Do you think that David Brooks sits in his computer chair, reads over a finished essay, and wonders just for a second before he hits the send button what is going to turn up in the Internet the next day? Does he wonder how many bloggers are going to tear apart his every word, mock his world view, and belittle his education? Does he ever google his name?

Brooks is a lightening rod for the leftie bloggers. I think that the Crooked Timber folks have devoted more posts to him than any other op-ed writer. He doesn’t bother me too much. I actually like his stuff on suburbia and red/blue America, because he’s fun to read even if he does paint American culture with a broad brush.

However, the article in today’s Times set my teeth on edge. He writes that Americans have grown more virtuous. He points to several indicators of a better America — lower levels of domestic violence, fewer abortions, bettering parenting, fewer children in poverty, teenage births down, teenage suicide down.

He credits these developments to the final death of 60s counterculture, better parenting, backlash against divorce, and the growth of charitable groups.

Brooks says it’s not utopia, but its damn close. But the good news is out there. You want to know what a society looks like when it is in the middle of moral self-repair? Look around.

I have so many problems with this essay, I am not sure which angle to take. Do I handpick my own indices to show that America is not so virtuous? Do I question his definition of virtuous? Do I point out what Brooks is really saying in this article? Oh, let’s do that.

What David Brooks is really saying is that America is doing swimmingly for all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do with government. American youth are pulling themselves up by their bootstraps with the help of family and church groups. Our Republican government has sensibly not devoted one cent to these efforts. Just set a good example. (Eyes rolling.)

Brooks wisely sets up his essay by pointing to the drop in the levels of domestic violence, which takes the steam out of any liberal counterargument. Who wants to play down that important development? If it is true that fewer women are getting thumped, then great. But to attribute that change to an underfunded church group and an army of well scrubbed teenagers is bizarre.