David Brooks has written the sum total of 1 column for the New York Times and, judging from email and this harsh discussion over at Lucianne.com it sounds like many conservatives on the web aren’t willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt. I like David Brooks very much and while I think he could use more red meat in his fare from time to time, I think he’s certainly A) conservative B) intellectually honest C) extremely talented.

When it was announced that Brooks was going to the New York Times, many conservatives cheered, and rightly so (It is a huge triumph to have anyone right-of-center at the New York Times. We don’t need another conservative columnist at the Washington Times or Townhall (two great outlets, don’t get me wrong). But we desperately need as many conservative voices as possible in places like the NYT.)

But conservatives also voiced, off the record, a fear that Brooks might “grow” at the Times. Taking nothing away from Brooks and his integrity, I do think that is a legitimate fear. The Times must be a daunting podium to pronounce from since the people controlling the mic and the audience are so overwhelingly liberal in all of their fundamental understandings of the universe. Nevertheless, not only would it be unfair and untrue to dismiss Brooks as a liberal fellow traveller, it would be inadvisable as well. If he gets nothing but undeserved grief from the Right from the get-go, he will feel even less beholden to listen to that consituency.

But more to the point, it’s just way, way, way too soon to draw any hard conclusions about the job he’s doing over there. Give him a break.