Say you're a conservative columnist who needs to produce a lot of content. And let's also say you've managed to keep your powder mostly dry thus far on the Bowe Bergdahl story. You now have basically two choices. You can repeat the criticism that almost every other conservative columnist in America (save for maybe Charles Krauthammer) has offered. Or you can make a more contrarian argument.
Enter New York Times columnist David Brooks:
The president and vice president, the only government officials elected directly by the entire nation, have a special responsibility to nurture this national solidarity. So, of course, President Obama had to take all measures necessary to secure the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. Of course, he had to do all he could do to not forsake an American citizen.
It doesn't matter if Bergdahl had deserted his post or not. It doesn't matter if he is a confused young man who said insulting and shameful things about his country and his Army. The debt we owe to fellow Americans is not based on individual merit. It is based on citizenship, and loyalty to the national community we all share. [New York Times]
Now, nobody I know of didn't want Sgt. Bergdahl to come home. The question has always been whether it was prudent to trade five Taliban members held at Gitmo for Bergdahl. There is also a legitimate question over whether Bergdahl should have been hailed as a hero who "served with honor and distinction" and was deserving of a Rose Garden announcement.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
In fairness to Brooks, though, this is somewhat consistent with his brand of communitarian conservatism. It's also an example of opportunistic column trolling. It's always terrific when one's political philosophy and business interests can merge.
-
Massacre in the favela: Rio’s police take on the gangsIn the Spotlight The ‘defence operation’ killed 132 suspected gang members, but could spark ‘more hatred and revenge’
-
The John Lewis ad: touching, or just weird?Talking Point This year’s festive offering is full of 1990s nostalgia – but are hedonistic raves really the spirit of Christmas?
-
Sudoku hard: November 15, 2025The daily hard sudoku puzzle from The Week
-
Trump DOJ sues to block California redistrictingSpeed Read California’s new congressional map was drawn by Democrats to flip Republican-held House seats
-
GOP retreats from shutdown deal payout provisionSpeed Read Senators are distancing themselves from a controversial provision in the new government funding package
-
Catholic bishops rebuke Trump on immigrationSpeed Read ‘We feel compelled’ to ‘raise our voices in defense of God-given human dignity,’ the bishops said
-
House releases Epstein emails referencing TrumpSpeed Read The emails suggest Trump knew more about Epstein’s sex trafficking of underage women than he has claimed
-
Newsom slams Trump’s climate denial at COP30speed read Trump, who has called climate change a ‘hoax,’ declined to send any officials to this week’s summit
-
UK, Colombia halt intel to US over boat attacksSpeed Read Both countries have suspended intelligence sharing with the US over the bombing of civilian boats suspected of drug smuggling
-
Trump pardons 2020 fake electors, other GOP alliesSpeed Read The president pardoned Rudy Giuliani and more who tried to overturn his 2020 election loss
-
Supreme Court to decide on mail-in ballot limitsSpeed Read The court will determine whether states can count mail-in ballots received after Election Day
