In Defense Of David Brooks, His Failing Memory, And His Failed Fact-Checker

David Zweig at Salon gets some clicks with a breathless expose of the lying David Brooks:

The facts vs. David Brooks: Startling inaccuracies raise questions about his latest book

Factual discrepancies in the NYT columnist's new book raise some alarming questions about his research & methods

Spoiler alert - we can all exhale, this is not that alarming. Still...

For at least the past four years David Brooks, the New York Times columnist, TV pundit, bestselling author and lecture-circuit thought leader, has been publicly talking and writing about humility. Central to his thesis is the idea that humility has waned among Americans in recent years, and he wants us to harken to an earlier, better time.

One of the key talking points (if not the key talking point) cited by Brooks in lectures, interviews, and in the opening chapter of his current bestseller, “The Road to Character,” is a particular set of statistics — one so resonant that in the wake of the book’s release this spring, it has been seized upon by a seemingly endless number of reviewers and talking heads. There’s just one problem: Nearly every detail in this passage – which Brooks has repeated relentlessly, and which the media has echoed, also relentlessly — is wrong.

David Zweig was exploring similar humilty-related themes when he came across this factoid from a David Brooks talk a few years back:

In 1950 the Gallup Organization asked high school seniors “Are you a very important person?” And in 1950, 12 percent of high school seniors said yes. They asked the same question again in 2006; this time it wasn’t 12 percent, it was 80 percent.

But diligent fact-checking could not confirm that detail, so Zweig did not use it himself. But Brooks did, in 2015!

The passage from “The Road to Character” reads:

“In 1950, the Gallup Organization asked high school seniors if they considered themselves to be a very important person. At that point, 12 percent said yes. The same question was asked in 2005, and this time it wasn’t 12 percent who considered themselves very important, it was 80 percent.”

And oddly, a thematically similar point had been made in Brook's own 2011 "The Social Animal":

The passage from “The Social Animal” reads:

“In 1950 a personality test asked teenagers if they considered themselves an important person. Twelve percent said yes. By the late 1980s, 80 percent said yes.”

So Brooks forgot his own book and his own factcheckers don't re-reread his own stuff. Color me disappointed, but hardly horrified. But if Zweig is right I am under-reacting:

Somehow, between the publication of “The Social Animal” in 2011 and the publication of “The Road to Character” in 2015, a study that originally occurred, by Brooks’ telling, in “the late 1980s” became one that occurred nearly 20 years later. (Amazingly, to the New York Times reviewer, the late 1980s and 2005 are only “slightly different dates.” And how was any difference in dates for the same citation, no matter how “slight,” not problematic to the Times reviewer?)

What began as a simple fact-check of a Gallup poll was devolving into a morass.

Zweig contacts Brooksies people, eventually is offered a research paper by Newsom, Archer et al as a citation, and contacts the authors. The gist - Brooks wasn't so wrong in The Social Animal" but was deeply wrong in "The Road To Perdition Character":

The thing I keep wondering is how did Brooks get nearly every detail of this passage wrong? He said Gallup did the polls, when they were actually done by academics. He merged a data set from 1948 and 1954 into 1950. He said the second data set was from 2005, when it was from 1989 (to me, the most damning and damaging inaccuracy). He said it was high school seniors, when it was ninth graders. And he said 80 percent answered true, when that was only so for boys. Can one accidentally get this many details wrong?

So the question is, if it wasn’t an accident, why would Brooks deliberately falsify nearly every detail in a passage of his book, let alone one that is a cornerstone of the book’s P.R. campaign?

Why would Brooks deliberately falsify this whole factoid? Is that really the obvious next question? I would ruminate on the fraility of human memory before I assumed Brooks to be lying. 

Speaking of which, and filed under "everything new is old again", here is an aggrieved blogger from 2011:

Back in March David Brooks titled one of his New York Times columns “The Modesty Manifesto.” In it, he argued that over the course of a few generations American culture has shifted from an emphasis on self-effacement to one on self-enlargement — in short, that Americans now hold themselves, as individuals, in much higher regard than they once did.

You see this freight train coming, don't you?

However, one item from his column that Mr. Brooks keeps repeating on the lecture and interview circuits is more sinister. He cites polling data showing that in the 1950s 12% of American high school seniors said they were “a very important person” and that by the 1990s a whopping 80% believed that they were. Leaving aside the fact that Brooks keeps changing the date for that 80% figure (sometimes he says it’s from polling done in the 1990s, sometimes from 2005), Brooks is refusing to look under the surface of this seemingly alarming number.

Hmm. So even back in 2011 Brooks was muddling his dates on the stump, if not in print. The Modesty Manifesto column from 2011 says this:

In a variety of books and articles, Jean M. Twenge of San Diego State University and W. Keith Campbell of the University of Georgia have collected data suggesting that American self-confidence has risen of late. College students today are much more likely to agree with statements such as “I am easy to like” than college students 30 years ago. In the 1950s, 12 percent of high school seniors said they were a “very important person.” By the ’90s, 80 percent said they believed that they were.

Hmm, right that time! And in July 2010, in the course of berating the narcissistic Mel Gibson, Brooks offers the same cite for the same factoid:

In their book, “The Narcissism Epidemic,” Jean M. Twenge and W. Keith Campbell cite data to suggest that at least since the 1970s, we have suffered from national self-esteem inflation. They cite my favorite piece of sociological data: In 1950, thousands of teenagers were asked if they considered themselves an “important person.” Twelve percent said yes. In the late 1980s, another few thousand were asked. This time, 80 percent of girls and 77 percent of boys said yes.

I Boldly Infer that Twenge et al were the source of this tidbit for Brooks. A diligent reader can Look Inside and find it on p. 35 here, or check this cool screenshot:

 

So why is Salon author Zweig contacting professors Newsom and Archer? Because they are the citation offered by Twenge (e.g., in this Journal of Personality 76:4, August 2008 paper, "Egos Inflating Over Time: A Cross-Temporal Meta-Analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory", p. 878). Rather than blaming Brooks for moving a 1948 survey into the 1950s and muddling boys with girls, one might take it up with Twenge. (And FWIW, Twenge reverses the 80% / 77% boy-girl breakdown provided by Zweig, and if I had a copy of the Newsom paper I would gleefully adjudicate that dispute. And do, see UPDATE.)

Still, one wonders how Gallup got involved and why the second study keeps getting moved into 2005. Let me compound the mystery - here is a blogger from 2007 describing "Fame Junkies", published in 2007 by former factchecker, New Republic and NPR writer Jake Halpern:

"American teenagers are the most narcissistic people in the world."

That conclusion comes from a study published in Jake Halpern's new bookFame Junkies, The Hidden Truths behind Americas Favorite Addiction. 

Last night I went to see him do a reading at a local bookstore.  He talked about how in the 1950's 12% of American teens answered yes to the question "Are you an important person?"  In 2006, that number  jumped to over 80%.

Well, that is one fanboy heard from, but did Halpern really say that? I wasn't there, but in the book (Look Inside p. 35 - that page is not presented, but searches on "important person" confirm the factoid's presence) he cites the 2006 "Generation Me" by Twenge, and in the press release he offers this:

Are teenagers in America really more self-important than they were in the past? 

There is certainly information to support this notion. This piece of data is my favorite. It comes from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. This personality test has been given to teenagers since the early 1950s. If you compare the results from teenagers who took the test in the early 1950s to results from teenagers who took it in the late 1980s, it's quite interesting. One of the most striking differences between these two groups was the way they responded to item 58, which reads: "I am an important person." In the early 1950s, only 12 percent of teenagers endorsed that statement; by the late 1980s, that number had jumped to roughly 80 percent. 

This is everybody's favorite factoid! If I had to guess, I would wager that Halpern mentioned a 2006 book citing a study from the 1950s and late 80s, and the blogger dropped the 80s figure. I would further wager that Our Guy Brooks remembers the 2006 book and is making the same mistake on the dates.

So how did Gallup get in the mix? Beats me. On August 31 2011 on C-SPAN, Brooks cited Gallup, contra his then-recent book. In 2010, at a talk in Asheville, Gallup was in the story, and the second survey was "last year":

“It occurred to me that this is a shift in our culture,” he said. “In 1950, a Gallup poll asked teenagers ‘Are you an important person?’ and 12% said yes. Last year, 80% said yes. That’s a shift in culture."

But why Gallup? Another unsolved mystery. There is a Gallup Youth Survey which was founded in 1977, and in a head as packed with factoids as Mr. Brooks, some cross-wiring may have occurred (yet again, more information equals less knowledge).

I would opine that Brooks is obviously confused, his factcheckers are either overworked or underpaid, and Zweig is a bit too excited about his "gotcha". As Mark Twain might have said, "It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so."

UPDATE: Don't seek and ye shall find - in the course of looking for something else I stumbled upon the full Newsom paper, which has something for everyone:

In the 1950s, this item, placed on the ego inflation (Ma4) subscale, was endorsed as true by only about 12% of the Hathaway and Monachesi (1963) sample. In contrast, this item was endorsed as true by 77% (girls) to 80% (boys) of contemporary adolescents. The dramatic shift in endorsement frequency probably reflects a fundamental shift in the connotation of this item, that is, in the Hathaway era this item was likely interpreted by adolescents as related to self-aggrandizement, whereas it is seen as reflective of positive aspects of self-esteem by modern adolescents.

So 1948 is culturally repackaged into 'the 1950s' here and down the line, But for some reason, Prof. Twenge reversed the boy/girl split.

And of course, when a 2003 paper cites 1989 data to describe "contemporary adolescents", I suppose some confusion is possible. That said, the authors are crystal clear, several pages earlier, that the "contemporary" data is from the late 1980s:

The contemporary adolescent sample is comprised of the 805 boys and 815 girls collected in the late 1980s to create the MMPI–A adolescent norms.

 

 

 

 

Comments

[jimmyk]

First.

[Cispigmented Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz]

I stopped at "In Defense of David Brooks..."

[NKonChrome]

wait? am I to understand Brooks is right about something? (even though he misstated the authority.)

[DrJ]

I stopped at "In Defense of David Brooks..."

So did I. Who cares about Brooks' opinions?

[henry]

Seems like normal social science accuracy levels to me.

[NKonChrome]

henry-- my BA Philosophy ('15) daughter wants a word with you.

[clarice]

TM, did they give you a lot to drink this weekend?

[NKonChrome]

henry-- quite soccer moment. On sunday, one of my assistants for 2 games this weekend was a guy who played soccer at Mich State in the late 50s. I handed him his pay for the 1st game, and he was surprised at the amount (too much). He told us the first game he refereed was in the Mich Open Cup, 1964... in Detroit.... he was the ONLY official...Serb v Croatian teams.... he was followed to the parking lot by the angry losers. He was paid $5.

[NKonChrome]

quite = quick

[NKonChrome]

Clarice-- are you touring my father's native island, Kephalonia?

[narciso]

not worth the candle, meanwhile back on planet earth:

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/17073#.VYBGEflViko

[DrJ]

In other news,

Billionaire financier Kirk Kerkorian, who built Las Vegas hotels and bought and sold MGM three times, has died. He was 98.

Formidable but quirky in his day.

[James D]

Who cares about Brooks' opinions?

Nobody who's sane.

[Beasts of England]

Wasn't Kerkorian the genesis for 'palimony'?

[DrJ]

Beasts, palimony came from Marvin v. Marvin.

[MarkO]

No way this thread can compete with the Donald.

As the sage of sagebrush, B. Bunny once said, "What a Marooon."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_Kh7nLplWo

[NKonChrome]

DrJ-- exactly. Back in the day, the Divorce lawyers called 'palimony' being "Marvinized".

[Dave (in MA)]

.

[glasater]

Clarice-

El-Erian of Allianz says that Greece will soon issue a parallel currency. It could make your trip more interesting than it normally would be :)

[Cecil Turner]

I know what it is . . . did you ever notice how people who believe in reincarnation were always somebody famous in a former life? So, over time, all these famous people keep getting reborn into current people, and voila! VIPs everywhere.

Hey, it makes as much sense as the rest of that tripe. (And if Salon is looking for fact-checking opportunities, they can find better ones in their own archives.)

[NKonChrome]

well, we know any new Drachma will be worth a fraction of the Euro/Dollar, so tourists can party on in Hellas.

[Cispigmented Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz]

Colt files for bankruptcy.
Latest M16 iteration contract went to them furinurs from Belgium, Fabrique Nationale, leaving Colt dependent on its civilian product line which has been underwhelming and poorly marketed for a long time.

[narciso]

how exactly does a partial currency work?

[Beasts of England]

Greece is the ultimate Blue Hellas.

[clarice]

Not to Kephalonia. Sorry.

Cecil, good point. Did I mention I am Eleanor of Aquitaine.

[jimmyk]

There's some thick irony in a so-called 'thought leader' pontificating about 'humility.'

[Alex McDonough]

It is pointless to argue whether a progressive is telling the truth or lying. Progressivism allows any statement, any behavior in support of the faith. Questioning those acts based on truth or lie, good or evil is heresy to those who believe in the progressive ideal. All theocracies are the same in this regard.

[Extraneus]

Depends. Who are his followers?

[narciso]

it's like 1988, all over again:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/06/taliban-leader-mullah-omar-writes-isis-leader-baghdadi-americans-have-abandoned-the-battlefield/

[Stephanie]

Andrea Tantaro: If I self identify as a cat, do I have to pay income taxes?

LOL We have hit the jackpot on getting rid of the IRS.

I am a meat popsicle.

[cathyf]

Maybe the meaning of the term "important person" has drifted some over a few decades? After all, the coupon saving program at my supermarket is called the "VIP Club" -- THEY think I'm an important person!

My husband claims that in social science in general, and psychology in particular, all results are 1) obvious; 2) trivial; or 3) wrong.

(I argue that the results are often in 2 or 3 of those categories at once.)

[narciso]

yes, but you didn't have the courage to sign with Cotton, or Cruz,

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/06/15/key-obama-enabler-bob-corker-why-this-iran-nuclear-deal-looks-surprisingly-terrible/

[rse]

Cool. Clarice was the only woman in history to be married to both a king of france and later a king of england.

Henry II was also her junior by a number of years, which sounds more interesting than going off on a crusade.

[lyle]

Anyone believe this?:

The White House on Monday defended a private concert over the weekend featuring Prince and Stevie Wonder, saying the Obamas paid for it themselves.

I don't.

[NKonChrome]

rse@12:27. Very good.

BTW-- I love Peter O' toole's 2 portrayals of Henry II in Becket and Lion in Winter.

[lyle]

Aaaaand here it comes:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/15/clinton-campaign-wont-commit-to-releasing-hillary-medical-records/

Gee, I wonder why not?

[glasater]

Angela Merkel wants a 'deal' on Greece by this Thursday, Narc. They've got to figure out something to ease out of the Euro I guess.

[narciso]

re the last thread:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/06/16/mrs-obama-in-britain-visits-bangladeshi-dominated-school-which-hosts-hard-left-conferences-in-islamist-friendly-borough/

[Cecil Turner]

Clarice was the only woman in history to be married to both a king of france and later a king of england.

Really, Clarice. I'm shocked. (I would also be appalled, but that one's taken.)

[narciso]

ok, then, run along:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/06/16/tsa-tells-congress-airport-workers-with-alleged-terror-ties-are-not-suspected/

[Extraneus]

I supposed they paid for the $3000 dress she wore to the Muslim girls school too.

[Beasts of England]

I wonder if there's a reason why the old, brain-damaged, alcoholic won't release her medical records?

[lyle]

Hayward at Powerline wins the internet today with this headline:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/06/jesus-christ-climate-scientist.php

[NKonChrome]

I'm tellin' ya, that was a significant stroke she suffered, and it has left her with diminished capacity.

[Appalled]

Cecil:

I'm sorry I have ruined the word appalled for you. I'm not using moderate anymore. Would you like that?

[The one ironing the pants was humble.]

This guy is supposed to be an authority on humility and he likes Obama?

[Dave (in MA)]

I love this artwork:

http://thewilderness.me/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/BLOC_BANNER5MAIN.jpg

I posted it earlier but TP seems to have objected.

[lyle]

That's great stuff, Dave.

[narciso]

yes the piece, that went with it, didn't link either,

[Tom Maguire]

I wonder if there's a reason why the old, brain-damaged, alcoholic won't release her medical records?

What, no allegations of spousal abuse?
Well, what do we care if she has some post-concussion memory issues and is on hormonal therapy? She's a fighter!

[Jeff Dobbs]

Dave:
I posted it earlier but TP seems to have objected.

Yup - there it is in the naughty bin. I hadn't checked it in a while - narc also put up a link to thewilderness that got caught. Only, he put it up on the last thread, so I could free that one......

[Beasts of England]

lol, TM!!

[narciso]

typepad is self aware in strange ways,

[narciso]

occams razor, salon is usually wrong, red queen, is a corrupt jackalope, available to the highest bidder, whether guiffra chatwal et al,

[narciso]

say what now:

http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/16/breaking-fbi-investigating-st-louis-cardinals-for-corporate-espionage/

[henry]

Barky must be a Cubs fan.

[narciso]

peoples exhibit 23, the larch:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3126581/Hillary-Clinton-charged-Boys-Girls-Club-massive-fee-speak-luncheon.html

[Captain Hate on the iPad]

Has Rodham been treated for depression from having been treated like a doormat by Slick?

[narciso]

no between red queen, the medici, and trump, I'm all out of ipecac,

[lyle]

They're the team that plays at ComiNskey Park, right, henry?

[DebinNC]

That mention of Peter O'Tooler reminded me of my favorite explanation of "acting" by his great friend Sir Ian McKellen, aka Gandolf.

[narciso]

apparently switching out martosko did not do the trick at the Mail,

[henry]

Lyle, as much as anyone that plays there. ;)

[narciso]

striking how they focus on all these ancillary targets, huh henry,

[narciso]

cause and effect:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2015/06/16/gap-inc-will-close-140-us-stores-year-%E2%80%94-just-its-obama-praised-10

[James D]

narciso @ 1:16

What a bizarre story. Aside from anything else, why would the Cardinals bother hacking the Astros, of all teams? They haven't been in the same league for 2-3 years now.

[henry]

JamesD, interleague scouting reports?

[James D]

I guess so. But you'd tihnk that, if they were going to go to all that trouble, they'd go after a division rival.

I guess they could have done it to several teams, and the Astros are just the first one to catch them.

[lyle]

PJM:

Asked about the event during Monday’s press briefing, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest was tight-lipped, citing the private nature of the party.

“The president and first lady did host a private event here at the White House over the weekend,” was about all Earnest would say. “Given that it was a private event, they didn’t spend a lot of time talking about it publicly.”

He did offer that the president and first lady covered the cost of the event themselves.

“I think the fact that we’re talking about a private event paid for by the president and first lady, that occurred in their own home on a Saturday night — I think most people would recognize that understandably as a private event,” he said, forgetting to mention that the “private event” included 500 guests and celebs.

Got that, peasants?

[narciso]

well digging out of labrea is neat I guess:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/06/carly-fiorina-rocks-the-view/#comments

[James D]

The day the NYT officially goes bankrupt and ceases publication will be a glorious day:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/15/opinion/stop-revering-magna-carta.html

[Cecil Turner]

I'm not using moderate anymore. Would you like that?

I think there'd be a truth in advertising (or nomenclature, or whatever) issue in there. Thanks for the offer, though.

[lyle]

JamesD, market cap for NYT is ~$2.3B. I think their RE holdings are worth approximately that so that means their "news" division is essentially worthless. But I concur with your sentiment. Every time a I see someone reading it (which isn't that often), I think "pretentious dick."

[Sue]

They held a party of 500 in their private residence? Bet it was cramped. If they held it anywhere else at the WH it was in our house.

[DebinNC]

Did BOzo refuse to release the guest list, because that should be problematic if the party was hold on public property.

[(A)Nuther Bub]

The various errors are far less interesting than the quetion itself. The MMPI is loaded with tricks. If you aver that you are not an important person, then (I suspect) you are pegged as lacking self respect and confidence. If you answer that you are an important person, then you're a narcissist with a grandiose view of yourself.

It's a test that provides no definitions, permits no "depends on circumstances" answers. Awful test to take; did so when I was 18. Probably woefully failed the normalcy scale.

[DrJ]

Every time a I see someone reading it [NYT] (which isn't that often), I think "pretentious dick."

That reminds me of a conversation I had with a woman who sat next to me on an airplane. We were chit-chatting, and somehow we got onto news sources. She sniffed that she read the New York Times. I replied, "So where do you get your news?"

She was not impressed.

[Captain Hate on the iPhone]

Carly did great on Teh Spew although I'm concerned that Norma Desmond seems to like her. Was that Rosie Perez sitting second from the right? If so she says "you know" more than Rodham and her speaking style is unbelievably rage inducing irritating. And retarded.

[lyle]

Good for you, DrJ. One of my very close friends from college announced last winter that he stopped reading the WSJ and now only read the NYT. He had come over for dinner after we had skied together and admitted that, apres ski but pre-prandial, he had fallen asleep. I quipped, "Reading the NYT will do that to you."

[Beasts of England]

...in their own home...

Yeah, not so much. It is a matter of public record - with very few national security exceptions - for anyone who walks through those doors.

[Porchlight]

Russell Wilson attended the WH party, from what I'm reading.

The WH Dossier gossip sheet said Obama was using the party to try to pry open some deep pockets for his library. Still, if it's in the people's house, we have a right to know about it and who attended.

[Beasts of England]

I hope you served him your very finest box of wine, lyle. :)

[DebinNC]

More Rachel Dolezal lies - she claimed to be the daughter of a black Oakland police officer to get the Spokane PD "ride-along" job.

[Janet]

OT
I loved this point at Instapundit about the campus rape crisis meme - "... parents keep sending their daughters to college anyway".

Hah! It is obvious most people, even Progressives, don't believe it.

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/208682/

[Jane]

"They held a party of 500 in their private residence? Bet it was cramped. If they held it anywhere else at the WH it was in our house."

My favorite comment of the day.

I bet it cost way more than a million bucks and I bet they only paid for the coke.

[henry]

OT, fun with an old map.

Imaging an old map got some hidden text resolved, e.g.:

"Text in the southern Asia portion of the map describes the "Panotii" people, who purportedly had ears that were so large they could use them as sleeping bags."

[jimmyk]

So the NYT publishes an op-ed saying that we shouldn't revere a document the purpose of which was to limit government power, because the leader in power ignored it, and because it was amended over the years. Makes sense in their world, I guess.

[Janet]

Hearing about that party...it is unbelievable to me that ex-Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell is spending 2 yrs. in prison.

Dems get to operate under an entirely different set of laws.

[James D]

jimmyk, it's also useful to note that the author of the OpEd is a professor of international law at the U of Chicago.

So he's teaching that crap to his students.

Or, more accurately: all of us here are paying for loan guarantees so the government can lend money to students (who will later default on those loans, with us again picking up the tab) for him to teach that crap to.

[Cispigmented Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz]

Between 2010 and 2014 121 illegal aliens were charged with homicides after being arrested for other crimes and released to await their deportation hearings.
No word on how many committed homicides but weren't charged nor on how many people were murdered by the millions of illegals not arrested for other crimes or awaiting deportation.

[Captain Hate on the iPhone]

Russell Wilson, another worthless fraud from the Goodell Football League.

[NKonChrome]

Did the Obamas put up a neon sign for the party advertising "Shakedown Shack". We're right back to the Lincoln Bedroom antics. I despise these grifters.

[Cispigmented Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz]

What would it take to convince the Royal Society global warming is not a problem?
A mile of ice atop The Tower of London.
I paraphrase.

[Cecil Turner]

I replied, "So where do you get your news?"

Heh. And the real problem with the Times is not the news they don't cover, even, but their totally outsized influence on all the other MSM outlets on how to cover it. For example, on the Hillary non-position on TPA:

In her first detailed comments on the trade deal since the House of Representatives refused on Friday to allow Mr. Obama to negotiate it freely, Mrs. Clinton laid out a far more calibrated position on the deal than many Democrats and Republicans have taken. She declined to take sides on the Friday vote itself but instead allied herself with Democratic critics of the deal — without actually opposing it.

Brilliant! What nuance! Nowhere in the story is a description of the TPA, the actual bill being voted on, nor the fact that without the TPA there won't be a TPP to negotiate . . . nor the clear conclusion that Hillary! is too cowardly to take a position (and, obviously, that she's pandering).

Now, if they could only get rid of that "dark money" and Fox News, they'd have all the Democrat party line that's fit to print, uninterrupted 24/7.

[Stephanie]

Prior thread: I'm fascinated by the little white flick of spittle or toothpaste in the corner of his mouth.

Posted by: Stephanie | June 16, 2015 at 11:41 AM

Twasn't only me evidently:

http://twitchy.com/2015/06/16/what-is-that-thing-on-his-face-trumps-message-got-trumped-by-this-photos-video/?utm_source=twfbp&utm_medium=fbpage&utm_campaign=twupdate

[Cispigmented Heteronormative Microagressive Ignatz]

I believe the term they were looking for was "calculated" not "calibrated".

[Beasts of England]

OFA is now offering a Globull Warning water bottle!! Woot!

It has easy to remember phrases for the terminally stupid, such as 'Science Says So'. Embrace the suck, leftards. For $27.00.

[lyle]

He got the good stuff, anyway, Beasts; '10 Antinori Tignanello. And yes, he can be a pretentious dick from time to time but he's pretty tame.

I bet it cost way more than a million bucks and I bet they only paid for the coke.

If it was good quality Peruvian, I doubt he paid.

[Beasts of England]

A link, just in case:

http://organizing-for-action.myshopify.com/products/science-says-so-bottle

[Beasts of England]

I'm sure they used a diplomatic pouch for the fish scale, lyle.