Let us give the Barack Obama administration credit. They have run a "professional, smoothly running operation" in setting David Brooks' mind right. Back in early March, Brooks demonstrated a bit of independence from the liberal party line in his role as "house conservative" for the New York Times with this outburst:
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. His words are responsible; his character is inspiring. But his actions betray a transformational liberalism that should put every centrist on notice. As Clive Crook, an Obama admirer, wrote in The Financial Times, the Obama budget “contains no trace of compromise. It makes no gesture, however small, however costless to its larger agenda, of a bipartisan approach to the great questions it addresses. It is a liberal’s dream of a new New Deal.”
As a result, the Obama administration dispatched four handlers to work on Brooks to get him back into line. It worked beautifully as you can see in his next column:
On Tuesday, I wrote that the Obama budget is a liberal, big government document that should make moderates nervous. The column generated a large positive response from moderate Obama supporters who are anxious about where the administration is headed. It was not so popular inside the White House. Within a day, I had conversations with four senior members of the administration and in the interest of fairness, I thought I’d share their arguments with you today.
In the first place, they do not see themselves as a group of liberal crusaders. They see themselves as pragmatists who inherited a government and an economy that have been thrown out of whack. They’re not engaged in an ideological project to overturn the Reagan Revolution, a fight that was over long ago. They’re trying to restore balance: nurture an economy so that productivity gains are shared by the middle class and correct the irresponsible habits that developed during the Bush era.
The crowning touch of the White House handlers was when they gave Brooks a toy chart of his very own to gaze at:
The White House has produced a chart showing nondefense discretionary spending as a share of G.D.P. That’s spending for education, welfare and all the stuff that Democrats love. Since 1985, this spending has hovered around 3.7 percent of G.D.P. This year, it’s about 4.6 percent. The White House claims that it is going to reduce this spending to 3.1 percent by 2019, lower than at any time in any recent Republican administration. I was invited to hang this chart on my wall and judge them by how well they meet these targets. (I have.)
The handlers performed their task so well that soon David Brooks was soon singing ballads in praise of his beloved Obama:
...The Obama approach would make it more likely that young Americans grow up in relationships with teaching adults.
...Obama’s goal is to make sure results have consequences. He praises data sets that “tell us which students had which teachers so we can assess what’s working and what’s not.” He also aims to reward states that use data to make decisions. He will build on a Bush program that gives states money for merit pay so long as they measure teachers based on real results. He will reward states that expand charter schools, which are drivers of innovation, so long as they use data to figure out which charters are working.
...Education is close to his heart. He has broken with liberal orthodoxy on school reform more than any other policy.
Perhaps the love-struck Brooks thought he hadn't done enough in praise of The One. Well, today he continued to reassure those liberals who had any lingering doubts about where Brooks stands with this paean to Obama:
The big lesson for the Obama administration is that the American people will continue to support its agenda as long as they think it is competent. It was not automatic that an administration led by a 47-year-old man with little Washington experience would run a professional, smoothly functioning operation. Yet he has. The administration has unveiled a dazzling array of proposals with a high degree of efficiency and managerial skill. This has inspired confidence in his team, if not in the government as a whole.
Barack Obama is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
It would be a shame to disturb young David in mid-awe over Obama with any whiff of nasty reality over out of control budgets with huge deficits, top posts, especially in the Treasury Department that still have not been filled, and the newly opened Pandora's Box of possible "torture" investigations after promising they wouldn't happen.
One wonders if the incoming Times "house conservative," Ross Douthat, will counter Brooks' state of bliss over Obama or merely echo it.
—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie FUnnies blog.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
really?
April 24, 2009 - 08:04 ET by John WIExcuse me Mr. Brooks.......please forgive me for being such an idiot for not agreeing with you.
Seriously.
No....really.
Famous Quote
April 24, 2009 - 10:41 ET by Wildcatter1980(My first thoughts when I saw the headline.)
As we approach the 100th day of the Obama Administration, I cannot help but think this has been one of the most duplicitous, incompetent and least professionally run Presidential Administrations of my lifetime. (Poor vetting of Administration nominees, no lobbyists in his Administration except when it is the lobbyist who they want, government out-of-control spending of money it does not have, claiming that the government can spend us to economic prosperity when it has never worked in the past, monetizing the debt, blocking access to domestic energy sources that can be developed in environmentally safe ways, and denying the truth behind why we are where are economy is just to name a few.)
Can you imagine if Obama did not have the benefit of a Democrat-controlled Congress to back him up--not that Republican Congress would not have pushed for "American Progressive Lite"?
--
We already have term limits. They are called elections. We can & should vote out those who do not represent & serve us! - Me
If this clown, Brooks, is a
April 24, 2009 - 08:06 ET by NL207If this clown, Brooks, is a conservative, I am the pope.
Pandora's box is right.
April 24, 2009 - 08:08 ET by JWFFor what 6, 7, years now we have been hearing that waterboarding is torture from all the lefty whiners. But we could not argue back as the exact method was classified. It has now been spelled out in clear detail exactly what that entails - restricting breathing for 20 to 40 seconds. Restricted breathing - it is defined in the OLC memo's.
You start bringing people up on charges for that. For political purposes. Things will get very ugly very fast.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
David Brooks is no Conservative
April 24, 2009 - 08:10 ET by kevinm13We are all in trouble if David Brooks is considered a conservative. He is about as conservative as Hillary Clinton. I bet David Brooks hasn't voted for a Republican President since ---- ever. Lets drop all pretenses here like the lie about 95% of taxpaying Americans getting a tax break from 0bama, Brooks is not a conservative by any definition.
He is about as conservative
April 24, 2009 - 09:33 ET by NewsbusterbrownHe is about as conservative as Hillary Clinton.
He's more conservative than Hillary, but that's not really saying anything.
Anybody who claims to be a conservative of any stripe can't possibly think Obama has been a good president, IMO. Only a fool or a liar could.
“There are no easy answers' but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)
It would be a shame to
April 24, 2009 - 08:14 ET by motherbeltIt would be a shame to disturb young David in mid-awe over Obama with
any whiff of nasty reality over out of control budgets with huge
deficits, top posts, especially in the Treasury Department that still
have not been filled, and the newly opened Pandora's Box of possible
"torture" investigations after promising they wouldn't happen.
Oh, none of that matters, PJ.....
Just as his "running a huge campaign organization" was proof that he had the experience to be President, the fact that he has a "smoothly running operation" is proof that his 100-day Presidency is "dazzling!" Dazzling, I say!!!
He has broken with liberal orthodoxy on school reform more than any other policy.
Broken on liberal orthodoxy? Is that what it's called when he junks the DC vouchers program????
Barack Obama is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
PS I think it's telling, where you got that quote......
They might say "Wow, that sucks!" But at least they'll say "Wow!" -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes
Smoothness
April 24, 2009 - 09:26 ET by KC MulvilleI agree. I deny that Obama is a good manager. Rahm Emanuel might be, but that's different.
Management is judged on results, not the smoothness of the process. The football coach, John Madden, was once asked why his players weren't required to wear coats and ties on the team airplane, as a show of discipline. Madden said that discipline isn't about coat and ties; discipline was whether you jumped offsides on third-and-two. There are a lot of things that go into management, and smoothness isn't very important.
Obama's military policy is to keep Bush's policies in place, only without the respect for the military that Bush showed. His homeland security policy is Bush's. His operation is basically Bush's policies, except for a naive foreign policy and a socialist business model.
If Bush was such a disaster, why is Obama adopting so many of the policies, while his differences from Bush are so disastrous? They can't staff several departments, not from political opposition (as was the case under Bush) but because of tax cheating and personal embarrassments. His press secretary is a buffoon.
What, then, accounts for Obama's reputation? Other than a glowing, adoting press ...
This is your brain. This
April 24, 2009 - 08:23 ET by Scuba DudeThis is your brain.
This is your brain on drugs (picture of David Brooks).
This guy is seriously delusional. Where has he been the past 90 or so days? Oh wait, I think his head is still stuck up his Shahinshah's posterior. It's giving him that warm, fuzzy feeling being in there.
"The wrOng ONE was elected"
Smooth running operation?
April 24, 2009 - 08:24 ET by BDSmooth running operation? Smooth at WHAT!?
In his first hundred days he has demoralized the nations intelligence services, has them looking over their backs to see if they are being followed by a federal officer with a subpeona when they should be watching their lane for the bad guys.
He has declared that his next budget he will ask for a 10% cut in defense spending while HEAPING money on all other governmental spending. The morale of the DOD will quickly follow those at Langley, Meade, and Bolling as they begin fleeing for safer positions.
The only people who are happy are those at Foggy Bottom who finally have a commander in chief who concurs with their perenially opinion of "Its all our fault."
Tokyo Rose
April 24, 2009 - 08:36 ET by needleTokyo Rose: Obama Running a 'Professional, Smoothly Functioning Operation'
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
Obama: "Raise the flag! No, the white one!"
April 24, 2009 - 08:43 ET by DontFeedTheTrolls...Education is close to his heart.
Oh, yeah, Obama is all for those kids and their education. NOT!
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
Brooks said Obama is a "cultural conservative"!
April 24, 2009 - 08:47 ET by TEThe latest, greatest evidence that Brooks is a complete fool occurred on April 21, 2009 when Brooks actually called Obama a "cultural conservative". A "cultural conservative"? Brooks is unbearable. I haven't read Brooks in years and for years have immediately turned off the television anytime he makes one of his many appearances representing the "conservative" (i.e., non-conservative) point of view on PBS, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSDNC, et al., but I'd seen that Brooks had called Obama a "cultural conservative", so I took the plunge and read his column. Nevertheless, it is amusing to see that the self-described "mainstream" media never ceases to turn to David Brooks, Meghan McCain, fundamentalist homosexualist Andrew Sullivan, Kathleen Parker, David Gergen, Chuck Hagel, John McCain, Steve Schmidt, Michael Smerconish, Linsey Graham, et al., for the "conservative" and "Republican" point of view.
How about a little truth in advertising...
April 24, 2009 - 08:50 ET by jawebster1this guy is not a Conservative. Why is it Liberals want to be called Conservatives and not what they are? David Brooks is no more Conservative than Barney Frank, Patrick Leahy or better yet, Lincoln Chaffee. Remember him? Jim Webster
As usual, David Brooks
April 24, 2009 - 09:05 ET by fitzfongAs usual, David Brooks writes a platitude-filled, substance-free opinion piece claiming that the Obamunist team is an ambitious and efficient operation. Most criminal enterprises are, Mr. Brooks. Every mafia boss has an org chart of shysters, "spokesman" and, most importantly, muscle. Every Third World dictator has the same. Obama is no different.
At least Meghan McLame has an excuse...she's a child. David Brooks is a cheap whore.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
What is he smoking? Has he
April 24, 2009 - 09:06 ET by Ken ShepherdWhat is he smoking? Has he seen Robert Gibbs in action? He makes Scott McClellan look like Seneca the Elder.
Tossing aside ideology, can anyone reasonably say the Obama administration has gotten off to a stellar start in terms of pushing a cohesive agenda, getting Congress to move along its leadership, etc.?
Ohmigosh, Ken, I'm glad I
April 24, 2009 - 09:13 ET by motherbeltOhmigosh, Ken, I'm glad I wasn't drinking when I read that...I would have spewed (spewn?) for sure!!
Facts mean nothing. It's what they SAY is happening that matters. Obama is "for drilling" even as he says no to it, Obama is "for education" even as he dismantles the voucher program; Obama is a "centrist" (as are all his appointees) even as they lurch farther to the left.
The best one, though, is that Obama is a "cultural conservative."
Is that how one describes a stand in favor ot late-term and even post-term abortion?
Good grief. The mind boggles.
They might say "Wow, that sucks!" But at least they'll say "Wow!" -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes
"His words are responsible; his character is inspiring."
April 24, 2009 - 09:12 ET by jefflebowskiExcuse me....I'm.....gonna..........RAAALLLLLLPPHHH!
You can call a turd a flower but it's still a turd. I knew a conservative and Mr. Brooks, you are no conservative!
Angry White Dude
www.angrywhitedude.c...
Re Brooks
April 24, 2009 - 09:17 ET by slickwillie2001Brooks is a cheap date. President Prissypants appears to be a devastating hybrid of Jimmy Carter and John F'n Kerry, without any of the useful experience.
BHO's people might need talk to the Washington Post also
April 24, 2009 - 09:32 ET by Prester JohnDoes a Washington Post reporter (one Lisa de Moraes) think BHO is overexposing himself a bit?
Obama May Sweep Aside TV Schedule
President Obama might take an additional $9 million to $10 million out of the purse of the broadcast TV industry when he stages another of his news conferences next week to talk about his efforts to bail out the banking and automotive industries.
In fairness, he'll probably talk about heath care, Iraq and Bo, as well.
Network execs got word yesterday morning that Obamavision was making another return visit, sending them scrambling to decide whether to air, how to reschedule planned programming, etc.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/23/AR2009042304605.html
Careful there Lisa, the Dear Leader's handlers may come by your office to adjust your attitude a bit.
Re TV schedule
April 24, 2009 - 10:11 ET by slickwillie2001When the Bamster runs into problems, he schedules a primetime speech, because reading from a teleprompter is the one thing that he is pretty good at, and the only thing. He's a one trick pony.
Bampster won't hire Brooks.
April 24, 2009 - 10:24 ET by sevenBrooks apparently is a cost cutting target for the insolvent Times. Looks like he has to clean up and validate the party line or go sleep under a bridge.
No wait. He can go sleep under a brand new bridge built by Hope and change to rejuvinate America. (Built by non white workers for non whites to sleep under.)
why is this item running again?
April 24, 2009 - 10:23 ET by dubuquemanI mean, it's on the mark, but isn't it old and a rehash?
David Brooks
April 24, 2009 - 10:26 ET by garyd99is he married to Kathleen Parker or Peggy Noonan????
What a joke he is.
Honestly
April 24, 2009 - 11:06 ET by StarAZThanks for the warning on another UmmmFest coming...what night again? Only a thousand days...gosh, seems way longer. As for Brooks, just rent a GD room--I am sick of all this ridiculous worship--he is smart like meeeee, etc. He is not that smart--and neither are YOU, if you think he is.
David Brooks is delusional...
April 24, 2009 - 13:30 ET by PrairieSkyif he sincerely believes that he is, as he put it, a "...moderate-conservative, in my case." Someone needs to give this guy a quick refresher about exactly what a conservative is, because contrary to what he may believe, he definitely does not meet the definition.
Brooks' delusions extend to his assessment of the first 3 months of the Obama administration, which he astonishingly characterizes as "...a professional, smoothly functioning operation...The administration has unveiled a dazzling array of proposals with a high degree of efficiency and managerial skill."
Brooks has got to be kidding...Has he been paying any attention to the chaotic mess that has transpired over the last 3 months? How much taxpayer money has gone down the drain in bailouts (for companies that are going to end up going bankrupt anyway?) How many campaign promises has Obama reneged on? How many people has he nominated for cabinet positions that are either incompetent or had to withdraw their names because they hadn't paid their taxes? How many times has Obama made a policy statement about something one day, and then the next day, done a 180 and said something completely different? How much damage has he done to this country's economy and national security in less than 100 days?
If this is David Brooks' idea of a "...professional, smoothly functioning operation" operating with a "...high degree of efficiency and managerial skill," then one of us is crazy, and I don't think it's me.
And as for Brooks' contention that "...Barack Obama is not who we thought he was..." Wrong again, David...Barack Obama is EXACTLY who many of us thought he was (and is). He is everything that I was afraid he would be...A spineless, national security empty suit and huge tax and spend liberal with delusions of being the the next FDR with a reworked "New Deal" for the 21st century...
No, Mr. Brooks...Barack Obama is precisely who we thought he was.
And that's the problem...
"...peace is the highest aspiration of the American People. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it, we will never surrender for it, now or ever." President Ronald Reagan~ January 20, 1981
Sky... Hear! Hear! I wasn't
April 24, 2009 - 13:34 ET by bigtimerSky...
Hear! Hear!
I wasn't going to bother with the RINO Brooks the msm loves, you said it all for me...and then some.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Howdy bt! Me too!...
April 24, 2009 - 13:53 ET by PrairieSkyI hadn't planned on bothering with Brooks either, but after I read this, I was so infuriated, I just couldn't help myself! LOL!!
"...peace is the highest aspiration of the American People. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it, we will never surrender for it, now or ever." President Ronald Reagan~ January 20, 1981
...
April 24, 2009 - 11:40 ET by Eugenia"They’re not engaged in an ideological project to overturn the Reagan Revolution..."
Hahahahahahahaha!! Hahahahahahaaaaa!!
If it looks like a duck....
The true meaning...
April 24, 2009 - 11:48 ET by sam12663...of 'MODERATE'; "loser a$$wipe that can't make up their own mind, and waits to see what the majority thinks". Look it up, its in the 'Real Mans' handbook. Brooks is a big time parasite, who saw what was happening and tried to become a 'somebody' by bashing his own 'party'. He can troll the bottom of the ocean with the other turncoat, Kathleen Parker.
President Obama is nothing more than a lying empty suit; a Hollywood style special effects smoke and mirrors show that has shown itself to be a total fraud.
WAKE UP AMERICA! SAVE OUR CONSTITUTION!
Wow, the Obamanistas must
April 24, 2009 - 12:06 ET by R D HelmWow, the Obamanistas must have some pretty killer Polaroids of David Brooks.
Either that, or he has been hiding out in a cave for the last 100 days.
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
Brooks represents the
April 24, 2009 - 12:40 ET by ConservativeRexBrooks represents the Thurston & Lovey Howell wing of the Republican Party. That's the part that absolutely hates the guts of the majority of the fine folks who write on this site.
And those are just the people we need to marginalize, and overthrow, if we are ever to succeed as the Conservative Party.
We don't need to meld them into our Conservative Republican Party, we need to throw them under the bus. They hate the fact that we are the more populist wing of the Party. The working man wing. And that just galls the hell out of them. Good. They are close to being on the outside looking in.
Can you understand that McCain? And all the other RINOS.
Now we are the reactionarys, we are the ones holding the sticks.
The time for a quiet Republican party has come and gone.
Brooks, enter the Democrat party. You're not part of our future.
It kind of makes you wonder
April 24, 2009 - 13:15 ET by AlanaIt kind of makes you wonder what they have on people. And what kind of offers they make that people can't refuse.
Maybe
April 24, 2009 - 14:37 ET by StarAZMaybe Wagyu beef wrapped in newspaper....
So apparantly "liberal
April 24, 2009 - 13:53 ET by RagamuffinSo apparantly "liberal bias" is when anyone, for any reason, says anything "good" about a liberal?
This website is pathetic.
It's fine to say something
April 24, 2009 - 15:52 ET by fitzfongIt's fine to say something good about a liberal...when there's something good to say. But David Brooks is clearly contorting something good to say about President Fonzie...as there is absolutely nothing substantially good to say about this aspiring Marxist tyrant.
And if you feel like this website is so pathetic, why don't you take your worthless contribution and piss off to DU, Kos or Nothington Post? Believe me, you'll be missed like violent diarrhea.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
Believe me, you'll be
April 24, 2009 - 23:44 ET by RagamuffinBelieve me, you'll be missed like violent diarrhea.
Perhaps a little less so, don't you think?
Let's put it this way:
April 25, 2009 - 11:35 ET by fitzfongLet's put it this way: neither of you will be missed.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
But David Brooks is clearly
April 24, 2009 - 23:46 ET by RagamuffinBut David Brooks is clearly contorting something good to say about
President Fonzie...as there is absolutely nothing substantially good to
say about this aspiring Marxist tyrant.
Let us assume for the sake of argument that you are absolutely right.
Some mention of that fact, rather than ASSuming that as the case, would have saved the original post from being a joke
So my point stands.
Obviously you haven't a
April 25, 2009 - 11:32 ET by fitzfongObviously you haven't a clue who David Brooks is. He is a self-described "conservative" employed by the New York Times and PBS solely to represent the disaffected "moderate" wing of the Republican Party in scolding fellow Republicans for being too principled in their conservatism. He has no purpose at those sinking ships beyond sucking up to the Obamunists and reinforcing the disinformation about conservatism and conservative principles that the left-wing NYT/PBS audience demands. Effectively, he's a straw man. His presence at these institutions "representing" conservative beliefs is further evidence of liberal media bias.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
Ragamuffin...If you find "this website" so "pathetic"...
April 24, 2009 - 16:52 ET by PrairieSkyI suggest that you slink on over to HuffPo and/or Kos...I'm sure you'll be much happy over there...
"...peace is the highest aspiration of the American People. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it, we will never surrender for it, now or ever." President Ronald Reagan~ January 20, 1981
*pitches his tent*
April 24, 2009 - 17:06 ET by Ragamuffin*pitches his tent*
*pitches his tent* Ahh
April 26, 2009 - 06:41 ET by Dan The Man 2*pitches his tent*
Ahh the Bitch in the Ditch defense. Doesnt work raggie.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
LOL...Please do not feed
April 24, 2009 - 16:55 ET by bigtimerLOL...Please do not feed this troll.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
If Brooks is a Conservative
April 24, 2009 - 14:00 ET by Anneke9"If this clown, Brooks, is a conservative, I am the pope."
<sarc on>
If Brooks is a conservative, then I'm a Poodle. No, really. In this post-modern, deconstructionist world it's my prerogative to define what any word means according to my whims.
</sarc off>
"I said there was a society of men among us, bred up from their youth in
the art of proving by words multiplied for the purpose, that white is
black, and black is white, according as they are paid. To this society
all the rest of the people are as slaves."
Jonathan Swift
–––––––––––––––
Camouflage conservative in Baghdad-by-the-Bay
Not Who We Thought He Was?
April 24, 2009 - 17:33 ET by Mitchell BlattObama is not who we thought he was? Speak for yourself, David Brooks. Everyone who was informed knew he was the most liberal member of Congress. The National Journal knew. When he spoke of socializing healthcare and bringing world peace, we didn't just think he was being pragmatic.
It's you and your ivory tower elitist friends like Peggy Noonan who couldn't grasp who Obama was.
Just Two Words About David Brooks:
April 24, 2009 - 20:13 ET by BarkerHooveresque Photographs
If David Brooks was a dog....
April 24, 2009 - 22:29 ET by bpjam...I'd have to consider having him put down because he obvious has distemper or dementia. And if there was some other signs of physical pain, it would be too mad a condition to even treat.
Brooks needs to be met with by a group of conservatives. They need to tell him that he stop using the term 'conservative' again. Ever. And to tell Gepetto to stop putting that word near his name or his byline. Queers wouldn't allow the NYT to call Brooks 'gay' nor would Armenians allow the NYT to call him 'Armenian'. Nobody would allow themselves to be slandered by having Brooks columns associated with them.