TFG: David fucking Brooks
I fucking hate writing about Epstein, but goddamn it, David Brooks does one of his "high and mighty" snooty opinions, and I just can't let it lie...
It's been a while since I had to think about the NY Times opiner David Brooks, who last graced these pages in his own "This Fucking Guy" expose:
Geoff Anderson
And frankly, I so rarely click on his columns, not out of distaste as much as out of a "who the fuck cares what this milquetoast elitist wad of fuck has to say" attitude.
That changed this week, when I came across his "fresh" attempt to do what he does best, ho-hum something that is literally en fuego to death.[1]
Shall we commence?
You know, with all that is happening in the world, and Mr. Brooks has a loooong list, he feels that he has to weigh on on this. He starts with that literal list:
Never before have I been so uncertain about the future. Think of all the giant issues that confront us: artificial intelligence, potential financial bubbles, the decline of democracy, the rise of global authoritarianism, the collapse of reading scores and general literacy, China’s sudden scientific and technological dominance, Russian advances in Ukraine. … I could go on and on.
This is probably the most cogent thing this drab dribbler of sclerotic prose has written in years.
But he then goes on to say that with all this in the mix, what does the "political class" deign to focus on?[2]
Naturally, this is merely his hoity-toity way to mention the banal "Jeffrey Epstein".
He then goes on to almost parrot Trump at that presser back in June when Trump jumped in front of Pamela Jo to protect her:
This is a guy who has been dead for six years and who last was in touch with Donald Trump 21 years ago, Trump has said.
Oh, so it is no big deal. I mean Trump said that he last was in touch 21 years ago, so you can take that to the motherfucking back. I mean, Trump wouldn't possibly be lying about that, would he?
Seriously, I re-read that two line 'graph like 14 times, while whacking my head against the desk.
But don't worry, David can explain why this is front and center in the frontal cortex in a bi-partisan way that seems to puree his sensibilities:
Why is Epstein the top issue in American life right now? Well, in an age in which more and more people get their news from short videos, if you’re in politics, the media or online it pays to focus on topics that are salacious, are easy to understand and allow you to offer self-confident opinions with no actual knowledge.
It's because people don't sit in their libraries or salons with snifters of Remy Martín and books that are so old that when you open them, you can smell the aeons of time that they have rested on your hand crafted teak bookshelves, and your subscription to Harper's, and Foreign Affairs, and if you are feeling particularly banal, Town and Country, and maybe Architectural Digest are what people should be reading.
Here Brooks is signalling his desire to remain above the fray. I mean he teaches a course at Yale and U of Chicago, so he's part of this "elite" that these Epstein files are disrupting. So he's clearly trying to "not all ..." that shit.
He then has his "aha" moment. It isn't about the abhorrence of kiddie-diddling at all. Instead, it is this silly "Q-Anon" that has suffused society and targeted the elite ranks, those "betters" that hold their noses over the swarming masses. This Q-Anon that propelled Trump to his political resurrection:
The Epstein case is precious to the QAnon types because here, in fact, was a part of the American elite that really was running a sex abuse ring. So, of course, they leap to the conclusion that Epstein was a typical member of the American establishment, not an outlier. It’s grooming and sex trafficking all the way down.
See what he's doing there? He's saying that L'affaire d'Epstein is really a small, hell inconsequential subset, of these titans of society.
This is the motherfucking bad-apple analogy writ large.
The saying "One bad apple spoils the whole barrel" is not supposed to be an excuse. As one who has (and will again) volunteered to sort apples at the local foodbank, you learn that you keep a trash can to toss these spoiled apples into, because when one has begun to rot, the rot will spread like wildfire.
But like most people who use this phrase, they take the wrong fucking point. That because one of their peers (say Lawrence Summer, former president of Hahvaaard) is tainted, that they can just utter this, and say "not all elites"[3] that they can bo back to their cozy cocoons and ignore the foul stench, covering it with their fancy eau de toilettes.
The adage means that you need to RUTHLESSLY cull those bad apples, or ... well you read it.
Or, maybe I am blinded by my partisan rage...
Another feature of the QAnon mentality is the conviction that if investigators fail to find evidence to support their febrile imagining, then that is proof that they, too, are part of the cover-up. If the F.B.I. and Justice Department conclude that there was no Epstein client list and there is no evidence that Epstein blackmailed people (as they did conclude), then let’s throw out the rule of law and throw investigations’ raw information onto the internet and let a social media mob sort things out. What could go wrong?
Wait, did Brooks really just say "well, the DoJ and FBI investigated and said that there is no evidence of blackmail, so ¯_(ツ)_/¯?"
<Narrator> Yes, yes he did...
He's going to trust those two merchants of bullshit Pamela Jo Bondi and Ka$h Patel when they say that their deep investigations uncovered nothing?
Then he does his standard dodge, look at all these other conspiracists:
To Candace Owens, Epstein was not just a rancid man; he was a scheming Jew working on behalf of Israel to control assets via blackmail.
Phew, I was worried, now that the exalted Sir David Brooks has used Candace Owens, the woman who has been saying that French president Macron is married to a trans-woman (and is being sued for it), and who literally rants for hours each day online about how the Jews are the cause of all the ills that the overworked Transgenders aren't causing directly in society. Clearly, Owens is the proof that we should ignore the tapestry of red flags that pelt us.
That totally means that all this Epstein Mania is really overblown.
Then he is "puzzled" that the Democrats are going along with the fevered swamps of Republican conspiracies:
What I don’t understand is why some Democrats are hopping on this bandwagon. They may believe that the Epstein file release will somehow hurt Trump. But they are undermining public trust and sowing public cynicism in ways that make the entire progressive project impossible. They are contributing to a public atmosphere in which right-wing populism naturally thrives.
Uh, probably because plenty of those elites (remember the Birthday Book?) were winking and all in on the "joke".
Politicians are supposed to pay attention to their constituents, and if their constituents tell them that they really want an investigation into the über rich men traveling to Epstein's island and Manhattan mansion to fuck underaged girls, to get "massages" with "happy endings" then you better support those wants of their constituents.
And you know what? As a life-long Democrat, I WANT them to keep the microscopes on this.
If it turns out that Obama, and Jimmy Carter were on the island, and fucked kids, then they should be arrested, put into the stocks, and an ample supply of overripe tomatoes be provided to pelt their slimy asses. (Well, not Carter, because if there is a heaven, he is probably lonely as one of the 10 or 15 people who earned their way in.)
But you know what? I would bet my bottom dollar that Obama was not involved. You know who was involved? For reals?
Trump. Summers. and plenty of other scumbags. All of them should have all this dirt aired, publicly. I mean, Prince Andrew had to sell his summer palace to pay out to Virginia Giuffre, and he has formally been stripped of his titles, and then there's the former ambassador of the UK - Peter Mandelson - who was recalled and summarily fired for being in the Birthday Book. No hand wringing. No public waffling. It is just done. That is how you cull bad apples, once you find them, you toss them into the trash.
And if that leaves your precious "elites" in tatters, and unable to sit in their boxes at the Met, then so fucking be it.
One more pull and I will wrap this up:
I have been especially startled to see Ro Khanna, a House Democrat and one of the most impressive politicians in America, use the phrase “the Epstein class” in his public statements. In an interview with my colleague David Leonhardt this week, Khanna explained that he had gotten the phrase from voters who asked him if he was on the side of “forgotten Americans” or “the Epstein class.”
Khanna tried to describe the mentality of the people he encountered: “I realized how much the abuse by rich and powerful men of young girls and the sense of a rape island that Epstein had set up for people embodied the corruption of government. And then many of them saw Donald Trump as fighting this corrupt government.”
Here, Brooks is picking on one of my local pols, Ro Khanna[4], to make an example, as if he is a deer caught in the headlights, and that he's falling for this framing of the "Epstein Class".
I know a thing or two about the American elite, ahem, and if you’ve read my work, you may be sick of my assaults on the educated elites for being insular, self-indulgent and smug. But the phrase “the Epstein class” is inaccurate, unfair and irresponsible. Say what you will about our financial, educational, nonprofit and political elites, but they are not mass rapists.
Uh, the gentleman doth protest too much. David makes the mistake that he thinks this tars all the elites with the taint of the Epstein debacle. That is not the case at all.
But you know who didn't get an invite to his mansion? Joe average, who works 40+ hours a week, and struggles to put his kids through college.
No, all the Epstein affiliates are from that vaunted "elite" caste that Mr Brooks is so adamant to prevent from being tarred.
I will leave you with this:
These are genuine challenges. If I were a Democratic politician, I might try telling the truth, which in my version would go something like this: The elites didn’t betray you, but they did ignore you. They didn’t mean to harm you. But they didn’t see you in the 1970s as deindustrialization took your jobs; in the ensuing decades as your families and communities broke apart; during all those decades when high immigration levels made you feel like a stranger in your own land.
Note: "his version".
David Brooks: GO FUCK YOURSELF.
David Brooks is just sad that his elites are being rightly tarnished by plenty of their ranks being fucking ceretinous shitbirds who were chummy with Epstein, and that they are being unfairly tainted by the scandal.
For this, David Brooks has notched his second formal "This Fucking Guy" award.
1 - "en fuego" is "on fire in spanish. I am classy as fuck when I slide in furriner talk into my posts LOL (really, I worked my way through college in the back of the house, and I was rather fluent at one point, a tale for another post though)
2 - Who the fuck is this "political class"? Is it the mouth-breathing knuckle draggers in MAGA? Is it the left of center Democrats? Is it the professional narrative drafters? Or is it just those people who actually pay attention to current events (something all my gradeschool teachers tried to make the 8 year old me care about) and actually think that fucking children is no bueno?
3 - Like the disingenuous "not all men" when the horrors of me-too were being exposes. Sure, not all men, but far to many of them.
4 - he's not my representative, but he is far too chummy with the tech broligarchs for my tastes. Jimmy Paneta is my rep, who took over from Zoe Lofgren, someone I tremendously respected
