You give way too much credit to the sheeple, but you're more concerned with saying "you're wrong" than doing some analytical thinking.
Posted on 04/24/2010 3:28:11 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
David Brooks is on a search to find out how it was that we elected such a “moderate” president and wound up with the worst of big government liberalism and a polarized electorate. He seems stumped as he explores these questions in what can only be described as evasive phrasing:
"The country had just elected a man who vowed to move past the old polarities, who valued discussion and who clearly had some sympathy with both the Burkean and Hamiltonian impulses. He staffed his administration with brilliant pragmatists whose views overlapped with mine, who differed only in that they have more faith in technocratic planning.
Yet things have not worked out for those of us in the broad middle. Politics is more polarized than ever. The two parties have drifted further to the extremes. The center is drained and depressed.
What happened?
History happened. The administration came into power at a time of economic crisis. This led it, in the first bloom of self-confidence, to attempt many big projects all at once. Each of these projects may have been defensible in isolation, but in combination they created the impression of a federal onslaught."
History happened? Oh, let’s see if we can’t be more precise than that. “As government grew [by itself? did someone grow it?], the antigovernment right mobilized. This produced the Tea Party Movement — a characteristically raw but authentically American revolt led by members of the yeoman enterprising class.” History happened and government grew. (Like magic!) And now Brooks is disappointed.
Brooks writes that the Democratic party did this and that, that opposition grew, and that we wound up in the big- vs. little-government debate. What’s missing from this autopilot version of politics? Hmm … could it be Obama, the moderate fellow, who did the government-growing?
I have a rule of thumb: when a writer, especially a good one, excessively uses evasive or convoluted rhetoric, he is hiding something. Let’s try this: Obama, a very liberal politician, was smart enough to know he couldn’t win the presidency as a hard leftist. He posed as a moderate. New York Times columnists sung his praises. Pundits assured us that he was beyond ideology, a sort of philosopher-king with very neat pants. He got into office. He governed from the far Left. The president signed bill after bill, spending money we didn’t have and running up the debt. Obama insisted on a mammoth health-care bill the country hated. He egged Congress on to pass it. Meanwhile, the country recoiled. They hired a moderate on advice of pundits and media mavens and got a far-Left liberal, a ton of debt, an expanded federal government, and a slew of new taxes.
How’s that?
The bottom line: history doesn’t just “happen.” Presidents make choices. Pundits make miscalculations. Voters exact revenge. It’s not that complicated — if you are honest about who did what to whom.
“NYT’s David] Brooks Struggles to Figure Out What Went Wrong (w/ “moderate centrist” Obama admin)”
Simple!! Brooks and a bunch of other @$$h$les drank the Obama Kool-Aid.
You're wrong. They understand very well.
"Think of it always, speak of it never" - that's their operating plan to communize America. And it's working.
It's the Republicans who were - and who remain - too stupid to understand.
At New Republic they’re still calling Brooks “prominent conservative.”
All I was going to say if it's raining David, it's time to come inside......but I think you said it better!
Palin is, to them, way out there. It has nothing to do with truth, such a raw fundamentalist concept, so naive and retro. She hunts and kills things for goodness sakes, she actually worked on a smelly fishing boat, can you believe that? So outré. And had a retarded baby on purpose, tsk tsk tsk.
They just don't understand her. She scares them, she has absolutes. Obama didn't, because he doesn't. It's all style over substance, and not just any style, but their style. It trumps all for Brooks, and the many people just like him, and they're now worried about feeling foolish because of it. So, another round of carefully modulated and oh-so-elevated navel gazing. Oh those rubes, they made a mess of things and spoiled the great hope of one of our own, how could this happen? It can't possibly be that we were wrong, no, it must be something else. And on, and on.
I also have a rule of thumb:
when a writer, especially a good one, excessively uses evasive or convoluted rhetoric, he is hiding something.
Let’s try this:
Obama, a very liberal politician an avowed communist , was smart [diabolical] enough to know he couldn’t win the presidency as a hard leftist commu-fascist.
He posed masqueraded as a moderate. New York Times columnists [prevaricated and] sung his praises. Pundits assured us that he was beyond ideology, a sort of philosopher-king with very neat pants.
He got into office [using deceit, a fabricated life, voter fraud and intimidation]. He governed from the far Left [... Moscow]. The president [- not until he provides ID -] signed bill after bill, spending money we didn’t have and running up the debt intentionally bankrupting the country.
Obama insisted on a mammoth health-care bill the country hated. He egged Congress on to pass it. Meanwhile, the country recoiled. [hmmmm, really? Within two weeks of the coronation, we were at the Capitol protesting while others called, e-mailed and faxed our complete and utter contempt at the idea of the Porkulus bill.]
They hired a moderate socialist on advice of [lying, deceiving] pundits and media mavens and got a far-Left liberal full-blown islamo-fascist communist , a ton of debt, an expanded federal government, and a slew of new taxes.
How’s that?
Much better with my corrections.
Obama ... mmmmm, mmmmm, mmmmm
DLC= Dirtbag Lying Communists.
“I simply don’t understand how they can be so incredibly blind.”
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
One of my favorite singers and one of my favorite people on this Earth explained it this way.
“There is none so blind as he who will not see.”
Everything Is Beautiful by Ray Stevens
It is called willful blindness or willful ignorance, the refusal to see the truth. One of the most difficult things a human can ever do is admit that he has started down the wrong path and reverse his own thinking. I think that is what Carlos Casteneda meant when he said that Don Juan told him that by the time a man realized he was on the wrong path his path was ready to kill him. Those who do successfully right their own wrong thinking are the greatest warriors on Earth against their former ways. Ronald Reagan is said to have begun as a socialist.
Much better writers than I have explained it, it seems that some would literally prefer to die than acknowledge that the ideas they hold so dear make no sense in reality. I think I have approached that point at times in the past but I try to remain aware now that I must trust my own judgment but at the same time never be unwilling to consider other views.
But, I have a feeling, with people like David Brooks, that will be a mighty struggle, because like most liberals and media persons, they have tremendously large egos, and, at heart, are lazy. Easier to blame "someone else" for their intellectual failings.
RICO media empowers Obama’s fascists.
“History happened”
“History” was an economic crisis CAUSED by GOVERNMENT entites...this “history” was welcomed by Mr. Brook’s candidate of choice, Obama, who although never running so much as a lemonade stand, nonetheless arrogantly believes that he and his equally “experienced” collection of never-had-a-real-job socialists will usher in a new Uptoia.
What went wrong is the fact that a majority of voters were not paying attention, distracted by “history”.
Barack Obama is what he is, an intellectually vapid, radical liberal Fabian socialist and old-fashioned Chicago street thug. He hasn't changed. He has surrounded himself with those like him. He said he will "fundamentally change America forever", and he means it. Those of us, here, and elsewhere, who were smart enough to see the threat, knew what it meant. People like Brooks and others chose not to see it, and the failing is theirs.
The Dims are too stupid to understand the idjit they elected is a consummate liar for whom the means justifies the ends.
You're wrong. They understand very well.
"Think of it always, speak of it never" - that's their operating plan to communize America. And it's working.
It's the Republicans who were - and who remain - too stupid to understand.
42 posted on Saturday, April 24, 2010 8:34:13 AM by Jim Noble
You give way too much credit to the sheeple...
It seems to me that the Rats referred to by Canedawg are the masses. The fainting fools in the general populace, while Jim references the “leaders” of the Rat pack. Those charged with establishing a base for the movement to accomplish its goals. The “community organizers“ the leaders of ACORN, MoveOn.org, and the KOS Kids, all doing the bidding of their bosses, Soros and Obama.
They are the ones who live by the "Think of it always, speak of it never" mantra. While the masses follow their “Jim Jones” accepting the kool-aid looking forward to utopia.
When you have the so-called republican presidential candidate saying this in the waning days of the campaign, you simply cannot deny It's the Republicans who were - and who remain - too stupid to understand.
"I have to tell you, [Obama] is a decent person, a person that you do not have to be scared [of] as president of the United States." John McCain, 10-10-08
Elitists like Brooks are easily seduced by glib phrases and appearances. After the folksy, southern-sounding, cowboy-dressing Bush, along came Obama who appeared patrician in his manner and speech, and saps like Brooks just couldn’t resist him. Remember Brook’s observation about the crease in Obama’s pants? Only a nitwit would think that was some sort of qualification.
Dear Mr. Brooks,
Nothing at all "went" wrong. Au contraire, everything went efficiently and quickly "right," as expected. In fact, the 0b0wa agenda is proceeding in a breathtaking pace.
You wasted your time on this article. Rest assured that the destruction of the USA by the regime's dictatorial powers is proceeding unabated except for minor static coming from most of the populace.
“Hey DUFUS (David Brooks), BO and his captive media told you what they wanted you to hear. They lied, manipulated, cheated, played you for a fool.”
And Brooks *played* the fool easily, as did about 30 million others in the center (if that’s how Brooks fashions himself...)
“Very well stated! Although Brooks would still be in denial if faced with your assessment.”
For the RATS, always and ever, de-NILE aint just a river in Egypt.
I seriously have a hard time understanding people like David Brooks. You could have picked a FReeper at random prior to the 2008 election, and they would have told you EXACTLY how Obama was going to behave. It was no secret whatsoever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.