I spoke too soon...

As it turns out, I didn't read Kristof's article until after I got done posting about Bobo, but if I had read it first I might have forgotten the Brooks' piece entirely.

I am not going to go to the same lengths with Nicky's article that I did with Brooks, mainly because anyone with an ounce of intelligence will cringe when they read it for themselves, but I can't resist what I think may be the worst bit of all:

That biological analysis turns out - surprise! - to have been superficial. Instead, modern science is turning up a possible reason why the religious right is flourishing and secular liberals aren't: instinct. It turns out that our DNA may predispose humans toward religious faith.

Really Nicky? I guess our evolution goes through some pretty quick paces... like remember how the House was absolutely dominated by Democrats for decades on end prior to Gingrich's 1994 Contract with America? Or how the Democrats did pretty damn well in the White House from FDR through Johnson (remember, the difference between Eisenhower and the Democrats was essentially nil)? Or what about other cultures which don't put close to the same stock that we do into the religiousity of their politicians?

It's amazing what a little thought can do to someone's overblown crock of a theory. Nick: go back to writing on Darfur and Cambodia...