Oh, the horror OR David Brooks dines at Newark Airport

First off, I have to confess that I find David Brooks - NY Times writer, pundit,  social observer - insufferable. Sure, the boy can write, but I find him snotty, patronizing, holier-than-thou. (One of his first post-college gigs was some sort of suck-up internship with William Buckley at the National Review. So when it comes to learning the snotty, patronizing, holier-than-thou ropes, he studied at the feet of the master.) 

Just wanted to provide some context for how absolutely gleeful I was to see him dragged/ratio'd/meme'd so furiously that even his eminence must have been taken a bit aback.

Here's what happened. 

Brooks decided to tweet out a pic of his meal - a burger and fries - with the caption This meal just cost me $78 at Newark Airport. This is why Americans think the economy is terrible.

In liberal circles - self included - it is generally thought that most pundits/commentators/journalists, in an effort to appear neutral, look at the world through the lens of "both siderism." The theory goes that since so many pundits/commentators/journalists are politically and/or socially liberal, they bend over backwards to criticize both sides of the political divide, creating all sorts of false equivalences to show that they're above the fray. (E.g., Hunter Biden is as bad, and deserves as much bad press as, say, an existential threat to the US like Donald Trump.) Since Brooks is pretty conservative to begin with, he doesn't have to bend over that far.

It is perfectly fine for Brooks to criticize Joe Biden. There's plenty there to criticize. But to pretend that this meal actually cost $78 for the meal (i.e., the food part) and to lay it at the feet of Joe Biden is beyond ridiculous. Especially given, as we learned when the restaurant he dined at entered the online drag show: 80% of his bill was for liquor.

If Brooks wants to say that, despite low unemployment and decreasing inflation, Americans still feel uneasy about the economy, that's fine. There's a ton of understandable unease out there. "Things", most of them, anyway, do cost more than they did a while ago. People are justifiably concerned about keeping their jobs, especially with the specter of robots and AI replacing them. I was going to write "us," but I don't work anymore. But, come to think of it, a robot could probably do a lot of what I do when I volunteer, like hand out towels and toothbrushes. And ChatGPT could probably take care of my blog quite nicely. (In both situations, I would hope someone would notice the difference.)

Then there's the colossal and widening spread between those at the uppermost echelon of the economy and the middle and lower classes.

So, lots of reason for economic unease.

But to do a snide, albeit indirect, "thanks, Biden" based on what it costs to drink your wait time away at Newark Airport, well...

Pffffttttt to David Brooks.

My favorite drag - and the ratio was major, the memes flying - was from Joyce Carol Oates, who, at 85, is a prolific Twitter presence. She retweeted Brooks, X-ing: (bar bill: $66. food bill: $12. tip: $0 N Y Times expense account).

We don't know what the tip was, but twelve bucks wasn't that far off the mark for the burger. 

Brooks coughed up a bit of an apology:

Brooks said in a PBS NewsHour interview on Friday that he regretted his post: “I was insensitive. I screwed up. I should not have written that tweet.”

“The problem with the tweet, which I wrote so stupidly, was that it made it seem like I was oblivious to something that was blindingly obvious,” he said. “That an upper middle class journalist having a bourbon at an airport is a lot different than a family living paycheck to paycheck. And when I’m getting sticker shock, it’s like an inconvenience. When they’re getting sticker shock, it’s a disaster.” (Source: WaPo)

Once again, pffffttttt to David Brooks.

And maybe I have to take back that "the boy can write."

Because how is sticker shock an inconvenience?

Although I don't have bourbons in an airport, or anywhere else these days, and I'm not a journalist, weird as it is to put it in black and white, I'm probably upper middle class. (I wasn't born that way, but somehow it kinda sorta just happened.) And I have sticker shock every time I go to the grocery store and see just how little you get for the $78 David Brooks spent on a meh burger and a top shelf bourbon. Or two.

In fact, I know exactly what you get at Whole Food - talk about upper middle class signaling - for $78, because that's what I spent there on Friday. 

What I got was enough to fill my backpack with the sorts of items that David Brooks might pick up for an upper middle class dinner. 

I knew the bill would be high because I did buy 1.5 pounds worth of very pricey sea scallops. And a few other upper middle class goods: small jar of capers, arugula, a box of orzo. But the rest of the stuff - cherry tomatoes, a couple of lemons, salad greens, head of garlic I didn't actually need, a few of the last of the nectarines, a bag of clementines - was pretty pedestrian. 

For what I paid for the scallops - $25/pound, but I don't do this all the time - I could have gotten chicken breasts, pasta, veggies, peanut butter. But for $78, I sure couldn't have fed a family of four for a week. (I recently saw a stat that, in Massachusetts, the average family of four spends about $12K a year on groceries. That's over $250 a week. Which really is pretty shocking.)

Anyway, I do recognize that grocery bills are generally shockingly sticker shock-y. But did it inconvenience little old upper middle class me?

Well, no, it didn't, unless you call raising your eyebrows or shaking your head in mild dismay, shrugging your shoulders with an insouciant que sera, an inconvenience. 

I know, I know. I sound as snooty as David Brooks, but I assure you I am not. 

I know I'm fortunate, and I know a lot of folks who aren't buying $25 a pound scallops. (Company for dinner on Saturday. Let me tell you those scallops were delish.) I know a lot of folks for whom the trip to the grocery store is, if not exactly a disaster, a challenge. Who have to keep a close eye on what they're buying. 

I also know folks who rely on food stamps and food pantries.

And something tells me that David Brooks doesn't know a lot of either the careful shoppers or the food stampers. 

Still, he's right about the economic strain that many people are under. 

But anyone who thinks this is a reason to vote for Donald Trump is nuts.

Maybe Americans would be better served by columnists like Brooks, people with prominence and vast reach, spent more time explaining how and why inflation occurs (hint: it's not Democratic policies), and how and why things can get better for those experiencing sticker shock disasters (hint: it's not Republican policies).

But enough with the rambling.

In response to Brooks' inopportune tweet, the restaurant where he dined has:

... made a new meal available to customers: the “D Brooks Special.” Instead of paying $78, customers can get a burger, fries and a double shot of whiskey for $17.78.

Hah! Almost (but not quite) makes me want to eat at Newark Airport. (The last time I ate at an airport - a salad at Wolfgang Puck at O'Hare - I got food poisoning, so I'm in no great hurry to eat anything at an airport beyond a granola bar or a bag of Cheetos.)

I'm still sticking with pffffttttt to David Brooks.