To the Barricades! NY Times's David Brooks Calls for a "Civic Uprising" Against the Trump Administration

 David Brooks recently published an op-ed essay in the New York Times calling for a "civic uprising" against the Trump administration. A terrifying vision flashed through my mind of blood in the streets.

A civic uprising! In my mind's eye, I saw an enraged Times columnist Maureen Dowd shaving President Trump's head as the Parisians did to Nazi collaborators at the end of World II. I also saw Frank Bruni and Paul Krugman filling empty Perrier bottles with gasoline to make Molotov cocktails to throw at Teslas.

The more I contemplated Brooks's call to arms, the more frightened I became. In the Hamptons, I envisioned the Beautiful People mocking RFK Jr at an inquisition and forcing him to eat Spam sandwiches made with Wonder Bread. I saw Hedge Fund managers dragging Tulsi Gabbard by her hair through the streets of Martha's Vineyard and making her answer for the despicable crime of trying to get foreign rapists out of the country. 

However, after reading Brooks's essay a second time, my panic subsided. I realized the shock troops for his "civic uprising" were not so fearsome. Brooks called for "Americans in universities, law, business, nonprofits, and the scientific community" to form "one coordinated mass movement" to stop Trump. That doesn't sound too scary.

After carefully rereading Brooks's manifesto, I also discerned that Brooks's "civic uprising" was not a call for guerrilla warfare. No, he was just pleading for more litigation. "Pile on the lawsuits," he urged.

I understood then that David Brooks's game plan for destroying Donald Trump was nothing more than the same, tired tactics the coastal elites have used unsuccessfully since the beginning of Trump's first administration. Litigation, hysterical references to Fascism, and mass rallies led by the grouchy old cranks in the Democratic party--that's David Brooks's big idea.

It never occurred to him to try to defeat Donald Trump at the ballot box by presenting Americans with sound ideas for improving their lives. That's because the op ed writers at the Times, the nation's pampered university leaders, and the Democratic Party hacks don't have any ideas. That's why they bray about "the end of democracy," spew profanity, and call  for a "civic uprising."

The New York Times editorial board is leading a" civic uprising" against Donald Trump.
Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd, Frank Bruni, and David Brooks are pictured from left to right.

Maureen Dowd labels the Supreme Court as "rotten" and "corrupt": I disagree

 Earlier this month, Maureen Dowd, an op-ed writer for the New York Times, published an essay calling the U.S. Supreme Court "rotten" and "corrupt".

According to Dowd, the Court is "in the hands of a cabal of religious and far-right zealots, including a couple of ethical scofflaws with MAGA wives."

Dowd cites no evidence to back her hysterical accusation. In fact, reading Dows's shrill screed a little further, she makes clear that her main beef is the Supreme Court's decision to overthrow Roe v. Wade, thereby "yanking away women's right to control their own bodies."

Of course, that's nonsense. The Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson shows that a majority of the Justices hold a conservative view of the Constitution. In Dobbs, it ruled that the states, not federal courts, have the ultimate authority to regulate abortion. Millions of people, including Dowd, disagree with that decision, but that's no basis for labeling the Court as corrupt.

I believe most states will eventually pass legislation that closely aligns with Roe v Wade. In other words, women will have an almost unrestrained right to terminate their pregnancies during the first trimester, but that right will become more restricted the closer a baby comes to term.

Some people believe the state should have zero authority to regulate abortions. Thus, if the "birth person" decides she needs more "me time" after the fetus is in middle school, she should be free to put a contract out on little Johnny to ensure the tyke sleeps with the fishes.

I take a more conservative view. If a woman hasn't snuffed her fetus by the time it's in kindergarten, mom should learn to live with the little brat and open a college savings account.

Little Johnny sleeps with the fishes.

Vaya con Dios, Edward Snowden: Surely most Americans wish you well

According to Maureen Dowd, Americans have mixed views about Edward Snowden. Some think he is a "self-aggrandizing creep," some think he is a sociopath, some believe he is a "self-sacrificing crusader," and some would like to see him hanged as traitor.

Vaya con Dios

But I disagree with Ms. Dowd. I think most Americans have made up their minds about Edward Snowden. I think most Americans see him as a decent man who exposed grave governmental abuses at great personal risk. Anyhow, that is my belief.

Presently, Mr. Snowden is negotiating with the Brazilian government.  He has offered to help the Brazilians protect themselves from arrogant American snooping if the Brazilians give him asylum.

In an open letter to the Brazilians, Mr. Snowden said American surveillance is not about national security. "These programs were never about terrorism: they're about economic spying, social control and diplomatic manipulation."

What if he's right? What if the NSA and its 35,000 employees are not solely engaged in protecting Americans from terrorism.?What if our government is spying on foreign leaders to help certain insiders make money? If Snowden's allegations are true, some people should go to jail, and I'm not talking about Edward Snowden

Personally, I hope Edward Snowden is granted permanent asylum in a friendly country in the Western Hemisphere. He has behaved decently so far and has shown great dignity..

So vaya con Dios, Edward. Go with God. I know that phrase is expressed differently in Brazilian Portuguese than in Spanish, but you get my drift.

References

Maureen Dowd. Spying Run Amok. New York Times, December 18, 2013, p. A23.

Simon Romero. Snowden Offers Help To Brazil in Spy Case. New York Times, December 18, 2013, p. A.6.