Amen. Political commentators, as a rule of thumb, strive to live down to Upton Sinclair's old saw about a man not understanding something if his paycheck depends on him not understanding it. So you have Brooks praising Romney as the finance version of a personal trainer, one of "rigor" and "productivity", as opposed to simply the equivalent of using other people's money to buy distressed property, borrow money against it to take out ginormous fire insurance policies, then torch the place.
Klein scarcely challenges the status quo any more than Brooks does; the stock in trade of both these men is to find the political center of any debate, on any subject, and attempt to circumscribe the perceived "centrist" path through the muddle.
But there is no muddle here. The stark reality is that, where at one time there may have been some intersection of interests for the peons and the oligarchs, there no longer is. This is by said oligarchs' explicit acknowledgement; if I have to sit through another round of braying by some pampered trophy cow that the people she rents don't understand the workings of the world quite as profoundly as she does, I'm going to punch a wall.
This is the way Romney and his claque want it, the system does precisely what they have engineered it to do. Brooks is right -- Romney is an efficiency expert, and his intent is to optimize. But the conditions he intends to optimize are those of the mafiosi who bankroll him, certainly not the conditions of the thankless rabble. Brooks knows this as well, he has to by now.