David Brooks Can't Use the Word "Iraq"

In his column yesterday on the Lamont victory in Connecticut, Times columnist David Brooks took up his new cause—saving the Democratic Party—and said that Joe Lieberman, and not the "net roots," has the wisdom to see that "The civilized world faces an arc of Islamic extremism that was not caused by American overreaction, and that will only get stronger if America withdraws."

Withdraws? From what? The word "Iraq" never appears in Brooks's column. It used to be that he diminished Iraq as a "single issue." Now it's no issue at all.

P.S. Those on the left who gave Lamont his victory are also concerned about the "arc of Islamic extremism." We differ in that we think Iraq is hugely important: a catastrophic error in foreign policy that has filled the terrorist swamps.

  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Newsvine
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • Stumble Upon
  • Netvibes
  • Windows Live

Comments
Post a comment

Post a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.