The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Brooks Again

Text Size

David Brooks had a thoughtful profile on South Dakota Senator John Thune in Friday's New York Times. It is a useful introduction to a man who we will likely be hearing more about and from as the clock slowly ticks away towards 2012.

But that said, as is the routine with everything Brooks' pen produces these days, an otherwise coherent piece is disrupted by the author's gratuitous displays of affection towards President Barack Obama.

After ticking off all of the qualities that might make Thune presidential material and the issues that may lead the country towards a GOP revival (balanced budgets, job creation, small business growth, the perception of the president as too liberal) Brooks (perhaps fearing the White House might construe this as some sort of criticism) quickly reminds readers that Obama is "the most talented political figure of the age." Really? After a year in the Oval Office, what tangible evidence is there to support this theory? Cash for Clunkers?

Oh, and again, lest a profile of a potential Obama foe raise eyebrows amongst Brooks friends in the administration, he also predicts that after "health care passes" Obama will "pivot and pick some fights with his own party over spending" and win back wayward independents. Interesting logic. After ramming through an unfunded and largely unwanted trillion dollar entitlement, the president (a moderate at heart as Brooks keeps reminding us) will reclaim the fiscal high ground by picking a few (surely to be superficial) fights with those irresponsible liberals in Congress and cruise to victory in 2012.

Bizarre...but typical. It has been said in this space many times before, but it is worth repeating yet again: Brooks's man crush on Obama has rendered his utterances on this subject incoherent and, frankly, embarrassing.

View all comments (13) | Leave a comment

Yosemeti Sam| 11.14.09 @ 10:25AM

Not enough for this RINO - whatever - to have been
a shoe-shiner. Now this RINO - whatever - is a boot licker!

Morris| 11.14.09 @ 2:49PM

Brooks is about as well as we're going to do on the pages of the NYT. remember what happened to Ben Stein and Bill Kristol. We all know he's always ready to kiss the ring-but at least the liberals get a slightly different point of view.

Jonah| 11.14.09 @ 3:02PM

Senator Thune is my Senator here in SD. He is definitely presidential material. Don't be fooled that RINO Brooks did a column on him--Thune is the real conservative deal.

JP| 11.14.09 @ 3:47PM

There isn't a chance that Obama could force the kind of budget cuts that would slowed down the defecit. This nation is now in the early process of the Baby Boomer retirement process. With each passing year more and more Boomers will be going on Social Security and Medicare. Also, for the next 12 months or more tax reciepts will be going down as the last of the Bush Tax Cuts expire. Add in unexpeted costs of the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and things get interesting.

The President's only option (and it may be too late for that) is to give the economy a "coup de whiskey" in the form of a sale tax or income tax holiday. The economic activity of something like this would decrease unemployment, spur short term consumption, and increase capital gains. But with $1.5 trillion defecits, this option is probably too late.

martin j smith| 11.14.09 @ 5:30PM

David Brooks is a Democrat not matter what he says( I would say the same for most RINOS ). He is the PBS token "conservative". Really I think it is time certainly in his case to know what you have and not take what he says too seriously unless he really says something truly new and off the wall.

Pkane| 11.14.09 @ 6:33PM

"most talented political figure of the age"does not mean most effective policy maker or brilliant commander in chief.

It means that Obama is likely to be very difficult to defeat no matter what happens in the next 3 years. Do you think jokes about Cash for Clunkers are going to help in 2012?

Look, people like this guy and want him to succeed. The country could be a smoldering ruin in 2012, but if Obama can convince enough voters that someone/something else is to blame, create doubts about his opponent and give people a glimmer of hope that things are on the verge of getting better he will be reelected.

The young ignorant voters - including a healthy batch of children casting their first votes - will be out in force. Do yo think the under 30 crowd will vote out their buddy "Barack" for some boring old white dude who wants to force Jesus on them?

And if Obama does get some form of healthcare passed the drama of the debate will be well over by then. For many independents it will be enough if they hear some noise about fiscal responsibility. Again, all it takes for many is to give them an excuse think Obama is the hip, sensible moderate they invested themselves in. Even the the wake of destructive, partisan actions one nice speech is all he needs to reassure them that they're not idiots for falling for "Hope and Change" in the first place. No one wants to admit they were an idiot.

Sadly, I don't think it will matter how brilliant the Republican nominee is.

martin j smith| 11.15.09 @ 7:50AM

No-think it will be conditions on the ground that motivate people. The more Obama speaks the more people are turned off. But people will look at their household income,their standard of living,they will pay attention to the cost of living,the loss of the value of the dollar, peole not spending money,small business going down and unemployment. These are things that they cannot ignore. Speeches, they are "hot air". Money or lack of it--now you are talking. Oh, and by the way, if you think Ft Hood not an issue smoldering out there --you are wrong. And, if there are nany further attacks on US soil forgetaboutit.

David Brooks| 11.15.09 @ 9:59PM

Almost forgot to mention. Thune's trousers are beautifully creased. He's Presidential material, without doubt.

martin j smith| 11.16.09 @ 7:33AM

If I were a potential candidate for President ( that would opposed to Obama ) I would ask David Brooks not to give his opinion. Unless one wanted something to laugh about--assuming you had the sense of humor to appreciate it.

Derek Leaberry| 11.16.09 @ 9:20AM

The odd thing about David Brooks is that he is the opposite of the elegant Obama he adores. I came across Mr. Brooks at 18th and I Streets in Washington two years ago and saw that he most looks like a Lower East Side tailor circa 1912. Crumpled suit. Scribbling his column as he walked. Short and pudgy. He must sit on telephone books when he does his show on The Jim Lehrer show on PBS. That Brooks is presentable on TV gives credit to the PBS make-up staff.

The truth about Brooks is that he has reverted back to the liberalism of his first twenty or so years. Like most neo-conservatives, he doesn't particularly like Christians who expect socially conservative policies and is a little ashamed that the Republicans depend on a large Christian vote. But Brooks does support endless wars in the Middle East although he doesn't propose to fight in them himself. That's for the rednecks to do.

Mike| 11.16.09 @ 9:50AM

What Mr. Brooks possesses that eludes the vast majority of writers and readers at TAS is a degree of objectivity and a sense of fairness. For all of the right wing's hyperventilation about freedom, the sentiment doesn't appear to extend to the realm of inquiry and analysis. For the right, ideological purity is norm. Woe to those who don't perpetuate the lies and the distortions that are the canon of the right.

George Bruce| 11.16.09 @ 10:16AM

Brooks is like some new type of subatomic particle. He appears to exist simultaneously on both sides of the fence, while sitting on top of it and perhaps also crouching beneath.