Oh man. David Brooks just *shreds* Miers.

[WilliamPitt]

http://select.nytimes.com/2005/10/13/opinion/13brooks.html?hp

In Her Own Words
By DAVID BROOKS

Published: October 13, 2005

Of all the words written about Harriet Miers, none are more disturbing than the ones she wrote herself. In the early 90's, while she was president of the Texas bar association, Miers wrote a column called "President's Opinion" for The Texas Bar Journal. It is the largest body of public writing we have from her, and sad to say, the quality of thought and writing doesn't even rise to the level of pedestrian.

Of course, we have to make allowances for the fact that the first job of any association president is to not offend her members. Still, nothing excuses sentences like this:

"More and more, the intractable problems in our society have one answer: broad-based intolerance of unacceptable conditions and a commitment by many to fix problems."

Or this: "We must end collective acceptance of inappropriate conduct and increase education in professionalism."

Or this: "When consensus of diverse leadership can be achieved on issues of importance, the greatest impact can be achieved."

Or passages like this: "An organization must also implement programs to fulfill strategies established through its goals and mission. Methods for evaluation of these strategies are a necessity. With the framework of mission, goals, strategies, programs, and methods for evaluation in place, a meaningful budgeting process can begin."

Or, finally, this: "We have to understand and appreciate that achieving justice for all is in jeopardy before a call to arms to assist in obtaining support for the justice system will be effective. Achieving the necessary understanding and appreciation of why the challenge is so important, we can then turn to the task of providing the much needed support."

I don't know if by mere quotation I can fully convey the relentless march of vapid abstractions that mark Miers's prose. Nearly every idea is vague and depersonalized. Nearly every debatable point is elided. It's not that Miers didn't attempt to tackle interesting subjects. She wrote about unequal access to the justice system, about the underrepresentation of minorities in the law and about whether pro bono work should be mandatory. But she presents no arguments or ideas, except the repetition of the bromide that bad things can be eliminated if people of good will come together to eliminate bad things.

...more...

[triguy46]

1. Verbal meringue.

At first I read the quotes looking for some sliver of insight, then it dawned on me, this is writing 'lite.' There is no there there.

[MuseRider]

6. I'm happy to know

it was not just me. ;)

[gratuitous]

13. Verbal meringue?

It's pretty clear that you're not optimizing your paradigm responsibilities to glean the pith of the matter involved, and failing to appreciate the long-term vision as it interfaces with the conditions precedent for actualization of goals and strategies.

Hang your head in shame, triguy46.

[triguy46]

16. Yes,

I see I failed to maximize the opportunity to more expansively elucidate my scorn, my wrath, my loathing, for this thesausrian dependent piece of verbal masturbation, or bunch of crap, whichever works.

[Batgirl]

20. I think I just found the opening sentence to my next cover letter

might need a bit of tweaking, but I think it's a darn good start.

[Marnieworld]

30. You people have to stop making me laugh at my desk

My work isn't supposed to be amusing.

My favorite Brooks line:
"the relentless march of vapid abstractions" Just perfection. It can also describe any of Bush's speeches. No wonder why she thinks he's brilliant. Heaven help us all,

[stopbush]

2. Why does David Brooks hate our troops? Why does he blame

America (bush/Miers) first? Why is he aiding the terraists? Would he rather have Saddam on the SCOTUS?

[AspenRose]

3. What has gotten into David Brooks?

Seriously. Honest question.

[LittleClarkie]

11. Maybe he's a paleo Conservative

Who's realizing that he and the Prez are not of the same ilk.

Kudos to him. A Conservative who is still thinking. Whoda thunk it.

[Ksec]

4. Shes a really cool lady, really really cool (hearts and flowers)

She might be the best in the whole wide world. (hearts)

:)

[displacedtexan]

5. It would help if Brooks didn't have a glaring error in his opening

in his opening sentence.

"None" requires a singular verb.

This is a common error: Brooks has made a prepositional phrase his subject (Of all the words).

None = "No one" or "not one."

One is the subject of that sentence.

[Emit]

22. I think it is correct

"None" can be singular or plural:

Singular: another, anybody, anyone, anything, each, either, everybody, everyone, everything, many a, neither, no one, nobody, nothing, one, other, somebody, someone


Plural: both, few, many, others, several


Singular or Plural: all, any, none, some, such

http://www.llrx.com/columns/grammar1.htm

TOMBSTONE: None is always singular.

R.I.P. Not always. In fact, none is more likely to be plural.

Many people seem to have been taught (mistakenly) that none always means "not one" (as in, None of the chickens is hatched). But most authorities have always believed that none is closer in meaning to "not any (of them)" than to "not one (of them)." So it's considered plural in most cases and takes a plural verb: None of the chickens are hatched.

None is singular only when it means "none of it"—that is to say, "no amount." (None of the milk was spilled.)

If you really do mean "not one," say "not one."

http://www.grammarphobia.com/grammar.html

[Lubernaut]

24. Yes, it is correct.

The none refers to "Of all the words written about Harriet Miers", which is plural (words).

[displacedtexan]

25. Interesting and true in some cases, but...

"However, none can only be plural when used in sentences such as None but his most loyal supporters believe (not believes) his story."

The American Heritage® Book of English Usage.
A Practical and Authoritative Guide to Contemporary English. 1996.

I'm all for the evolution of language (which keeps it alive), but the object of a preposition ("of the ___") can't be the subject of the sentence.

[Emit]

33. I think you misread that quote from the American Heritage

I'm no grammar wiz, but the American Heritage is not saying that "none" can only be plural in that one instance you quoted (about the loyal supporters). I think it means in that particular instance it can only be plural, not singular, but in other instances it can be either.

Here's the full text where it seems it is saying that "none" can be plural or singular in a lot of instances.

“… and then there were none.” The closing words of this well-known nursery rhyme should dispel the notion that none can only take a singular verb. People opposing the plural use base their argument on the fact that none comes from the Old English word an, meaning “one.” But the citational evidence against restricting none is overwhelming. None has been used as both a singular and plural pronoun since the ninth century. The plural usage appears in the King James Bible as well as the works of John Dryden and Edmund Burke and is widespread in the works of respected writers today.

Of course, the singular usage is perfectly acceptable. Whether you should choose a singular or plural verb depends on the effect you want. You can use either a singular or a plural verb in a sentence such as 'None of the conspirators has (or have) been brought to trial.' However, none can only be plural when used in sentences such as 'None but his most loyal supporters believe (not believes) his story.'

http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/039.html


Here's the original sentence from the OP article that is hanging us up:

"Of all the words written about Harriet Miers, none are more disturbing than the ones she wrote herself."

Putting it into context per the first example above (where 'none' can be singular or plural), it would read: "None of all the words written about Harriet Miers are more disturbing than the ones she wrote herself."

So: none are more disturbing than ones. Seems okay to me to get the 'effect' of more than one word (written by Miers), so to speak, which is what the author intended.

Besides, if one were to say, "Of all the words written about Harriet Miers, none is more disturbing than the ones she wrote herself" -- that just wouldn't make sense to me.

To use a singular verb (is) with 'none' in this sentence, you would have to change 'ones' to 'one':

"Of all the words written about Harriet Miers, none is more disturbing than the one she wrote herself"

... and since she obviously wrote more than one word, then we're talking multiples here, so using 'one' wouldn't make sense either.


But, like I said, I'm no grammar expert. Just thinking common sense and what sounds right.

[Vanje]

7. For you ms Meirs

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/020530902X.01._BO2,204,203,200_PIlitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,32,-59_AA240_SH20_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

[Beetwasher]

8. Oh, But She's Just Dreamy! And Peachy Keen and Stuff!

n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

9. She needs "Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace."

For rizzah...

[AllegroRondo]

10. Its like Freshman English class.

Lots of style, no substance.

[billybob537]

12. Hey Will

Pants on Fire Guy

[whalerider55]

14. really, now...

this is just an attempt by the strategically diverse factions of people who don't agree with one another to reach a concensus that obliterates the borders of their diviciveness and congregates a agreement of sorts that will help to unify their constituency in favor of a single position.

And as my knight in white armor once said, "I am a un-tier, and not a divisor." And I will say, in the spirit of faith and diversity-mongering that reflects my judical temperment, i am pleased to be an instrument of unity and perplexity.

And if I haven't made myself clear, let's just take it out to the parking lot.

Harriet

as channeled by whalerider

[calmblueocean]

15. Republicans are the true 'elitists'

I'm bookmarking all the snarky anti-Miers conservative rants I find, just so I can pull them out from now on whenever I hear someone talk about the so-called 'liberal elite'. The disdain they show for Miers based on her averageness is remarkable. It's not her positions they disagree with -- it's her background. She's simply not elite enough for them. The sneer in Brooks' remarks shows the kind of disdain the conservative elite have for average people, the kind they usually hide until one of them threatens to breach their club.

I don't want Miers on the court, but it's her positions and philosophy that make that choice for me.

[marions ghost]

32. Ann Coulter

also insists that Miers is not intelligent enough, not distinguished, too average. However there's a difference between intellectual elites (usually what you want in a judge) and rich & privileged elites, who can be of average intelligence. Dubya (rich and cunning, but not wise) chose her...and there are a lot of 'average" people who rose through the Neo-con ranks. We are obviously suffering under the rule of small-minded reactionaries. It could be argued that selection of Miers is indeed "choosing one of their own." Anyway I think David Brooks is using what he thinks is a Liberal opinion as a smokescreen, to unify the forces against Miers...

How do you even begin to talk about a person whose positions and philosophy are obscure and whose verbal style would appear to be incomprehensible? Yes Brooks has taken them out of context, but even so, they may be illustrative. I think it's possible that the Right sees her as a weak choice who would put in a poor performance and not be as useful to them as they would like. In other words I think their objections go beyond the issues of elitism. She's too much of an unknown for them (and Dubya's personal pick, it would seem). I think they worry that she will just be ineffectual in realizing the rightwing agenda.

[Taxloss]

17. Does appointing an illiterate count as a blow for equal opportunities?

I mean, that stuff is just dreck. Verbal vapour.

[Cocoa]

18. this is cheap cherry-picking

like I said in the other thread on this column, if the political winds were blowing the other way, Brooks would have found quotes supporting his case that Meirs is a judicial genius.

Same with the rest of the conservatives piling on Meirs. Totally fake.

[LittleClarkie]

34. I still think he makes a good point from his point of view

The Conservatives want a Conservative brain in there. Meirs is NOT a brain. At least it could be said of Roberts that he wasn't vapid.

I think it's genuine. Even when someone is being genuine, cherrypicking occurs. You ignore some things, highlight others. I think that the groups he's separated the Right into ring true. The Religious Right, the Conservatives, and the mainline Republican corporate folks. One group will always be loyal, but if you're not true to the Conservative think tanks, they'll cut you to shreds.

That said, I had to remind myself I was reading Brooks and not one of the liberal columnists. Yikes!

[mitchum]

19. Christ! When David Brooks says that your writing "doesn't even rise...

to the level of pedestrian" you should hide in shame.

[VelmaD]

21. I particularly like...

when she says "More and more, the intractable problems in our society have one answer"...and then lists two answers. *snorts*

Her writing, in a word, sucks.

[leftofthedial]

23. no wonder the bushrturd likes her

they don't speak the same language

[Dora]

26. Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot.

Methinks you have something in common.

[npincus]

27. I made my husband run out in the monsoon yesterday to buy the NYT

so I could read this.

I have changed my mind: at first I thought Miers may be the least of all evils that B*sh would nominate- a roll of the dice. But, after reading her own words, sorry, she may be a terrific litigator but she IS NOT qualified by any means to be on the Supreme Court. The superficiality and meaningless substance of her writings,not to mention her poor, meandering writing style (tortured, senseless sentences)... if I take it on faith (an in this case i do) that the random samplings Brooks noted were representative of ALL of her journal columns, she is UNFIT INTELLECTUALLY to be there. Sorry, it's about fucking time REALLY IMPORTANT JOBS in this government go to people who are functional and competent and merit them.

I think we need to roll the dice again on another appointment- perhaps the Chimp is so pissed off at conservatives he would nominate a real moderate next time. She's gotta go.

Sorry Harriet, you are not up to THIS job. And that ain't sexist- I am a woman and would love another woman to get that vacancy. Not you.

[Bridget Burke]

28. Buzzword Bingo!

I work with several people who speak English as a second language. They would go insane trying to translate this stuff. It doesn't make sense!

[msongs]

29. so, how many dems will vote to confirm the bush get out of jail free card?

[KittyWampus]

31. "doesn't even rise to the level of pedestrian" Funny, I'd Say Exactly Such

in reference to Brooks himself.