Email Message
This form does not yet contain any fields.
    The Will to Create

    Entries in David Brooks (36)


    David Brooks is wrong again

    David Brooks has lost all relevance, but he still writes for the NYT, so some people must still take him seriously. I follow his writings because he represents what went wrong with the Right, although Brooks will say he's a Centrist or something vague to avoid committment -- however, Brooks is like a lot of squishy thinkers who influenced the Republican Party to comproimise with what they thought was the current political fashion -- progressivism. All the young people and the minorities and the women were going progressive, so Brooks and the Compromisers recommended softening the Republican approach and reaching out to young voters, ditch the old stodgy image and let the public know that Republicans have heart -- compassionate conservatives! Statism is not compassionate.

    Now Brooks believes that cynical gameplaying by Obama is the ticket to re-election. Brooks fell in love with Obama around 2007, and he hasn't been able to comment on him since without appearing delusional. Brooks thinks Obama hit the "sweet spot" with his speech yesterday, that blindsiding Paul Ryan, then basically promoting vague cuts, but assuring everyone he's going to spend more than he cuts, is the sweet spot. Obama plans on using a tired, worn-out Democrat strategy of smearing the Republicans because they are seriously trying to prevent entitlements from collapsing our economy, and Brooks praises this strategy and says that Obama is now a sure thing in the re-election.

    It's as if Brooks is wiping all memory of the Tea Party and mid-term elections out of his memory because these events conflict with his desire for Obama to get re-elected. Either that or Brooks never thought the Tea Party was that influential, and that it will have no affect on the 2012 elections. Is Brooks right? Will the American people believe the Democrat strategy when they say Republicans want old people to die and young people to suffer? Do the majority of Americans really like Obama so much personally that they will overlook unemployment, manipulation, lies, high gas prices, incredible deficits, the threat of entitlements collapsing the economy and causing severe across the board cuts, the cronyism with GE and Goldman Sachs, his poor relationship with Israel, the debacle in Libya, his association with SEIU, Obamacare, his refusal to open up real energy production?

    Does Brooks believe that nothing has changed with the American electorate, and that cynical campaigns to smear and demonize honest men like Paul Ryan and Rand Paul will work like they've always worked? And even if they do work, why is Brooks so apparently pleased by this sad state of affairs, and why isn't he using his column in the NYT to reveal the deceptions and condemn them?


    OMG! No you ditent, Stacy McCain

    Stacy McCain paints a near-perfect picture of the dinosaur media's clumsy attempts to regain relevance in what they think is a youth-controlled universe. NYT, WaPo and the others don't have a clue -- just look at NYT's representation of leading conservative thought -- David Brooks! I rest my case.


    The Broken Government

    David Brooks seems to think that "free market" principles played a part in breaking Big Government. I hate to break (pun intended) it to Brooks, but what has broken Big Government is Big Government -- plus, bought politicians using cronyistic measures to favor Big Business are not representative of free market principles or libertarianis. How can someone so apparently smart, be so ignorant? Or is Brooks simply doing what all statists do -- obscure the issues in defense of another form of statism.

    So, the old form of statism has failed because of libertarians and rampant free marketism, thus now another communitarian form of statism is needed to fix what's broken. Rather than a centralized tyrant, let's create local tyrants who inevitably will receive marching orders from centralized technocrats. No, Mr. Brooks, libertarians didn't break government, although I'd like to take part of the credit.

    Brooks is the worst kind of political pundit -- he pretends to be conservative and concerned with government abuse of power, like his concern over subsidies, but he's statist to the core. His kind have no confidence in the ordinary person's ability to self-govern and choose freely in a real free market. Brooks is from the old Conservative mindset which believes an elite few have to guide the hoi-polloi to a better, more stable and civil world. Even when he's playing the smart and pragmatic conservative he promotes managed conservatism from above. Brooks is a joke that doesn't seem to end. If the new Republicans inspired by classical liberal ideas lead us in a new direction, Brooks will have no niche for his Big Government centrism -- perhaps the joke will end, and then we can laugh.  


    Meet the Press 3/6/2011 - American Monarchy

    On Meet the Press with David Gregory this morning, the interviewed guests were Bill Daley and Michelle Bachman. Daley was asked about Obama's response to the Mid-East protests and the current budget debate. Daley defended all of Obama's responses and actions and proposals, maintaining that Obama does not think in political terms, but, rather, what's best for the country and "democracy" in general. Yep, Daley said that. Bachman was asked about Obama's responses, actions and proposals, and Bachman thinks Obama is not doing a very good job. Yes, she feels that way, really. When the subject of entitlements were brought up to Daley regarding a Democrat strategy to let the Republicans make the first proposals to deal with entitlements so that Democrats can blame the Republicans for reducing SS and Medicare, Daley said Obama doesn't think like this and wants to work with Republicans to address the entitlement problem. So, when Republicans make their proposals, we ought to see headlines in the news media stating Obama is following the Republican's lead to deal with entitlements and that the Republicans have Obama's full support. These headlines will no doubt follow a speech given by Obama praising the Republican's courage to deal with entitlements and that he is totally on board with the effort. Not.

    The Political Roundtable was small, with David Brooks representing moderates, and Eugene Robinson representing the Left. I can't think of a more mediocre pair of pundits. The conversation was focused on Obama's responses, actions and proposals regarding the Mid-East protests, the budget controversy and the 2012 elections. Brooks and Robinson both believe that spending cuts should not interfere with government "investment" and that jobs are the most important concern for the public. All throughout the discussion, the question was how this affects Obama and his approval rating as opposed to Republicans and the public perception of spending cuts.

    This morning's Meet the Press respresents the obsession the media has with the President. Especially since Clinton, American Presidents have become more like Monarchs, with congress and the courts becoming side issues. With Obama, the idea of Monarch has reached a pinnacle in the media. The Meet the Press show was wasted on speculations regarding Obama's popularity and chances for re-election. Our country faces major challenges, as does the world, but all the media seems interested in is whether Obama will be affected by the challenges and if he will be President in 2013. This might be fearful reaction to the mid-term elections which strongly favored Republicans. If Obama loses in 2012, the major media outlets and all arms of the State could be threatened with a new Republican push to beat back State power. We'll see how it turns out -- there always seems to be a tendency to move back to the status quo each time it's threatened.


    Meet the Press 2/13/2011 -- Democrat strategy

    The show began this morning with an interview with experts on foreign policy and they discussed the Egyptian revolution and nothing new was revealed, just a rehash of how well Obama has handled the situation and how the Muslim Brotherhood will not be a threat, although nothing is really for sure at this point. Then David Gregory interviewed John Boehner and rehashed the situation with spending, then Gregory tried to get Boehner to denounce anyone who thinks Obama is a Muslim, which Boehner wouldn't do, but Boehner takes Obama at his word that he's a Christian. Real riveting stuff. Republicans want to cut spending.

    Then there was the roundtable discussion with Rep. Schilling, a Republican Tea Party type, Kasim Reed, The Mayor of Atlanta, a Democrat, Dee Dee Myers, a Democrat, David Brooks, a centrist, and Mark Halperin, a Democrat. Of course it's all about party affiliation and politics. Gregory and Brooks presented the image, regarding the Egyptian situation, that Obama was on the side of protesters, and the State Department was on the side of keeping Mubarak in power to help with the transition, with Obama winning the conflict. There was no speculation that this might have been the administration's political strategy to cover all bases as situations in Egypt quickly shifted back and forth. There was also practically no talk about the egregious missteps and lack of intel.

    Then Gregory revealed the Democrat strategy to trap Republicans. Gregory didn't state the strategy, but he continued it by trying to trap Rep. Shilling into saying the retirement age of SS will have to be raised to make any significant dent in the national debt. Gregory didn't meantion how Democrats will excoriate the Republicans if they try to raise the SS retirement age, but that's what the Democrats are waiting on. The Democat strategy is to get the Tea Party Republicans to make committments to reform SS, Medicare and Medicaid by showing specific cuts and reform measures -- then the Democrats will savagely attack the Republicans for taking retirement and health security away from old people, allowing the poor and sick to die, and leaving children to suffer with no access to healthcare. Then Gregory will ask why Republicans are so callous to the needs of the most vulnerable in society.

    The only question Gregory needed to ask Rep. Shilling is does he think the Republicans would join Democrats, if Democrats were willing, in a bipartisan effort to reform SS, Medicare and Medicaid even if it means raising the retirement age. Then Rep. Shilling should have said that he will go even further if Democrats are willing to help, by looking at meaningful ways to transition these social programs to the private sector.

    Then it would have been a good show. As it was, it was just more political posturing and gamesmanship.

    Page 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next 5 Entries ยป