I'm not so sure. Brooks is still defending his "moderate" understanding but there is an admission in his writing that at least gives some sense of hope for those of us who were not fooled by the politics of the Obamassiah.
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.”Well at least it only took a couple of months for some of the duped to begin to see the truth behind this administration.
The only change that Obama has brought to Washington is a change in the names of those benifiting from the pork and spend governing we've had to tolerate for the better part of a decade now. Sadly, even a brief review of Sullivan's blog serves as a who's-who of so-called moderates who are still drinking the Kool-Aid and shows that Brooks is very, very alone in his observations.
4 comments:
What amused me MOST is that Obama is doing EXACTLY what he promised he would do. He is actually coming thru on the campaign promises he made - at least all of the CONCRETE promises. "Bringing a new tone to Washington" was always a phrase without real content, so I do not count that. It is funny that we finally have a politician who was fairly honest and is fulfilling the promises he made, and people are shocked by it.
Of course, I disagree with 75% or more of what the president is doing. So don't take this as praise of Obama's policies. But you can't say this was a case of false advertising, as with Clinton's economic conservatism or Bush's big-government spending.
Obama HAS brought huge change. He is moving us quickly toward socialism in the style of many European governments. Government owns or controls banks, controls health care, etc.
The earlier stimulus bill will restrict access to medical care for any patient whose profile does not meet the cost/benefit target. Under this, Ted Kennedy (the law reads "any American") would not have access to expensive treatments for his brain cancer because his life expectancy is so short that nearly any treatment could be denied. And doctors will not have the option to supply services not OK'd by the plan.
AS of now, people come from countries with socialized medicine to have tests and procedures done in the USA that they could not get or would have to wait for in their own country. It is sad that we might be going to other countries for those things before too long.
Not to mention that those countries are moving more towards our free market system!
I agree with Nomad, the guy was saying what he would do all campaign, but people either didn't believe him, or more likely never really paid attention anything other than "hope and change". They put their own hopes and dreams into that phrase, and never paid attention to HOW he said he would bring change!
It's interesting to remember that not only have we been run by the Republicans for 20 of the last 28 years we also (as a nation) elected this guy and he is doing what he said he would. Maybe the old way didn't work to the satisfaction of the majority of voters and so we are trying something different!
Thanks for listening
Post a Comment