The old journalistic advice, "whatever you do, don't pee down both legs, was clearly never given to New York Times Columnist, David Brooks.
On September 30, 2016, he wrotethat the Eighties, the era of "go-go capitalism had a lot of elan back then. By elan, we presume Brooks means greed, selfishness and tax avoidance which distinguished the particularly cruel brand of capitalism championed by Reagan and Thatcher.
Brooks then warbled on about the current "Death of Idealism" and told us (gasp) that Trump represents "capitalism degraded to pure selfishness. His ethos is: Get what I can for myself , and everyone else can take care of themselves."
But, in case you think Brooks might actually be about to have an original thought, he ritually pees down the other leg: "There is an entire absence, in both campaigns, of an effort to appeal to the higher angels of our nature."
Apparently, this is because Hillary "lacks the human touch when talking about the nation's problems, and fails to make an emotional connection." He continues, "When asked why she wants to be president or for any positive vision, she devolves into a list of programs.....this is pure interest-group liberalism. "
Whoa, a candidate lacks the human touch who has detailed plans for child and elder care, improved wages, fighting climate change, protecting women's rights and millions of new jobs! What can be more human than ensuring children have enough food to eat and that young mothers have child care so they can go out to work. What can be more human than providing good-paying jobs for working people who have no job today?
In Brooks' mind, that's not really human. That's not what the chief executive of a country does! WTF!
Hillary has a real change agenda to help men, women and children who have been shafted because of a winner-take-all capitalism that squeezes the middle class. She has campaigned all her life for the most vulnerable amongst us, then for 9/11 first responders and upstate New York farmers, for women marginalized and abused for centuries, for girls bullied and demeaned, but no, she lacks the human touch.
She calls out Trump before the nation for humiliating Alicia Machado, but she lacks the human touch.
She fights for economic equality, for minimum wages for janitors, restaurant workers and working class people everywhere, but she "lacks the human touch."
Presumably, her allies, Senators Warren and Sanders also lack the human touch.
If we can get her elected, Hillary will be one of the best presidents in our history! And as President Obama said, she is certainly one of the most qualified. She may also be known for her very human touch.
Postscript: To be fair to the New York Times, the befuddled thinking of Brooks on September 30 was more than offset by two splendid columns - one by Paul Krugman which Voices4Hillary reprinted this morning and one by Timothy Egan. The latter's recent column denouncing the "Fat-Shamer in Chief" has to be read, sohere it is.
##
October 1, 2016
