David Brooks writes that Barack Obama, contrary to popular opinion, is a politician and a pretty deft one at that. This provokes some thought. What do we know about Barack Obama?
Obama argued that he'd meet unconditionally with our enemies, but when he came under attack for that position he said he'd have "preparation," but not "preconditions," as if there is a difference.
He argued that Iran was no significant threat to the U.S., but then when criticized he backtracked
saying that he has always thought that Iran posed a "grave" threat to the U.S.
He railed against NAFTA while having his surrogates assure the Canadians that he didn't mean it.
He recently called for an "undivided" Jerusalem, but when he found out that those are fighting words in the Middle East he had to back off.
He swore his fidelity to public financing of presidential campaigns until that became inconvenient so now he has forsaken such financing.
He says he won't be swayed by the special interests and greedy corporations, but, according to Brooks, he has a "phalanx" of corporate leaders bundling money for him.
He tells us that he won't make promises he can't keep, yet he also promises $900 billion in new spending with only $40 billion in new revenue, all the while insisting that he'll balance the budget.
He was opposed to the war in Iraq in 2002, but in 2004 he said his position was pretty much the same as George Bush's, and now of course he claims to be the pure anti-war candidate.
He tells audiences that he is for immediate withdrawal from Iraq, but is apparently telling members of the Iraqi government that he won't act too quickly.
He claims to have a new politics, but he is a conventional liberal, ranked the most liberal member of the US Senate by National Journal.
Relatedly, he claims to offer a new politics, but he is a product of the corrupt Daley machine in Chicago, hiring Daley's right-hand man, David Axelrod, as his spokesperson. He got a sweetheart deal on a $4 million mansion from corrupt Chicago business man Tony Rezko. But Obama says he is shocked to find out Rezko is a criminal.
He makes claims to "post-partisanship," yet he has voted with his party 97% of the time in the US Senate. You almost can't get any more partisan. One reason he talks so much about the ethics bill he supported is that it represents the only evidence of bipartisanship he has and is the only piece of significant legislation he has any association with.
He claims to offer bold leadership, but as Brooks documents, throughout his career he has avoided making tough votes, choosing instead to vote "present."
He claims that he sat in the seats at Trinity Christian "every Sunday" yet was unaware that his pastor was an anti-American racial separatist. He said he could no more disown his pastor than he could his own family, but he then disowned his pastor only weeks later.
Obama is just like other politicians, only a lot more charming and not quite as competent at governing.
Recent Comments