David Brooks clearly fell off the Obama wagon hard. He went from writing absolutely glowing articles about Sen. Obama, to somewhat ambivalent yet respectful articles, and now to outright character assassination.
I usually enjoy David Brooks' column. He writes with an eye towards culture at large, and is often elucidating when discussing society in general.
It is, however, when he aggressively carries water on behalf of the Republican party that Brooks is at his worst. And today he wrote as clear cut a partisan hit piece as they come, so I thought I'd take the time to take it read it so you wouldn't have to.
After complaining that Republicans don't really understand the Barack Obama for the bare knuckles politico he really is, Brooks makes this statement:
This guy is the whole Chicago package: an idealistic, lakefront liberal fronting a sharp-elbowed machine operator. He’s the only politician of our lifetime who is underestimated because he’s too intelligent. He speaks so calmly and polysyllabically that people fail to appreciate the Machiavellian ambition inside.
But he’s been giving us an education, for anybody who cares to pay attention. Just try to imagine Mister Rogers playing the agent Ari in "Entourage" and it all falls into place.
So after that warm little introduction, Brooks moves to the meat of his argument.
Back when he was in the Illinois State Senate, Dr. Barack could have taken positions on politically uncomfortable issues. But Fast Eddie Obama voted "present" nearly 130 times. From time to time, he threw his voting power under the truck.
And somebody as informed as David Brooks couldn't be expected to know he was actually voting present in accordance with the wishes of his progressive allies. Moving on.
Dr. Barack said he could no more disown the Rev. Jeremiah Wright than disown his own grandmother. Then the political costs of Rev. Wright escalated and Fast Eddie Obama threw Wright under the truck.
That's right, Sen. Barack Obama didn't want to disown his preacher of 20 years, and many of us found that laudable. But when that same preacher was trying to grab the spotlight for himself in a way that betrayed their friendship, Sen. Obama was forced to denounce him for his actions. This is not hipocrisy, but a reflection of a very unfortunate decision by Rev. Wright to undermine his parishioner.
To blame this on Sen. Obama seems disingenuous at best.
Dr. Barack could have been a workhorse senator. But primary candidates don’t do tough votes, so Fast Eddie Obama threw the workhorse duties under the truck.
Really David Brooks, and Sen. McSame has had a peachy attendance record since he started running, no?
Dr. Barack could have changed the way presidential campaigning works. John McCain offered to have a series of extended town-hall meetings around the country. But favored candidates don’t go in for unscripted free-range conversations. Fast Eddie Obama threw the new-politics mantra under the truck.
The truth is, I would have liked to see these town halls happen as well. But I don't blame Sen. Obama for not allowing terms to be dictated as to how that should happen.
He then goes on to praise/condemn Sen. Obama for withdrawing from the public financing system in such as to make it "a cut-throat political calculation seem like Mother Teresa’s final steps to sainthood."
David Brooks concludes his poorly thought through attack with by declaring himself agnostic on what he just wrote.
I have to admit, I’m ambivalent watching all this. On the one hand, Obama did sell out the primary cause of his professional life, all for a tiny political advantage. If he’ll sell that out, what won’t he sell out? On the other hand, global affairs ain’t beanbag. If we’re going to have a president who is going to go toe to toe with the likes of Vladimir Putin, maybe it is better that he should have a ruthlessly opportunist Fast Eddie Obama lurking inside.
And thus we get another brief glimpse into the ongoing tale: What does David Brooks think about Obama today?
Meanwhile, McCain has flip-flopped on oil drilling, attacked the supreme court decision to affirm habeas corpus, and may himself have some legal problems regarding his decision to enlist and then forego public financing. He has also repeatedly said he didn't love his country until he later in his life, when in the army.
But I'm sure David Brooks will be writing about those issues soon.