Does Times columnist Brooks regret telling the media swells at Le Cirque last week that Sarah Palin represents a “cancer” on the Republican Party and that she was clearly unqualified to be VP?

As Greg Mitchell notes today, readers of the Times have no idea because Brooks still has not addressed or explained the comments; comments that appear to contradict what he has written about Palin in the Times.

As we detailed here, it's an embarrassment for the Times to have one of its most prominent political columnists pulling his punches in print and not leveling with his readers. What else has Brooks written for the Times that may or may not believe?