David Brooks, yeah right...

Is David Brooks on Sen McCain's payroll? His editorial in the NYT, entitled "Talking versus Doing" is an artfully written argument for why Sen McCain should be president, unfortunately for Sen McCain, Brooks' claims are inaccurate.

Brooks compares Sen Obama's support for the bloated Farm Bill to McCain's opposition to it. Well, neither Obama nor McCain voted ... period. So, neither thought it was that important to take them off the campaign trail.

When I first read Brooks' column, especially this gem:

McCain has been in Congress for decades, but he has remained a national rather than a parochial politician. The main axis in his mind is not between Republican and Democrat. It’s between narrow interest and patriotic service. And so it is characteristic that he would oppose a bill that benefits the particular at the expense of the general.

I thought to myself, yeah, Arizona is not exactly the biggest ag state. So, I looked them up in the last Agriculatural Census for 2002. There are only 17 other states whose value of ag products is lower. That puts Arizona well in the bottom half of Ag states. So, not supporting, by not voting, is not that a big a deal back home.

Obama, on the other hand, though he supported it by not voting for it, is from Illinois, where 41 states are lower in terms of ag value.

My point is to use the Farm Bill as evidence of McCain setting aside narrow interests is a laugh.

By the way, there were 15 Nay votes in the Senate on the Farm bill. 11 of those Senators were from states with lower valued ag production than Arizona.

I wish I could get a job writing fiction for the NYT editorial page.