Categorized | Commentary/Editorial

The Insufferable Mr. Brooks





There are a group of "Davids" in the public sector who are on this site’s Merde List, and the one I’m interested in flogging this afternoon is the one who, if riding on a high horse whilst maintaining perfectly pursed lips were a sport, this David would be league MVP. I’m referring to David Brooks. Although this article he wrote yesterday does not, for once, spray drops of derision upon this site’s namesake, it nonetheless rusts my spurs, because it epitomizes the snobbery of elitists who so dislike being challenged by less credentialed folk.  A rebuttal worthy of space in the Wall Street Journal, it is not, but the internet is the ultimate visual medium and while those more intelligent that I can wield words like scalpels, I am content with using a slingshot of gifs aimed the heads of these self important Goliaths.

The Solitary Leaker

"Though obviously terrifically bright, he could not successfully work his way through the institution of high school. Then he failed to navigate his way through community college."

snobThat sentence has more snobbery dripping from it than Peggy Noonan at a NASCAR race in summer.

"When a neighbor in Hawaii tried to introduce himself, Snowden cut him off and made it clear he wanted no neighborly relationships."

wuhwhatGirl, get out! He was rude to a neighbor!? Holy chocolate donuts, we should burn him.

"If you live a life unshaped by the mediating institutions of civil society, perhaps it makes sense to see the world a certain way: Life is not embedded in a series of gently gradated authoritative structures: family, neighborhood, religious group, state, nation and world. Instead, it’s just the solitary naked individual and the gigantic and menacing state."

Marty-McFly-WhatI mean, can it not be both?

"This lens makes you more likely to share the distinct strands of libertarianism that are blossoming in this fragmenting age: the deep suspicion of authority, the strong belief that hierarchies and organizations are suspect, the fervent devotion to transparency, the assumption that individual preference should be supreme."

preachAmen to all those things

"But Big Brother is not the only danger facing the country. Another is the rising tide of distrust, the corrosive spread of cynicism, the fraying of the social fabric and the rise of people who are so individualistic in their outlook that they have no real understanding of how to knit others together and look after the common good."

scandalbracket (1)Do tell, Mr. Brooks! But fill out your bracket, first.

"For society to function well, there have to be basic levels of trust and cooperation, a respect for institutions and deference to common procedures. By deciding to unilaterally leak secret N.S.A. documents, Snowden has betrayed all of these things."

download

I think that train has long ago left that station, Mr. Brooks.

"He betrayed honesty and integrity, the foundation of all cooperative activity."

you-have-to-stop

Skips down memory lane…

“I remember distinctly an image of–we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant,” Brooks says, “and I’m thinking, a) he’s going to be president and b) he’ll be a very good president.”

bridesmaidsSometimes, the F bomb is warranted. I really can’t add more to this.

"He betrayed his friends. Anybody who worked with him will be suspect. Young people in positions like that will no longer be trusted with responsibility for fear that they will turn into another Snowden."

Seems LegitRight, just like a cranky old battle axe from Arizona will give older politicians a bad rap and prevent them from being re-elected. #BecauseLogic

"He betrayed his employers. Booz Allen and the C.I.A. took a high-school dropout and offered him positions with lavish salaries. He is violating the honor codes of all those who enabled him to rise."

121012021610-vp-debate-biden-expressions-1-horizontal-gallery

I call that "assumption of the risk," Amiright, Joe?

 

"He betrayed the cause of open government. Every time there is a leak like this, the powers that be close the circle of trust a little tighter. They limit debate a little more."

oprah-disagrees-with-your-nonsense

Right, because EXPOSING bad deeds HURTS the truth. Oprah ain’t buying what you’re selling.

"He betrayed the privacy of us all. If federal security agencies can’t do vast data sweeps, they will inevitably revert to the older, more intrusive eavesdropping methods."

3040480660_222bf0cd22_m

Right, Snowden betrayed the privacy of us all. Not the data mining, eavesdropping, eye of Sauron NSA.

"He betrayed the Constitution. The founders did not create the United States so that some solitary 29-year-old could make unilateral decisions about what should be exposed. Snowden self-indulgently short-circuited the democratic structures of accountability, putting his own preferences above everything else."

YesRight, well they also didn’t just throw in the 1st, 4th and 10th Amendments for farts and giggles, either, Mr. Brooks

"Judging by his comments reported in the news media so far, Snowden was obsessed with the danger of data mining but completely oblivious to his betrayals and toward the damage he has done to social arrangements and the invisible bonds that hold them together."

Vapors

I do declare, Mr. Brooks appears to have the vapors.
Not over NSA spying, mind you, but damage to social arrangements. #Priorities


Tags:

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • conservativemama

    Brooks and others like him would have turned over Paul Revere and Samuel Adams to the British.

    • cbenoistd

      After he sold Lord Jeffrey Amherst’s perfectly creased diseased blankets to the Indians.

  • cbenoistd

    Brooks was aware that we live in a country where the winning candidate for President can attempt to bankrupt the family of the losing candidate for Vice President in order to drive its mother from politics. Referencing the scholarship of de Tocqueville, Wittgenstein and Gwyneth Paltrow, Deep Dave declared this splendid deus ex machina embedded in the social contract to be most awesome.

    • mich mccormick

      "Deep Dave"

      Also, everything else = splendid

      • cbenoistd

        Thanks for letting us know, MIchelle.

    • section9

      Masterful takedown of this establishment toady.

  • Vicki

    When you use the F bomb in discussion, you have ceased to be civilized.

    • blerch

      Sometimes it is more than warranted. Brooks ogling Obama’s pants crease is one of those times.

    • mich mccormick

      “Profanity and obscenity entitle people who don’t want unpleasant information to close their ears and eyes to you.”
      ? Kurt Vonnegut, Hocus Pocus

      “I’ve been accused of vulgarity. I say that’s bullshit.”
      ? Mel Brooks

    • http://profiles.google.com/sanddog Ms Anonymous

      When you sit back and meekly allow the government to shred the very rights they were tasked with protecting and then have a case of the vapors when the F-word comes up, you’ve shown you’re not capable of being part of the conversation.

  • MaMcGriz

    Good work mm.

    This thread reminds me popular culture is upstream of politics and makes me thankful.

    We can only wonder what the next chapter will be in the unfolding saga of barky’s big doubledown fustercluck.

    • mich mccormick

      I think the GOP thinks going all Buzzfeed is their ticket back to the White House. It’s not. It’s just one of the arrows in the quiver. A quick way to convey ideas. Although, it’s easier to spread a gif around than a white paper. Not sure if that’s a good thing!

  • hope4palins

    I loved all of the gifs and their comments; the one that cracked me up the hardest was, "That sentence has more snobbery dripping from it than Peggy Noonan at a NASCAR Race in summer" ROFLMHO. She and Brooks should be chained together in a room, the door shut, and then we all walk away whilst they bore each other to death.

  • FaithColeridge33

    I love these threads. I thing GIFs are worth 1062 words. Who is the last lady fainting? I thought, for a second, it was my precious Kitty Montgomery from Dharma and Greg but the hair isn’t blonde enough.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvpFCuxIhd4

    • mich mccormick

      I believe it’s Christine Baranski from "Cybill"

  • indemind

    Fantastic Stuff Mich, ….But now your really starting to worry me. I can see some BIG C. G. (computer graphics) Law Firm "Make you an offer, you can’t refuse" scoff you up with a HUGE SALARY, and then we’ll never SEE you again here at C4P…………..so please Dumb It Down a little……..sarc/ ;-)))

    SarahAmerica- "There is no limit to what we can accomplish when we don’t care who gets the credit." …

    • mich mccormick

      Ha! Nope, just play old copy/pasting going on, Inde ;)

  • http://www.conservatives4palin.com/ 1776er

    He talks like a Marxist doesn’t he? Big fancy words conveying profound meaninglessness. The true hallmark of a stone cold you know what.

    I particularly liked this quote:

    “If you live a life unshaped by the mediating institutions of civil society, perhaps it makes sense to see the world a certain way: Life is not embedded in a series of gently gradated authoritative structures: family, neighborhood, religious group, state, nation and world. Instead, it’s just the solitary naked individual and the gigantic and menacing state.”

    Ah, those mediating institutions. Civil society. Civil society is a common theme of Marxism. Collectivism. Mediating collectivism. And doggone it, if you have been raised by independent parents to think for yourself, to use your own brain, to not let some dumbass Marxist do your thinking for you, then you are unshaped. Unshaped! Better by far to be Shaped.

    But here he is at the very least disingenuous for a Marxist or, if he is not careful, a traitor to the Marxist cause. The very last thing in the world that a Marxist wants any person to be is one that has been "Shaped" by family, neighborhood or by church. The Last Thing. These are the Enemies of the Things That Marxists Want You to Be Shaped By.

    David Brooks and his ilk prefer that you be shaped by the State and the World. And that’s not a menace. Nope, the State is a warm and fuzzy and cuddly happy place where all are shaped into a harmonious conforming collective. Nice and safe and secure. No thinking required. The State does all the thinking for you.

    Civil society. Such a benign and beneficent sounding concept. Rolls off the tongue–civil society. Marxists make a distinction between the State/ Political Society and "Civil Society". Civil Society is the sum of cultural, philosophical and religious traditions of a people or class. When a Marxist starts talking about "Civil Society" reach for your wallet because he is about to rip you off.

    It is the relationship between Political Society and Civil Society that most concerns and consumes Marxists.

    Antonio Gramsci observed that Civil Society is the State. Political Society ultimately reflects the Civil Society and its mores and customs. Thus, for a Marxist of the Gramscian persuasion the ultimate task is the "fundamental transformation" of Civil Society in order that the State fall into its hands like over ripe fruit off a tree. That "fundamental transformation" of Civil Society necessary to successfully achieve the Marxist revolution requires the banishment of folkloristic and magical philosophical and moral religious views and attitudes acknowledging a Supreme Being. Replacement with Marxist Scientific Materialism dogma. Only when that has been accomplished through the Long March of Critical Theory attacking, undermining, subverting and ultimately overthrowing the culture of the West can the State/Political Society fall into the hands of a properly conditioned and "shaped" Civil Society consisting of millions of brain dead Marxist robots.

    That is what David Brooks wants us to swallow as the true nature of Civil Society–Marxist dogmatic bullshitsky in place of Western Civilization. And we should all be "shaped" and conditioned by it to be "civilized" human beings.

    David here’s your problem. Most of us here in America like our "Civil Society" the way we have it. We prefer to be shaped by our Families, Neighborhoods, Religions and traditional American values of self-reliance, independence and fair play. Naked individual? Not so Naked pal. Solitary? Not so Solitary as you would like to think. Shaped by forces of Good that so vex you and your comrades. Not alone. Not naked. Not as vulnerable as you wish. The Gigantic Menacing State part you got right. We want our Government to reflect our Civil Society not yours.

    The David Brooks of the world have a hard job pulling the wool over 300 million of us.

    Brooks typically is confused. Marxist group think as Civil Society. Riding shotgun alongside the influence of Family, Neighborhood, Religion, or Traditional American values of independence, self reliance and common sense.

    Just blend it all up into a mushy gob of intellectual goo passing for profundity and layer it on thick for the simpleton proletarians to slop up and ingest.

    What a joke. Can’t it be both? Your picture of Michael J. Fox asking the question is priceless. No, David Brooks it can’t be both. Ask any dumbass Marxist and he will set you straight. Marxist Group Think Scientific Materialism and Western Civilization can’t coexist. Can’t ride shotgun on the stage coach of history together. Karl Marx or God. Choose one. Kick the other over the cliff.

    The foregoing is just my way of countering Brooksian arrogant, meaningless profundity with big sounding fancy words of my own. We can do it, too, Brooksie.

    Lots of heavy stuff. You convey the argument with a clarity stuffy ideologues can never convey. GIF arrows of clarity and humor. Whoda thunk?

    Can’t it be both? Hah! You crack me up! No, no it can’t.

    You educate me and others every time you spin these up. Keep ‘em coming.

  • section9

    Here’s the problem with Brooks.

    He sees no problem with Obama’s use of power to crush his political opponents. Brooks sees that as a "bug" that can be ironed out by a Platonic Circle of Ivy League Graduates committed to the Radiant Future.

    Brooks’ problem is with those who do not want to be ruled by the circle of Ivy League Graduates committed to the Radiant Future.

    Note: I am fully aware that Brooks, like me, is a graduate of the University of Chicago.

    What you see on display here is the March of the New Fascism in all its certitude of a Right to Rule.

    Brooks’ problem with Sarah Palin was twofold: that she was not up to the job, of course, but more importantly, that she challenged the legitimacy of the Ruling Class. That was always the problem people like Brooks and Frum had with Palin.

    The more the country runs deeper into the ground, the more Palin will have been proven correct, both in 2008 and 2010 and ’12. What Palin does with the power she will accrue in coming months for having been the conservative John the Baptist will be up to her. Let’s just hope she doesn’t lose her head for all her troubles.

    • mich mccormick

      "Brooks’ problem with Sarah Palin was twofold: that she was not up to the job, of course, but more importantly, that she challenged the legitimacy of the Ruling Class. That was always the problem people like Brooks and Frum had with Palin."

      Yup. Like they gave a collective "Eek!" when she walked out. I realized then how they truly viewed people like us. And I’ve loathed them ever since.

      • conservativemama

        You took the words right off of my keyboard. I share your loathing.

  • nkthgreek

    Huh?

  • CBDenver

    Trying to make sense of this. First he says "For society to function well, there have to be basic levels of trust and
    cooperation, a respect for institutions and deference to common
    procedures". Then "Every time there is a leak like this, the powers that be close the circle of trust a little tighter.".

    So what Brooks is saying is that the ruling class (aka "the powers that be") won’t trust the ruled peons (i.e. "us") if we look too closely at what they are doing? Does the ruling class have any corresponding responsibility to actually be trustworthy? Doesn’t the trust relationship run both ways? It seems as if Brooks thinks it does not. Apparently the ruling class can do as they damn well please but if the peons get out of line, well that’s a tragedy.

    The fact is the ruling class has already betrayed the trust of the people. They can bleat all they want that their spy programs are only to keep us safe, but I don’t believe them.

  • CBDenver

    Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds weighs in on this http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/170580/

    • mich mccormick

      Ah, there’s the more eloquently stated rebuttal to Mr. Brooks!

  • AJ40

    ON BROOKS:
    I was watching analysis and commentary on CHARLEY ROSE, (which I never watch except on rare occasions like the 2010 election returns with David Brooks and and Shields and others). Brooks made a scathing comment about Sarah saying that it wasn’t a good nigght for Sarah Palin (after she had endorsed several high profile candidates like Sharon Angle and Christine O’ Donnell and several others like Carly (sic) Fiorina and they lost). What Brooks failed to mention (because he’s not paying attention) that Sarah had an almost 70% success rate with her other endorsements
    .> I sometimes wonder how Charley stays on the air. Every time I surf past his program , he has guests tha either have beards, or is someone I’ve never heard of wearing really thick glasses or looks shopworn like some dustbowl socialist having just stepped out of the Berkeley scene vis-avis 1967

    • socon

      Insufferably snotty Brooks is a moron. Sarah didn’t endorse Sharron Angle in the Nevada Primary. Did Brooks expect Sarah to support Dingy Reid in the general?

      "Governor Palin’s success rate in 2010 was a stunning 71%." Jedediah Bila

      • SuperRoadrunner

        Brooks is a pseudo-intellectual blowhard who gets an orgasm just listening himself talk!

        • socon

          Really bad visual; but I agree with your sentiment. lol

    • mich mccormick

      "he has guests tha either have beards, or is someone I’ve never heard of wearing really thick glasses or looks shopworn like some dustbowl socialist having just stepped out of the Berkeley scene vis-avis 1967″

      Excellent! I love this description!

  • Joe Durnavich

    Brooks: "“If you live a life unshaped by the mediating institutions of civil society, perhaps it makes sense to see the world a certain way: Life is not embedded in a series of gently gradated authoritative structures: family, neighborhood, religious group, state, nation and world."

    Family, neighborhoods, religious groups, nation, and world are not authoritative structures. (Family is not once you become an adult.) Civil society is founded on voluntary relationships formed for mutual benefit. The NSA secretly sifting through our personal data is something else entirely.

  • AJ40

    REPLY TO MICH MCCORMICK;
    .>I did watch one other Charley program with Natasha Peloski. By gum her face looks like a map of the Mars canals. Not all the botox in Hollywood is going to make everything right.

  • AJ40

    REPLY TO SOCON:
    > Right, Sarah endorsed Angle for the general, but I thought her %’s were not quite 71%

    • socon

      Take it up with Jedediah.

      Sarah sure as hell didn’t endorse Dingy Harry.

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets