...in the Platner “fight.” But honestly, after the nation elected Trump the first time (“Entertainment Tonight”), and the second time (E.Jean Carroll; Epstein), I don’t need to hear from the self-appointed national scolds about “character” and how some men allegedly treat women, every election cycle.David Brooks: If Democrats Side With Platner, I Don't Want To Hear About Trump And His Degeneracy In The Future https://t.co/JYdFj1MVQB
— RealClearPolitics (@RCPolitics) June 6, 2026
It’s clearly not a subject that matters to the voters, and never has.
I know that disappoints David Brooks but: who cares about David Brooks?
After he left his wife of 28 years for his research assistant (23 years younger), I don't want to hear about David Brooks's moral standards.
ReplyDeleteThere’s that, too.
DeleteWhen it comes to degeneracy, Platner is nowhere near Trump's level and Brooks knows it. This is just his way of saying he wants people to forget about *his* stumbles from grace, or however he looks at his own situation.
ReplyDeleteBrooks has the ability to set out what appears to be a virtuous position where the negative consequences of holding that view fall on someone else. In the terms of this blog, ideas matter but people don't (and they ideas are the kind that are helpful to those with lots of things.) I suspect that is why he has always had a certain appeal to a certain group of more upper class liberals, you can take Brook's position and feel both contrarian and above the fray of more plebian liberals, along with feeling virtuous about something that benefits you.
ReplyDelete