John Tierney: Dumbass

I will try to keep this relatively short, and I hope this will be my last post concerning the rash of particularly ridiculous conservative viewpoints in the New York Times lately. Of course, I think all conservative viewpoints are ridiculous, so I guess I should refer to these as laughable. My disdain for David Brooks is well-documented. He seems like a nice guy, but his reasoning is crap. But the newest conservative columnist at the Times, John Tierney, puts David Brooks to shame. I've read three of his columns so far, and his track record isn't good. The first column is a dialogue (yes, you read that right!) between Tierney and his good Peruvian friend "Pablo." Pablo is proud of the enormous pension that he will receive as a result of Peru's wonderful private pension plan! Tierney is sad, because his measly Social Security checks won't help him maintain the lifestyle to which he is accustomed. Putting aside the fact that Tierney surely won't be reliant on Social Security for his retirement, there is also the fact that SOCIAL SECURITY WASN'T DESIGNED TO KEEP OLD PEOPLE IN VELVET SMOKING JACKETS AND CUBAN CIGARS! The reason some of us are opposed to privatization is that radical conservatives/libertarians want to ELIMINATE the New Deal and the legacy of FDR. The libertarian Cato Institute, who advocates the exact plan that Bush is pushing down our throats, has not been shy about this, either. And what about dear Pablo? Are we supposed to believe that Peru's system is a shining example for the rest of the world? Funny, I've heard nothing about Peru's system except how corrupt and inefficient it is. But I guess that's the liberal media talking. Oh, and Tierney, the dialogue thing isn't clever, it's embarrassing. Leave the alternative column thing to hipster music critics half your age.

The next column was published the day after Bush's recent press conference on Social Security "reform." He takes everything that comes out of Bush's mouth via Karl Rove at face value and then proceeds to mock Democrats based on this assumption that everything Bush says is completely true. I'll pause here to let you snort with contempt. Behold:

"Democrats have good reason to be aghast at President Bush's new proposal for Social Security. Someone has finally called their bluff.
They tried yesterday to portray him as just another cruel, rich Republican for suggesting any cuts in future benefits, but that's not what the prime-time audience saw on Thursday night. By proposing to shore up the system while protecting low-income workers, Mr. Bush raised a supremely awkward question for Democrats: which party really cares about the poor?"

Let's review. Bush and the Republicans care more about the poor because he says so on prime-time television. Wow. OK!

Let's not even get into the various hidden and obvious reasons why Bush is full of shit on this. There are too many to count. Tierney's colleague at the Times, Paul Krugman, came out with a scathing attack on this humorous assertion within a few days. Maybe Tierney could take a few lessons from Krugman, who isn't even a journalist, for Christ's sake! He's an economist. At Princeton. Not only is he much, much, MUCH more informed than Tierney, a career reporter, he can also write a column that could get past my college editing professor. I actually felt embarrassed for Tierney, what with his extreme gullibility, the likes of which I haven't come across this side of NewsMax.com. The earnest title of this column? Bush as Robin Hood.

His latest column is titled Laura Bush Talks Naughty. This title is also without a shred of irony. He goes on to assert that Laura Bush really proved all those liberals wrong with her completely off-the-cuff (see, Tierney, irony isn't that difficult!) jokes at the White House press club dinner the other night. Why, it looks like she's not the prim librarian after all! She called herself a desperate housewife (god, how I love topical humor)! So many racy jokes! I can practically see Tierney fanning himself at this dinner. He goes on to use this performance as a metaphor for why the Republicans keep winning elections and why they hate Democrats for their "smugness." That smugness angle is so new, so fresh, John. The liberals at this dinner were experiencing what Tierney refers to as "cognitive dissonance" at such an unfamiliar sight. There is only one problem.

Laura Bush's totally hilarious jokes were written by presidential joke writer Landon Parvin. The same guy who wrote that charming routine for last year's dinner about Bush looking everywhere for those dang WMDs. Wow, you must be really embarrassed now, John!