http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/opinion/12brooks.htmlUsually I disagree with conservative columnist David Brooks about everything, but he has been long cured of his fawning over the Bush Lite regime, and he also finally seems to have grasped that "Republican" is not synonymous with "conservative," something by no means as obvious as it should be these days. After his ridiculous comparison of the teabaggers with the SDS and the Black Panthers of the late sixties, his assessment of Obama so far, as well as Obama's political standing with both left and right in America, is downright lucid and well thought-out, based on real evidence rather than made-up Fox lies. While my friend Richard Viguerie has gone off the deep end, praising teabaggers and vilifying Obama as a Marxist and a socialist, relying on zero evidence whatsoever to back up his claims, Brooks, whom I do not know personally, has gone the other way, opting for a rationally thought-out opinion--in this case at least. While the Republican Party continues to smoke their hemp and down their LSD (or so it seems, for all their connection to reality these days), at least some conservatives seem to remember the meaning of the word. Too bad Brooks is this lucid only as often as the broken clock is correct. Otherwise, he might even be a columnist from the right worth following, and opening a rational discussion with. It's just about impossible to hold a rational discussion with most of the rest on the right, as they tend to all be of the dining room table variety.