Can someone explain why people continue to treat Brooks as if he were more than a sophisticated hypocritical conservative propagandist. Each of his columns has as a linchpin to his argument as statement, presented as a truth universally acknowledged, that is a false conservative myth.
Can someone explain why people continue to treat Brooks as if he were more than a sophisticated hypocritical conservative propagandist. Each of his columns has as a linchpin to his argument as statement, presented as a truth universally acknowledged, that is a false conservative myth.
Can someone explain why people continue to treat Brooks as if he were more than a sophisticated hypocritical conservative propagandist. Each of his columns has as a linchpin to his argument as statement, presented as a truth universally acknowledged, that is a false conservative myth.