Posted on 03/03/2009 5:02:37 AM PST by publius1
You wouldnt know it some days, but there are moderates in this country moderate conservatives, moderate liberals, just plain moderates. We sympathize with a lot of the things that President Obama is trying to do. We like his investments in education and energy innovation. We support health care reform that expands coverage while reducing costs.
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.
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 U.S. has traditionally had a relatively limited central government. But federal spending as a share of G.D.P. is zooming from its modern norm of 20 percent to an unacknowledged level somewhere far beyond.
Those of us who consider ourselves moderates moderate-conservative, in my case are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
These people are so weak that they can’t help wanting to please the smart set. I’ve noticed what a pussycat Buchanan is when he’s on Morning Joe. And Joe Scarborough on TV is quite different from the Joe Scarborough who serves up ‘conservative schtick’ on the radio.
Why?
Because they chose to cast their lots with a man whom they had every reason and opportunity to know was an Alinsky-influenced left-wing radical activist. A man who was dredged by Democrat power brokers from the political cesspool of Chicago, polished and groomed, and finally held up as a heroic figure - not because of his achievements, which were (and remain) few, but for his lofty image as the inimitable Mr. Hope N. Change.
And in Washington, as in New York and Hollywood: image is everything.
Barack Obama went to Harvard! He is so articulate! He is so... clean and shiny and new, just like a freshly-minted Lincoln penny!! So much better than those awful gun-toting hillbilly Baptist NASCAR Budweiser boobs down there in Alamissitexarbama!
And so there went the Noonans and Frums and Brookses with their chilled chablis in splashing crystal glasses all love-struck and moon-eyed, sprinting right up the hill and headlong over the cliff after The One.
And there they now lie, all piled in a heap, wondering just what the hell happened. They didn't see it coming, but many of us certainly did and tried to tell them, only to be given the brush-off and high-hat for our troubles. So, I say let them pick themselves up off the ground, if they still can. Except for Peggy: apparently she still doesn't know she's fallen.
One thing's for sure.... Brooks has damaged his own reputation. He's the Timothy Geithner of the NYT.
You are right! His tune changed the second his radio broadcasting began.
I've begun listening to a non-ABC station, when Joe and Mika have their radio show.
Hold the presses...plumbers, aka Joe the plumber,small business owners, etc. are smarter than the elite talking heads.
You mean he actually had a credible reputation at one time? Wow! I didn't know that. Or do you mean he damaged his reputation in the view of the left who depended on his pseudo-conservative wussyness at the NY Slimes?
I consider anyone who voted for the kenyan an idiot, no matter what my prior relationship is/was with them.
But I welcome all criticisms of this demonic administration, including those written in The Slimes, to be read by their libtard readership.
“We are in this situation because of them, not in-spite of them.”
We are going to need all the voters we can get to get OUT of this situation. Every person who gets the buyer’s remorse is a point for us, especially if it is printed in The Slimes to be read by others.
“I hear alot of buyers remorse, ALOT.”
* * *
You see, reading a post like this is very encouraging.
We need lots of people to move from obamaworship to realism.
Let's be a bit more precise. The only moderates who were "fooled" by Obama were unaware of or disbelieved the overwhelming evidence that Obama is a committed Marxist.
Consider the source of the criticism. They are not all equal nor are they all valid.
you’re still missing the point.
Apparently if someone isnt as conservative you, then you are dismissing their questioning of Comrade Obama. that is not the way to gain support for opposing his policies.
And if someone who voted for The Kenyan votes against him in 2012, guess what- their vote counts just as much as yours!
Mr. Brooks, you are an ass. Wait until you learn more about the object of your man crush. You will be horrified. Especially if you have children....
"Moderates now find themselves betwixt and between. On the left, there is a president who appears to be, as Crook says, a conviction politician, a bold progressive liberal. On the right, there are the Rush Limbaugh brigades. The only thing more scary than Obamas experiment is the thought that it might fail and the political power will swing over to a Republican Party that is currently unfit to wield it."
I for one do not care if David Brooks has now had an epiphany about Obama or not. He has already done his damage prior to the election. FYI: I am far more cynical about Brooks who wants to feather his own nest and be seen as a moderate and all of the attendant benefits that gives him among the NYT crowd. I gather that those "benefits" have subsided after the election just like Cindy Sheehan's.
And if someone who voted for The Kenyan votes against him in 2012, guess what- their vote counts just as much as yours!
If you really think that this article is going to sway voters, you have a reading comprehension problem. Brooks is no conservative nor is he a Republican. Read the entire article.
You couldn’t discuss this without making a personal attack, could you? How typical of a closed mind.
I’m done with you.
David you saw what you wanted to see like a lot of others
Works for me :) I'd only add that I don't think "moderates" really know just what the heck it is they do believe. If push came to shove, I doubt they could actually tell ya.
B.S. I refuse to slobber in congratulations over the far-too-late realizations of the painfully obvious. They need to be slapped full across the face for helping put us in the mess--and for the messes such idiots are likely to put us in in the future.
LOL. You must resort to making it personal because you can’t refute the substance, i.e., the Brooks’ article slams Reps and conservatives while making a few criticisms of Obama. You want us to embrace it. BS.
Brooks is developing a more serious “deer in the headlights” look than David Gergen.
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.