Free Markets, Free People

David Brooks Finally Figures It Out

Well sort of.  He tells us in his latest piece that he considers himself a “moderate-conservatitve” (what in the world is that?) and he finds the Obama budget (and agenda) waaay to “progressively liberal” for his taste.

Like David Broder, he seems to be surprised by that.

But the Obama budget is more than just the sum of its parts. There is, entailed in it, a promiscuous unwillingness to set priorities and accept trade-offs. There is evidence of a party swept up in its own revolutionary fervor — caught up in the self-flattering belief that history has called upon it to solve all problems at once.

So programs are piled on top of each other and we wind up with a gargantuan $3.6 trillion budget. We end up with deficits that, when considered realistically, are $1 trillion a year and stretch as far as the eye can see. We end up with an agenda that is unexceptional in its parts but that, when taken as a whole, represents a social-engineering experiment that is entirely new.

The U.S. has never been a society riven by class resentment. Yet the Obama budget is predicated on a class divide. The president issued a read-my-lips pledge that no new burdens will fall on 95 percent of the American people. All the costs will be borne by the rich and all benefits redistributed downward.

The lesson the left learned from the Clinton era is to move boldly and unapologetically toward what they want while they have the power and popularity to do so instead of screwing around with moderation, incrementalism and governing from the center. And the Republicans only reinforced the lesson when they tip-toed around while they had power, seemingly more worried about being liked than getting things done that agreed with their principles. Well, as Brooks and the “moderates” who were fooled into thinking Obama would be another Clinton have found out, there’s nothing “centrist” to this bunch now in power.

To their horror, they find they’re getting exactly what they were told they would get and, for some reason, they’re surprised and don’t like it. But without them, this little progressive song and dance never had a chance of hitting the main stage.

Now, per Brooks, its up to the moderates to save the country.

Oh goodie.

Pardon me if I don’t hold my breath. The squishy middle save us from anything? Based on what?  What principles do they rally too?  As easily as they were gulled in the last election, they have little credibility when it comes to such activities. And to whom or what would they appeal? Other moderats who were as clueless as they were? Then what?

But losing the middle would be a bit of a blow to the Obama administration’s plans. Obama is presently trading off of his popularity and there seem to be more questions about his true intentions than satisfactory answers. A loss of popularity might stiffen the spines of some blue dog Dems and slow this rocket sled to hell down a bit. Of course, it seems there’s a RINO in the weeds for every blue dog that says no, so I’m not sure what real impact that would have.  But hey, even the RINOs may get the message (again, not holding my breath).

I know it’s not much to hope for, but it is interesting to see the scales finally begin to fall from moderate eyes.  It demonstrates the brilliance of the candidate being the projection screen and with a few key words like “hope” and “change”, conning the middle into pretending that the fantasies they’ve conjured up and projected on him would become reality.  Now we pay the piper for that little screw up, don’t we?


Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

10 Responses to David Brooks Finally Figures It Out

  • …seemingly more worried about being liked than getting things done that agreed with their principles.

    The thing that gets me about that is that it was obvious from the beginning that they would not get either one. Being liked depended on pleasing the media, and if they had been clear-eyed about the media’s leftist bias, they would have realized the impossibility of that.

    (But, to be fair, even Jon Henke wasn’t clear-eyed about that leftist bias a couple of years back. I don’t know if he’s seen the light on that.)

  • “Obama is presently trading off his popularity…”

    I hate to disagree, but I must.

    I believe that a majority of people have written The Clown™ off. But, you say, what about his high poll numbers?

    Inflated. And why? Because right now people have no confidence in anything The Clown™ says. He opens his mouth and the stock market drops 200 points. He makes Bush look like an amateur when it comes to ruining any gains the Dow Jones might make in a day just by appearing somewhere.

    What is keeping his numbers at 59% approval (per Rasmussen; CNN keeps saying “his JARs are at stratopheric levels, in the high to low 70s,” which is grade-A horsecrap, and they know it)? People know that The Clown™ is in office less than 45 days, and if he continues to fail we are stuck with him until January 2013 no matter what happens. So, they will “support” him. But ask those people by July 4, or by the end of summer, or by Thanksgiving, when unemployment is about 10% and the stock market continues to go down and gas prices start to shoot up and The Clownettes™ will have spent trillions and gotten us nothing, what they think of his job performance, and watch as he goes below 50% to the low to mid 40s. And next year, if things continue (as I suspect they will, especially with the country being run by Howdy Doody) to slide further and further down, the Clownettes™ in Congress will run away from The Clown™ faster than MSDNC’s ratings continue to drop.

    I had a friend who worked on several campaigns call me Saturday night, and he was told by a Democrat in Colorado that if things are bad in mid-to-late 2010, Dems could lose 70+ seats in the House.

    And The Clown™ will solidify his standing towards being a one-termer.

  • As Nelson (on the simpsons) would say : haa haa

  • Obama doesnt care about the middle.  When he gives voting rights and green cards to 20 million illegals it wont matter any more.  Then he can have their votes and they can have our social security money and all the other benefits which Obama will pay for out of our pockets.

    • Voting rights for illegals (which many RINO’s support) is just one step.  ACORN is another.  Having democrat trash counting the ballots (as in Ohio last year) is a third.  Combine all this with a compliant media and an ignorant voting public and you’ve got a tremendous electoral advantage for the filthy democrats.  And why should conservatives bother to vote if the best they can hope for is a “compassionate conservative” like Bush, a madman like Yosemite Sam, or a lisping RINO like Graham?

      James Marsden may well be painting an accurate vision of the future (“when unemployment is about 10% and the stock market continues to go down and gas prices start to shoot up and The Clownettes™ will have spent trillions and gotten us nothing”), but how will the majority of Americans really respond to that?  Will they get angry and demand “change” to put things back the way they were?  Or will they do as people in Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, etc. have done in bad times in the past and demand MORE from the government, surrendering whatever rights and money they’ve got left in return for more empty promises of government programs?

  • And many of us are hoping that all those in power fail. Because those in power have a grating habit of being annoyingly self-righteous, hopelessly corrupt, resolutely incompetent and completely apathetic about the freedoms that they have sworn to protect.
    Embrace the failure. It’s patriotic.