David Brooks is the most undeserving “public intellectual” in the history of public intellectuals. He is the embodiment of the failure of “meritocracy,” the system he frequently derides, because he lacks the merit to be promoted to the status he has achieved through mediocrity. He has perfected the brand of the “civil conservative liberals can like,” even when his civility has provided cover for uncivil atrocities like the Iraq War.
Today’s column “Impeach, then move on” is ludicrous without any context. All his assumptions are wrong:
- “Democrats have not won public support” is belied by polls showing over 50% favor not just impeachment, but conviction — See Today’s WaPo/AP poll just out;
- Impeachment “hurts Dems in swing states” is belied not by the lower numbers in those states, but the trend upward there.
- “there is little prospect these numbers will turn around” is belied instantly by polls showing the numbers actually turning around.
- people are so cynical they think both parties are corrupt — this is both-siderism at its worst, mainly because Brooks is the prime suspect pushing both-siderism ever since he could no longer advocate crazy Republican positions.
- “it’s harder to do impeachment when politics is seen as an existential war for the future of the country.” I’ve got news for David. It is an existential war, and even he has admitted Trump poses that threat.
- “Many Republicans know Trump is guilty, but they can’t afford to hand power to Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders.” Does that mean impeachment would be OK if Biden was still the front-runner? And Brooks himself said last week he would vote for Warren over Trump.
- Finally, he rolls out “If a Dem President were guilty, would Dems vote to impeach?” I say “Yes.” Especially if there were a Veep as liberal as Pence is conservative. And just maybe the odds Democratic voters would elect a crook is much, much smaller than the 100% odds Republicans would elect a Trump.
And then there’s context — Brooks minimized the Russia scandal, even writing an “I told you so” column based entirely on the sleazy Barr memo. With Ukraine, he first said it was bad, but not impeachable; then said it was impeachable, but don’t do it; now he says yes, impeach, but don’t go any farther.
And this goniff gets $50,000 for a speech, appears on every talk show as a sage, wise person, and sells mushy self-help books by the hundreds of thousands?