E-Mail 'David Brooks: I'm worried about Obama's legacy, and I have some suggestions I hope will help him' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'David Brooks: I'm worried about Obama's legacy, and I have some suggestions I hope will help him' to a friend

Loading ...

24 Responses to "David Brooks: I’m worried about Obama’s legacy, and I have some suggestions I hope will help him"

Anthony says:

February 12, 2010 at 9:12 pm

I swear, Iowahawk’s “T. Coddington Van Voorhees” parodies are nothing compared to the reality of these cocktail conservatives. They satirize themselves without knowing it.

And why is it, when one faction or another doesn’t get their way, they scream that the country is ungovernable and we need to amend the constitution? Losers. [-(
John Bibb says:

February 12, 2010 at 10:40 pm

***
I’ll help Comrade Obama (PBUH) out the door of the White House when he loses the 2012 election to Sarah Palin. Always ready to lend a hand where needed most.
***
Rocketman
***
Carlos says:

February 12, 2010 at 11:07 pm

The supposed president is a pathetic, pathological liar whose only direction is a total takeover of every American life. He doesn’t care if the takeover is as gentle as velvet or as brutal as the old Soviet crackdown of Hungary in the 50’s. His only goal is that takeover.

So wait for the sweet sounds of bipartisan cooing coming from the prez as he shuts the door on the opposition and (metaphorically) guns them down as they sit there entranced.

I’m sure sometime in his life he’s told the truth. I’m just not sure if it was in adolescence or puberty. I know it’s not been in adulthood (if that’s what his pathetic life now can be called.)
Joe says:

February 12, 2010 at 11:26 pm

Why does anyone getting ready to criticize this Chump in Chief always start out with the default BS line, “while president Obama is still personally admired, his….sucks..”? Not only do most Americans not like his socialist reformation ideas, we flat out don’t like the man.
Tom says:

February 12, 2010 at 11:36 pm

Hey Mr. Brooks here’s a thought. Before we amend the Constitution lets try enforcing it first and see how that works out.
Michpundit says:

February 12, 2010 at 11:57 pm

Rock on, Sis! Well said!
Anthony says:

February 13, 2010 at 12:32 am

Brooks:

He could lay out the fiscal realities and explain that voters cannot continue to demand programs they are unwilling to pay for.

Sorry for the double comment in quick succession, but something was bothering me about the cocktail conservative’s post, and I just realized it was the above sentence. With those few words, Brooks laid bare the condescension, paternalism, and elitism at the heart of the Rockefeller Republicans, of which Brooks is the latest example.

Dear David Brooks:

Listen, you smug, pants-crease worshiping twerp. If the people demanded programs they weren’t willing to pay for, it was because their political leadership told them there really was such a thing as a free lunch. Social Security is a demographic Ponzi scheme. The Great Society had almost no positive results and definitely harmed Black society. No Child Left Behind, while touted by a president I admire, is an administrative nightmare according to teachers I know, taking away from teaching time and thus robbing the children. The people were sold a statist bill of goods.

How dare you blame the American people for trusting “leaders” supposedly elected from among them, and how dare you –HOW DARE YOU– implicitly criticize them for finally waking up and refusing to be played for suckers? This, David Brooks, is exactly how the system is supposed to work when the elected representatives no longer represent the people, and don’t you dare compare them to unruly children who need a lecture from the National Nanny.

Go back to admiring His pants-crease, David. That’s where you belong.
Independent says:

February 13, 2010 at 12:35 am

It’s about the economy…that’s what Americans want fixed right now, not health care or global warming.
mike191 says:

February 13, 2010 at 6:05 am

Mr.Brooks you and your ilk in the “fourth estate ” help to create this “thin resume…” into President44.When we get access to the “particulars of each bill…ad nauseum”,the people exercise first amendment rights to stop the particulars from being formed.Instead of being a shield for Obama write about the dangers of the “particulars”to the American People.
Persecutor says:

February 13, 2010 at 7:34 am

In the words of that immortal philosopher Buggs Bunny,”what a maroon!”
Eli Stoltzfus says:

February 13, 2010 at 7:35 am

I think your quotation marks should be around ‘republican’, not ‘moderate’
Gregory says:

February 13, 2010 at 7:43 am

His only legacy should be the “boot” the voters give him in 2012, donated to his outhouse size library to be built over a the economic pit he dug for America at a later date.
Sister Toldjah says:

February 13, 2010 at 10:26 am

Preach it, Anthony! =d>
Carlos says:

February 13, 2010 at 12:00 pm

And Anthony, remember, all the “programs they are unwilling to pay for” are the programs the statists shoved down our throats to begin with!

Those programs are designed to “help” those who are not productive and aren’t paying significantly into them to begin with. They are the bastard children of bleeding hearts gone wild.

And, for the last four decades at least, they are the programs designed to keep Americans from working the land that they, not the “government”, in fact own. When “We, the people” becomes “we, the government,” the Constitution designed to protect us from them (the government) has failed.

People foolish enough to accept Ponzi schemes such as Social Security and Medicare are foolish enough to think that a shrinking work force can support an expanding entitlement list.
Tom the Redhunter says:

February 13, 2010 at 12:37 pm

David Brooks wrote “Fifth, it’s time to have a constitutional debate. We might require amendments of one sort or another to fix the broken political system.”

This is a howler. The last thing Obama or any progressive want is a debate on the constitution. They regard it as settled that it is a “living’ document. For this reason they see no need for amendments. To them, the Constitution means whatever they say it means.

Remember that FDR proposed a Second Bill of Rights. It failed to gain ground, and the progressives realized that the Constitution was a sacred document and it was better to just leave it be. They realized they could get what they wanted through the courts and legislature, which is what they’ve been doing ever since.
Carlos says:

February 13, 2010 at 5:39 pm

As a “living document” the Constitution the Founding Fathers so carefully crafted has been grown into a noxious weed, just as a rose will if left to its own devices.

The solution? Find federal judges who will start trimming the excessive of federal reach, until what is left is the original document with its original intent.

Typical of any “progressive”, Brooks assumes that because something is wrong with the way things are playing out with the changes, there must be something wrong with the document itself. It never occurs to them or him that the problems are with the changes, not the document itself.
CZ says:

February 14, 2010 at 7:45 am

“Obama is still admired personally, but every major proposal — from the stimulus to health care — is quite unpopular.”

Where have I heard this before? Hmmmm….

“We support the troops but we are against the mission”

Yeah, that’s the ticket.
Neo says:

February 14, 2010 at 10:34 am

Apparently, the Democrats have convinced Boehner that it is “reconciliation” …

A productive bipartisan discussion should begin with a clean sheet of paper. We now know that instead of starting the ‘bipartisan’ health care ’summit’ on Feb. 25 with a clean sheet of paper, the president and his party intend to arrive with a new bill written behind closed doors exclusively by Democrats — a backroom deal that will transform one-sixth of our nation’s economy and affect every family and small business in America. They will then engage a largely handpicked audience in a televised ‘dialogue’ according to a script they have largely pre-determined. They will do this as a precursor to embarking on a legislative course that Democratic congressional aides acknowledge has also been pre-determined — a partisan course that relies on parliamentary tricks to circumvent the will of the American people and engineer a pre-determined outcome. It doesn’t sound much like bipartisanship to me.

For the weak minded, that’s a NO to the health care summit.
Neo says:

February 14, 2010 at 11:32 am

Cheney agrees with Obama on Afghanistan and DADT …
Biden and NSC Jones disagree with Cheney, say he is misinformed.

Hilarity ensues.
Tango says:

February 14, 2010 at 3:15 pm

…I don’t know when I’ve read such mindless twaddle as this offering by Brooks. And this is what passes for journalism in the current era.

A pox on them all!

**==**==**==**==**==**==**==**==**==**==**==**==**==**==**==
Major Kong says:

February 14, 2010 at 6:14 pm

Thank God for the Tea Party! Brooks, et al are becoming increasingly irrelevant. They do serve to stir up those of us who actually think, however. And for that maybe they deserve a bit of gratitude. Nah!
Helen says:

February 15, 2010 at 1:04 pm

Am I allowed to steal “slobbering succotash”?
Sister Toldjah says:

February 15, 2010 at 1:29 pm

LOL, Helen! A tiny tip o’ the hat will do 😀
Helen says:

February 15, 2010 at 4:09 pm

Sure thing, ST. I never steal without linking. 😉

Comments are closed.