooks.

Ask me about Friedman in six months.

David Brooks

Brooks Barnes

I'm sensing a pattern here.

In New York, a brook is called a kill. I suppose that is where the mercenary spirit comes from.

[quote]Ask me about Friedman in six months.

Well done.

I agree that Bruni--means well, but most of his columns are decidedly less than essential reading. And, frankly, too much stuff about his family. We get it, you're Italian

Brooks is terrible. Kristol is even worse.

Dowd wrote some good columns years ago. Now she just writes the same crap over and over and over.

Funny that the Times, which takes itself so seriously, should have so many ridiculous columnists.

Of course, since this is DL, it would be Dowd. Her secret advantage: her vagina.

I can remember a time maybe 25 years ago, when I thought Dowd and Friedman were among the best. Can't stand either one.

[quote]Bruni tries too hard to be the other Frank (Rich)

The Times really lost a good one when he got away. His columns were often brilliant. His articles for New York Magazine are too long and too infrequent. Still great, but I preferred him at the Times.

Frank Rich was brilliant. I miss Bob Herbert as well.

Frank Bruni just doesn't have anything to say.

Frank Bruni loved to be pampered and fawned over at NY restaurants, and he got a lot of satisfaction making snide putdowns of his fellow diners for their inferior taste and social status. His love-your-fellow-man schtick reads pretty hollow.

They need some new blood at that place without going over to clickbait and youthchasing.

The NYT has really fallen from grace. The topics are so faux-edgy anymore. Sulzberger is a fool and Dean Baquet is pedestrian as a leader.

Mark Bittman is a food nanny and bore.

The Washington Post has lousy, predictable columnists too. Both papers need fresh points of view.

Douthat, hands down. Why does he have a column there?

The worst is when they let people like Mona Charen or Charles Krauthammer express an opinion. These are clowns and buffoons.

MoDo's pot column was one of the stupidest things I've ever read.

You'd assume that she was Spiro Agnew's grandmother from the tone and the content.

Douthat is less insidious to me than Brooks. Everyone knows Douthat's ideological slant, but Brooks presents himself as a common sense everyman. He tries to hide his conservative and retrograde views behind a veneer of moderation.

The less said about Friedman, the better.

Friedman is blunter than some about stating how messed up the Middle East is. Always worth keeping in mind.

I wish Bruni were a better writer. I always lose interest about halfway through a column.

Does anyone know the general length of their contracts? What does it take to get dismissed? If Maureen Dowd wants, can she just stay until she croaks from an overdose of THC?

R34 - I wish Friedman were blunter about how messed up his columns are.

Where is IDunno? I thought its googling ass had to respond to anything with New York in the title.

Anyone voting for Cohen or Krugman should be ashamed.

Cohen is blustery and overemotional. He feels pre-internet.

I miss Michael Kinsley. He was a deadpan, funny, and brilliant columnist without the whining tendencies of some leftists.

And right on cue, David Brooks jerks off Marco Rubio.

David Brooks is the devil. Run.

x

David Brooks proved again yesterday why he is the worst. He is a total embarrassment.

You forgot a few. Like, gee, I don't know, ALL OF THEM. The NYT is a conformist rag designed to reinforce the status quo and keep the people enslaved to their mass media masters.

Frank Bruni wrote a column today about stress eating and politics. He's been reading too much David Brooks!

Kristof, once he allowed Mia to push him into the middle of the Dylan issue.

Any Republican.

Maureen Dowd is the worst but with the exception of Paul Krugman they are all pretty bad. I don't bother much with the paper anymore, they have badly damaged their legacy with their support of the war in Iraq and their 2016 e mail obsession.

Thomas Friedman is far and away the laziest--there's actually a Friedman Generator that can write an entire Friedman op-ed in a twinkling of an eye if you click the button.

[quote] You forgot a few. Like, gee, I don't know, ALL OF THEM. The NYT is a conformist rag designed to reinforce the status quo and keep the people enslaved to their mass media masters.

Wow, how thrillingly profound, Miss Leftist Conscience of the World.

Maureen "Why Wouldn't Bill Fuck Me ?" Dowd. Preppy scum bag David Brooks a close second.