Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ReRe

(12,189 posts)
38. I have never read such gobledee-gook in my life....
Tue Jun 11, 2013, 04:02 AM
Jun 2013

... that wasn't fit to print! Did I read the word conscience in that article anywhere? If so, it did not stick out at me. All I could see was David Brooks "view" of Snowden's mistake of NOT being blindingly loyal to an "oath" to the National Security State (NSS).

The reason we didn't see the word "conscience" is that David Brooks doesn't have one. To him, one's conscience is forfeited when you take the oath to the nether world of the NSS of our government. Without a conscience, you go about your business of doing the unconscionable, like it's factory work. Like a hit man. No conscience, no problem. Hey, you have a job! And a good paying one too.

But Edward Snowden goofed up bad. He let his conscience creep in and felt he just could not go on. And by God, he felt he needed to get it off his chest. It wasn't enough to just quit, walk away and keep his mouth shut. He might not have felt any loyalty to the NSS, but he did feel loyalty to the Constitution of the USA.

I've done allot of reading in my life and when he called Snowden "unmediated" in the first paragraph, I had to stop and look up the word. WTF does "mediate" mean. The definition of that word in my mind didn't match up with Brook's usage of it. Sounds faintly like a Union term. What I found in the old fashioned dictionary could barely match Brooks definition. Basically, his NYTimes editorial put-down of Snowden defined the word.

Oh yeah, and now since ES "betrayed the cause of open government", there will have to be even MORE secrecy. Really. I can't imagine MORE secrecy.

The closest Brooks gets to Snowden's "conscience" he calls "his own preferences" or his "moral dilemmas."

And the last paragraph is absolutely incomprehensible. This man needs to be taken away in a straight-jacket. He has left his mind.

I have never read such garbage in my life. Not even by David Brooks.
What. A. Prostitute. For the National Security State.

Thanks, jsr, for the OP. I had not heard of this editorial yet.

RANT OFF

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

And so many Democrats are on board with the Republicans. Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #1
Authoritarianism on full display Puzzledtraveller Jun 2013 #2
Home of the brave? I think not. Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #4
in china arely staircase Jun 2013 #34
Bull crap. The Republicans want to get rid of Pres Obama for any reason. Even if they approve of his rhett o rick Jun 2013 #13
Where do you think I stand because your post makes no sense to me. Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #17
Why wont you tell us where you stand? I stand with freedom and liberty before party. rhett o rick Jun 2013 #18
I honestly don't know where this is coming from and I won't be a subject to this Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #19
I apparently misunderstood your post #1. I mistakenly thought your barb rhett o rick Jun 2013 #43
I think the two of you agree. BlueCheese Jun 2013 #20
Probably, I am easily confused and let my frustrations get the best of me. rhett o rick Jun 2013 #44
David Brooks is pissed because he will never be as important as this. sadbear Jun 2013 #3
Blithering ignorant asshole whatchamacallit Jun 2013 #5
Bobo Brooks? Fumesucker Jun 2013 #6
The circle of trust? noise Jun 2013 #7
"They limit debate a little more. " Skittles Jun 2013 #8
David Brooks is almost like performance art. BlueCheese Jun 2013 #9
of course! nt boilerbabe Jun 2013 #10
Brooks starts off by saying Snowden is the "ultimate unmedicated man," as if that's a bad thing. reformist2 Jun 2013 #11
Actually, it's 'unmediated,' not 'unmedicated.' nt Nay Jun 2013 #41
Oh,shut the fuck up... MrMickeysMom Jun 2013 #12
Love you! Fawke Em Jun 2013 #31
Scorching article there. We need to define all of this. Thanks for posting it. freshwest Jun 2013 #14
Looks like he took that "10 things you should know about Ed Snowden" article to heart! LOL reformist2 Jun 2013 #15
Wake the hell up, this isnt about Snowden, it's about the domestic surveillance. It exists to rhett o rick Jun 2013 #16
I don't even understand what he's saying it's so convoluted BrotherIvan Jun 2013 #21
Not drugs, partisanship Fumesucker Jun 2013 #22
I don't doubt that some here feel the warmth in their cockles reading this BrotherIvan Jun 2013 #26
I just mentioned this fact.... ReRe Jun 2013 #33
It passes over the threshold of literal doublethink and stays there most of the way through kenny blankenship Jun 2013 #24
All of the BOrGers constantly remind me of Winston's neighbor BrotherIvan Jun 2013 #27
The look of disbelief never left his face Puzzledtraveller Jun 2013 #47
china has free speech arely staircase Jun 2013 #35
The lights have been turned on by Snowden and ugly things are coming out of the woodwork. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #23
Outing Valerie Plame was not a big deal? SCVDem Jun 2013 #25
Ha, ha. Hissyspit Jun 2013 #28
Sir, Authoritarian Follower Brooks reports as ordered! n/t xocet Jun 2013 #29
David Brooks can kiss my ass. Fawke Em Jun 2013 #30
I strongly disagree with David Brooks on all counts regarding Snowden. avaistheone1 Jun 2013 #32
He betrayed the privacy of us all? Abq_Sarah Jun 2013 #36
The simple question is: Did Snowden tell the truth about NSA surveillance? Ford_Prefect Jun 2013 #37
I have never read such gobledee-gook in my life.... ReRe Jun 2013 #38
Amen. Ford_Prefect Jun 2013 #39
Exactly... n/t ReRe Jun 2013 #40
Apart from Rev. Moon's secret friend? Octafish Jun 2013 #42
Of course he is! n2doc Jun 2013 #45
Oh Barf... WillyT Jun 2013 #46
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»David Brooks: Edward Snow...»Reply #38