David Brooks, a so-called "moderate," has five suggestions for Obama. We only have one.

David Brooks's Op-Ed column in The New York Times started in September 2003. He has been a senior editor at The Weekly Standard, a contributing editor at Newsweek and the Atlantic Monthly, and he is currently a commentator on "The Newshour with Jim Lehrer." Brooks is considered to be a moderate by many in political circles. An appropriate question would be, "A moderate what?" This is a question we would ask of any so-called "moderate." The term suggests a non-position, politically, and, for this editor, that is not only unacceptable, it is unbelievable. No one is without "position."

From a NY Times Op-ed
David Brooks on Point
J David Smithson with Counter Point

First, the president is going to have to win back independents. . . . Obama will win 99.9 percent of the liberal vote in 2012, and in a presidential year, liberal turnout will surely be high. . . .

Note: depress ctrl and tap on the "+" key to enlarge printed text.

Understand that In dependents despise uncompromising rhetoric and tough guy language and conduct. Phrases such as , "I am not going to tolerate such and such" may have fired up his Leftist base but it is a turn-off to Independents. ". . . so I know whose ass to kick . . " is another high profile bit of conversation, uttered on national television. If he continues with such rhetoric, he will not reel the Independent vote back in. They already have their opinion of Obama. Each and every threatening phrase will drive them further away. Also, Independents are not ideologues. Independents want things done and done fairly. Perception, their perception, is as important as what is actually accomplished. The problem with Obama is that he sees Independents as weak and ideologically problematic.

Second, Obama needs to redefine his identity. . . . . . Obama came to be defined by his emergency responses to the fiscal crisis — by the things he had to do, not by the things he wanted to do. Then he got defined as an orthodox, big government liberal who lacks deep roots in American culture.

Obama is a student of Saul Alinsky. We have pictures of him teaching "Rule of Radicals" in college. He cherishes "crisis" because such is a critical to his methology. Brooks is wrong in that Obama's "responses" was not limited to fiscal crisis. He used the Gulf oil crisis to shut done production the Gulf. He continues his victory over "big oil" with a full throated regulatory process that has effectively shut down production in the Gulf region. His assault on the banking industry was viewed in terms of a crisis. The FinRig legislation was his response to that. TARP was sold to use in terms of crisis. Turns out that trillions were funneled through the loop holes created by a Pelosi lead Congress, the original allocation was never actually spent. Stimulus was Obama's answer to the continuing jobs crisis but only 3% of the allocation. Brooks misses the point. Obama uses crisis to foster agenda. Our problem is that no one really knows his agenda.

Over the next two years, Obama will have to show that he is a traditionalist on social matters and a center-left pragmatist on political ones. . . .

Laughable. No ones, absolutely no one sees Obama as either traditional or a traditionalist. If this is the heart of solution, it is end of Obama's hope to regroup.

Third, Obama will need to respond to the nation’s fear of decline. . . . Obama will have to propose policies that re-establish the link between effort and reward.

Obama has spent much of his adult life (the part that we know about) challenging the American edthic and the Doctrine of American Exceptionalism. It is systemic to his very person. He has become an angry black man on the plane of Jeremiah Wright. He has had 22 years of anti-tradition ground into his soul.

Fourth, Obama has to build an institutional structure to support a more moderate approach. . . .

He has his structure. It is the community organization that is his base. He knows that this is new to the political scene and that is why he will not give up on it's use. He just needs more time. That is what he believes. There is no "institutional structure" other than his "organization"and the current liberal conclave with its support systems. Obama is not in control of the latter. He created the former.

Liberals already have institutions. To be a center-left leader, Obama will have to mobilize independent institutions as well. These don’t exist in Washington, but they do around the nation. Civic organizations, local business groups and municipal leagues run from Orlando to Kansas City to Seattle. These groups are filled with local leaders who lobby for balanced budgets, infrastructure plans and other worthy causes. . . . YOU WILL NEED TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>>

That last phrase, "These groups are filled with local leaders who lobby for balanced budgets, infrastructure plans and other worthy causes," these have nothing to do with Obama's ideology. Keynesian macroeconomics has little to do with balanced budgets. Infrastructure repair is for union participation only.

There will be no change in Obama of the nature described by Mr. Brooks. why? Because Obama cannot move beyond himself. He is what he is. He sold his party into a 40 year decline. He will do the same for himself. Such is the nature of an ideologue.

Brooks five points make for great theory. Our formula for success is quite different. We suggest that Obama quite now, before the investigations begin. Yes, Biden would be president but that should be fine. Right? I mean, the Dems chose Biben as VP.

Geeeeeeesh

m