Flory brought up Althouse again, so it's her fault entirely that I saw this, which would be Miss Havisham Winebox's explanation for why David Brooks is a great big sillygoose for revealing that "I sat next to a Republican senator once at dinner and he had his hand on my inner thigh the whole time":
I'd make a joke, but, well, what can you say? How can you possibly improve, comedy-wise, or creepy-wise, upon the adverb "technically" in that particular sentence? Please, just marvel. This is not Art, precisely, but it is nevertheless fondling Art's balls under the tablecloth. The rest is good too:
Why wouldn't we believe this? Or are we supposed to believe that powerful men don't get away with public groping precisely because (1) they are powerful men, and (2) it's in public? Maybe if there were a still photograph of the thigh touching, we would be able to parse this all more precisely, but then again, Brooks probably had it coming, as I'm sure he was deliberately flaunting his tits.
(Is anyone genuinely startled that Brooks would have submitted to sexual abuse on the part of an abuser in a position of power...? I sure ain't. I'd have hit the guy, and if it had been her, my wife would have hit the guy, and neither of us would have done squat to protect a sexual predator: which is part of why, I suppose, we're just bloggers, not Elite Opinion Journalists. Dude, David, if you're telling the truth, you're protecting a monster -- speak up, asshole. Because sure as hell there is someone else who needs to be spoken for, and who has a hell of a lot more to lose than you do by going public. I mean, the more I think about this -- ha ha, a Senator gropes you in a public place, but no names, they're all like that -- I mean, Christ, this gets less funny and far more revolting.)
And with that I retire, because I have thought about this too long and I want to kill myself. And I thought being a Mets fan sucked.


I'm sure Brooksie had it coming, but Althouse is still a creepette.
Posted by: Tehanu | July 11, 2009 at 03:08 AM
What does it say about the guy who put up with it so as not to make a fuss lest the cocktail weenie train should come to a screeching halt?
Whore?
But you knew that.
Posted by: Danny Guam | July 11, 2009 at 03:59 AM
The hand on thigh move is strictly alpha dog behavior, akin to pinning the sub-alpha with fangs around the throat. Knowing his place, Brooks lay on his back frozen in place with nary a whimper.
Besides, a little thigh grope is scant price for not having to work for a living.
Posted by: cavjam | July 11, 2009 at 04:07 AM
This harkens back to the olden days when the press would do ANYTHING to get the story.
Sleep with the source?
Sure!
Let them grope you?
Sure!
Assume that everyone else is doing it because you are?
Sure!
I think about how the press rolled over for Bush to get access. How far is Brooks willing to go to stay in the club?
Maybe his senator is the new deep throat?
Posted by: spocko | July 11, 2009 at 06:33 AM
What a great picture: everyone who's ever dined across the table from Brooks thinking back to whatever Rethuglican senator he was next to and thinking, "Was it THAT Rethuglican senator?"
There's gotta be a good fifty of them at least considering it's Brooks getting heavily petted, so I like the image of all those House of Lords creeps getting funny looks and being avoided at dinner now.
Not to mention all the request Sally Quinn will be getting to switch seating at her salon gatherings.
Posted by: Hai | July 11, 2009 at 06:42 AM
You're right. It does suck being a Mets fan.
Posted by: Mick | July 11, 2009 at 07:19 AM
Surely I'm not alone in hoping that the senator in question was Tom Coburn.
Posted by: Michael Bérubé | July 11, 2009 at 07:45 AM
Deacon Dr. Coburn would be good
Knowing Brooks for the little shit that he is, I am putting my money on it being a D.
C
Posted by: Poicephalus | July 11, 2009 at 08:19 AM
To build on what Spocko says, it may have been, for Brooks, somewhat empowering.
Posted by: P.Drano | July 11, 2009 at 08:27 AM
I suppose that discreetly removing the Republican Senator's hand from his inner thigh would have shown a lack of comity and bipartisanship.
Posted by: Thomas Allen | July 11, 2009 at 08:56 AM
A small price to pay for Bobo's access journalism.
Posted by: par4 | July 11, 2009 at 09:43 AM
Does give a different context to Danny's use of "cocktail weenie train" doesn't it?
Posted by: darrelplant | July 11, 2009 at 09:57 AM
I'd suggest that if you wouldn't hit a woman, then you probably shouldn't hit a man.
If someone deserves a smackdown, they deserve a smackdown. It doesn't matter if they are weaker or not. All that matters is that they have it coming.
Personally, I lean towards the belief that you don't hit people unless they place you in direct physical danger. However, I always find it creepy to believe that it's okay to hit dudes because they are dudes.
Posted by: soullite | July 11, 2009 at 10:53 AM
I assumed it was Larry Craig. Or some other closet job. That doesn't really narrow it down, does it
Posted by: Damned at Random | July 11, 2009 at 10:53 AM
One lifts the offending hand into the air and asks the assembled company, "And whose is this?"
Brooksie didn't do that because he didn't want to.
Posted by: Fleas correct the era | July 11, 2009 at 10:56 AM
My vote is for Saxby Chambliss, fwiw. I seem to recall a really icky campaign commercial where he had Inappropriate Hands.
Posted by: zhak | July 11, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Brooks also knows a certain Republican president who reached his hand into our constitution and fondled the fourth amendment. But he didn't want to make a scene, so he kept his mouth shut.
Posted by: SteveB | July 11, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Good touch, amusing après-dinner party anecdote milked for polite titters - Bad touch, withering expose of Democratic foibles and glowing review of Republican virility.
Brooks, you slut.
;>)
Posted by: darkblack | July 11, 2009 at 11:44 AM
I'm not quite ready to buy the sexual-predator story just yet. When you listen to Brooks tell the story, it almost sounds like he's bragging. Brooks never said that he did not consent.
I think it's consistent with an honest reading of David Brooks oeuvre to think that he's the kind of a guy who likes to go to parties where he can get felt up by Senators.
Posted by: Jeremy | July 11, 2009 at 12:02 PM
I've been pondering the possible perps, but it also occurs to me that a guy who can imagine what happens at an Applebee's salad bar might have just made the whole thing up because he had nothing interesting to add to the convo.
Posted by: Libby | July 11, 2009 at 12:04 PM
When you listen to Brooks tell the story, it almost sounds like he's bragging.
That's my feeling too. I suspect the kuhl kidz in the Village are all telling each other amusing little stories about Senatorial ickies right now. And Brooks has spent his life trying desperately to be one of the kuhl kidz.
Posted by: flory | July 11, 2009 at 01:02 PM
Docilely putting up with being groped by a senator was the civil thing to do. It was probably a very civil and bipartisan-ish grope to begin with.
Posted by: DrBB | July 11, 2009 at 01:35 PM
just periodically patted him on the thigh and technically the fingers extended into the inner part.
Because of course no Republican politician has ever been associated with sex scandals involving homosexuality.
On the other hand, as Bobo is a well known conservative whore, the politician probably thought it entirely appropriate.
Posted by: Dr Dick | July 11, 2009 at 02:00 PM
Brooks wasn't blowing or rimming that Senator for access to power.
He was technically just tongue-massaging his 'taint.
Posted by: Harry R. Sohl | July 11, 2009 at 03:11 PM
To Brooks:
Seriously?
With that fabulous pink tie?
Come out, come out wherever you are...
Posted by: Vern Rutter | July 11, 2009 at 03:16 PM
You know, John Ensign is probably in need of a good sexual harassment defense attorney right now.
Friendly word of advice.
Don't hire Althouse.
Posted by: bcf | July 11, 2009 at 03:36 PM
Do you realize you just jumped on the victim of a sexual assault and told him what you'd have done in the same situation? "I'd have hit him!" No. You weren't there, you weren't him, and you don't have the right to say to the victim what he should have done at the time. It's wrong when it's done to a woman (remember Anita Hill?) and it's wrong when it's done to a man.
Posted by: Jonquil | July 11, 2009 at 04:08 PM
For me, David Brooks ranks as a sex object just ahead of C. Montgomery Burns.
Posted by: Bitter Scribe | July 11, 2009 at 05:06 PM
One lifts the offending hand into the air and asks the assembled company, "And whose is this?"
Brooksie didn't do that because he didn't want t
---------------
HA! Good one!
Posted by: spocko | July 11, 2009 at 07:28 PM
Seriously, Althouse hasn't the slightest talent for telling a joke. Of course, that this alleged incident is no joking matter is beside the point.
Posted by: daphne | July 11, 2009 at 07:54 PM
Wow, um wow. Is this Whiskey Fire or little green footballs? I guess bashing and blaming are just fine when it's a guy and a guy whose politics you don't like.
And Thers, you sound just like all those right wingers who talk macho smack about what they'd do in certain situations when ripping on the left. I guess you agree with them, huh?
Posted by: wellthen | July 12, 2009 at 01:00 AM
you sound just like all those right wingers who talk macho smack about what they'd do in certain situations when ripping on the left. I guess you agree with them, huh?
Yes. Yes I do. I am just like Little Green Footballs. Well said. Very insightful.
Posted by: Thers | July 12, 2009 at 04:40 AM
Shit, man, you changed.
Posted by: Allienne Goddard | July 12, 2009 at 05:20 AM
I don't think it is macho smack or blaming the victim so much as acknowledging that the power dynamics are completely different between two middle aged white men versus say a man and a woman or a middle aged man and a 20 year old female intern. I just don't buy that Mr. Brooks was in any kind of danger or didn't have lots of options in this particular situation. It isn't OK when men do this to other men, but it is a completely different world in terms of the power dynamics and we shouldn't confuse it with any other scenarios.
Thers is not just talking macho smack. Why just the other day I was at his house and when I put my hand on his inner thigh he smacked me with a pillow, of course we were in our nighties at the time.
Posted by: Jake T. Snake | July 12, 2009 at 09:28 AM
Poor, poor David "the Powerless" Brooks.
If only he had some type of protection, such as a platform to announce to easily the world these strange ministrations.
It's almost as shocking as hearing that poor, poor Pumpkinhead had died of a heart attack - why, he was the picture of good health!
Posted by: Harry R. Sohl | July 12, 2009 at 01:20 PM
What 'victim of a sexual assault' relates it to the public as an amusing chat show anecdote replete with talking head titters and guffaws?
As for 'macho smack' - Nonsense. One is either forced to submit or attempts to assert their personal rights in such situations irrespective of gender or orientation.
A charge that can certainly be levied successfully against Brooks is his poor judgment in treating such abuse as a mere peccadillo for the public's benefit, as opposed to calling it for what it is - predatory conduct that has likely been performed in a serial fashion against others who might not have the resources to rebuff the unwanted advance or publicize it so that the behavior becomes known and censurable.
Posted by: darkblack | July 12, 2009 at 04:15 PM
Or there's the Germaine Greer option. The Aussie feminist explained back in the 70s that when she felt creeping fingers upon her person (I think this happened in NYC) while riding on a crowded public conveyance, she turned to the offender and said loudly, "Get your hand OFF my arse."
Of course she's six feet tall and has a posh accent, so she possesses resources unavailable to Brooks.
Posted by: Li'l Innocent | July 12, 2009 at 08:24 PM
Poor bastard so broke and lonely he would feel up something like Brooks. Now that is mental illness and Brooks really should reveal his presser so he can get help from the members of the "C street" prayer committee so they can encourage the poor man to payoff Brooks for the use of his leg.
Posted by: evil is evil | July 12, 2009 at 10:37 PM
Was Brookswagon eating in stirrups?
Posted by: Pinko Punko | July 12, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Being a Mets fans doesn't suck, being a Mets fan mean YOU suck. Huge difference there, huge.
Posted by: HumboldtBlue | July 13, 2009 at 02:55 PM