David Brooks attacks the Obama campaign, while providing a lukewarm defense of Mitt Romney by Political Oberver

You must give David Brooks his due, he is gifted story teller, and the political fiction he excels at producing is his political opinion column, that he writes for the New York Times. It isn’t that Mr. Brooks is an inveterate lair, he just manages to take facts and the interpretation of those facts, to his political advantage by a firm,even brutal rhetorical twisting. In his latest essay titled The Capitalism Debate of July 16, 2012 he accuses President Obama of attacking Capitalism by way of Mitt Romney, as a defensive measure, a cover for his failed economic initiatives. But quickly Mr. Brooks moves to his central concern, a defense of Capital as practiced by Bain Capital, that purchased firms, then mortgaged them to the hilt, then declared bankruptcy. It was a winning formula for Mr. Romney and his partners, but not for workers or the state of business in America. Those disconcerting bits of Capitalist Realism elude the grasp of Mr. Brooks. It's all too inconvenient to this backhanded promotion of Mr. Romney, which strikes this reader as completely lukewarm, at best. Mr. Romney remains the least objectionable of the candidates the Republican Party has offered, for the office of the presidency. A Party that seems to be mired in a self-destructive pattern of political nihilism. Mr. Romney's political baggage is self-evident, add to that his unreleased tax returns, his Cayman Island and Swiss bank accounts: in sum the expression of certain unmistakable verisimilitude to the attacks on him by the Obama campaign. The question that remains is how Mr. Brooks will redress this unacceptable political imbalance.

Political Observer

About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.' https://www.lrb.co.uk/v15/n20/perry-anderson/diary
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.