David Brooks Apologizes for Penn State Cover Up

In a truly astonishing piece, David Brooks manages

to apologize for those who failed to report on the horrific

sexual abuse scandal at Penn State by intellectualizing human

responses to witnessing crime. Apparently, not reporting child

rape is ok because:

Even in cases where people consciously register some offense,

they still often don’t intervene. In research done at Penn

State and published in 1999, students were asked if they would

make a stink if someone made a sexist remark in their presence.

Half said yes. When researchers arranged for that to happen,

only 16 percent protested.

I find it truly amazing that Brooks could honestly compare not

making a scene about a sexist remark with failing to report child

rape. But then you have to know what Brooks does for a living,

and why.

Brooks earns his keep by being a contrarian in his home at the

leftish New York Times – he pens articles supporting class

division, defending snobbery, and justifying whichever war the

President wants to drag the country in to. In short, he is a

sophisticated shill for the interests of the upper classes, and

he gets paid an awful lot to massage their egos. 

As Chez Pazienza writes:

It practically goes without saying that Brooks will give the

automatic benefit of the doubt to those who’ve attained

positions of authority and therefore know better and are made

of higher-quality stuff than the average unwashed, but to

indirectly condone the systemic concealment of child rape —

and the protection, inadvertently or not, of the rapist — is

new territory even for him. In the ethical purgatory Brooks and

his anointed ilk inhabit, there are always acceptable

rationalizations for why the powerful do what they do,

regardless of which realm those powerful happen to move in or

what it is they happen to be doing.

Brooks must be as horrified by the scandal as anyone else so why

he is writing this nonsense is anyone’s guess. Perhaps defending

the powerful is so ingrained in his psyche he literally cannot

help himself. I’m guessing he isn’t an apologist for the

Holocaust, but after reading his piece in the Time, I honestly

don’t know anymore.

Chez continues:

If you have a brain, a heart and a soul you would’ve done
something more. Something right. And even if you

wouldn’t have, it in no way exculpates the actions of those who

we already know didn’t do all they should have. If you dropped

the ball and didn’t do the moral and human thing when put in

that situation — whether it be because you were blinded or

scared, or because you wanted to cover your ass and the ass of

your football program and school — it would make you exactly

the same as the people at Penn State who covered for Jerry

Sandusky as he raped kids: wrong.

According to Brooks though, powerful people are never wrong. They

just make mistakes.

Ben Cohen is the editor and founder of The Daily Banter. He lives in Washington DC where he does podcasts, teaches Martial Arts, and tries to be a good father. He would be extremely disturbed if you took him too seriously.