Comes from David Brooks, the house “conservative” of the New York Times (giving him an ideological “north pole” similar to Bill Clinton), and the man most famous for endorsing Barack Obama based upon the crease of his pants.
Brooks, the consummate conduit of inside-the-box thinking and passé conventional wisdom, spoke out against the campaign of Herman Cain last Friday on NPR. Cain is fair game, of course, but it is Brooks' rationale that reveals his biases. You see, Cain shouldn’t be running for president, because…he isn’t one of the “in-crowd”.
Let me stand up for elitist insiders — this is a job for professionals. Running for office is a job for professionals. Governing is a job for professionals. What Herman Cain did this — let’s leave aside the harassment, his handling of this was completely unprofessional… You find the information, you lay it out clearly.
Easy to say – Brooks wasn’t the target of an ambush media attack that seems more and more like more gristle than meat. But that’s not really at issue here. It’s that Brooks, like so many who are part of the Washington-based media establishment, find it shocking that Americans can conceive of electing someone who is outside the establishment. Their establishment, to be perfectly frank.
Which makes the attacks on Cain reminiscent of those upon Sarah Palin. Cain, first and foremost, is a natural Democrat (he’s black, don’t you know) who has strayed from his place on the plantation, much as Sarah Palin (a ggg…ggg…giiirrrl!) betrayed her gender with a successful life based on conservative values. Can’t have that. Add to the fact they they are outsiders who don’t hobnob with the DC name-droppers and kiss up to its media elite – in other words, don’t play by the pre-established “professional” rules - and you have, in the eyes of Brooks and most of the MSM, and intolerable situation that must be rectified.
Hence, the Politico “hit piece”. And thus, Brooks’ revealing response to Cain’s reaction.
Reminds me all to much of someone the media destroyed a few years ago for being “unprofessional”. Give us a wink, Sarah: