Today's David Brooks column set off mini-firestorm among some liberals. I didn't find the column upsetting or especially controversial. Instead, I think it could provide the basis for an interesting discussion. I would question some of Brooks's observations and introduce a few considerations that aren't part of his discussion, but I'm surprised by how intensely people are in conflict over the column. It seems to me that how a reader might react to the Brooks piece has much to do with their own social history and identity.
Anyone out there have a stronger reaction to the Brooks column?