He sprinkled his debate performance Wednesday night with the sorts of fibs, evasions and hypocrisies that are the stuff of conventional politics. He claimed falsely that his handwriting wasn’t on a questionnaire about gun control. He claimed that he had never attacked Clinton for her exaggerations about the Tuzla airport, though his campaign was all over it. Obama piously condemned the practice of lifting other candidates’ words out of context, but he has been doing exactly the same thing to John McCain, especially over his 100 years in Iraq comment.
« "Bitter" Makes Its First Mail Appearance | Main | McCain Attends National Catholic Prayer Breakfast » David Brooks Falls Out Of Love With Barack Obama18 Apr 2008 07:09 am Comments (38)
Virtually every conservative who's flirted with Obama over the past few months but fallen short of an explicit endorsement will come back into the fold before election day. Brooks' job is to be one of the NYT's two conservatives - he can't very well do that if he's mooning over the Democractic nominee. 
Brooks was too quick to swoon in the first place. What we have here is a standard issue Democratic candidate (not necessarily a bad thing, but not 'new' either). On pledges - surely Obama should be refusing to make blanket pledges on Iraq, turning this into a question of 'judgement' versus Clintonian 'experience'/old politics?
If "Falling to Earth" means "Is decisively beating Hillary Clinton in the race for the nomination" then yes, I suppose Obama is falling to earth. And if "out of touch" means "not white," then yes, I suppose Obama is "out of touch." And if "David Brooks" means "a hysterical six-year old girl, pretending to be a conservative pundit," then yes, I suppose David Brooks wrote that column.
What?!? David Brooks fell out of love with Obama?!? OMFG!?! Dog bites man!?! Marc, exactly how credulous are you? Did you ever think that Brooks' love for Obama was going to last? Did you ever think it was anything other than a pose? If memory serves, you have at least one co-blogger on this site who called this a long time ago.
Oh, c'mon....lthis post makes the implicit assumption that people write what they actually think. David Brooks and other columnists will continue to write whatever they think makes themselves different, relevant, etc. Personal love has nothingn to do with anything these people write. It all has to do with cold, hard calculations of media and corporate self-interest.
Yo, can we get some analysis here? Don't throw this out there like it's significant and avoid commenting on it. As for "who's next" I'd wager it's another prominent conservative who's praised Obama.
Wow, so once Obama becomes the Democratic frontrunner, Brooks switches his support to the former Democratic frontrunner. It really is food for thought.
Be sure to sign the moveon.org petition………..It was also mentioned on ABC’s Good Morning America Maybe if there is enough backlash the news networks will think twice about the distractions issues in the GE
Marc Why should I come to this website, only to see short blurbs from other pundits that I can get elsewhere. You're losing me
There really are some right-wing pundits who embraced Obama only because they wanted Clinton eliminated. Brooks is one of them. It's like in 2000 when I supporter McCain in the GOP primary. I wanted the Bush family eliminated. But I wasn't going to vote McCain in November.
It's the general election now. Every single Republican will "suddenly" fall out of love with Obama...
Wow...conservative writer decides he doesn't like Obama so much...surprise...surprise. And oh yeah...didn't both Brooks and Kristol cheerlead for the Iraq war? Perhaps before they criticize Obama they should apologize to the families of those who have lost soldiers in Iraq, or to those soldiers disabled in Iraq. I haven't exactly seen Brooks stand up too much to Bush's wrong ways these past 7 years...so that tells me about his judgement. This is again another piece of non-news...and it is so obvious that this blog cheerleads for Hillary. Now this is OK, Marc, but at least be like Andrew Sullivan, who is unashamedly pro-Obama, and declare your bias openly.
It seems Brooks got the same memo from the RNC that Ambinder received with orders to explain away McCain's 100 years in Iraq.
This has been coming for some time now. Why anyone would be surprised by it, I have no idea.
Who's next? More like: who's next to delete your blog from their RSS feed? Does David Brooks have any special status in this culture, except for working for some newspaper that means very little for people who aren't coastal elites? Nope.
A quick look at googleimages reveals many candids and formal portraits of David Brooks in which he is not wearing an American Flag pin on his lapel. He obviously hates the flag, America, and all that it stands for. His words are not to be trusted. He is an unpatriotic reprobate. By the way, John McCain has failed to properly display the lilliputian enamelled image of old glory on many occasions, as has George Stephanopoulos, as has Hillary Clinton. These are not mere omissions or oversights. Every image in which these politicians or pundits fail to "shoulder" the colors is clearly a deliberate message about how much they hate our troops. It speaks volumes about their disregard and deep seated disdain for the symbols that ordinary Americans revere and want to make the central issue in the fall campaign. Once the Supreme Court makes it clear that the death penalty can be applied to crimes other than capital murder or high treason we can begin to deal with this thought crime appropriately. Come to think of it, it is clear that failure to wear a flag lapel pin can be considered "high treason," that's why the founders made it a specific requirement for holding the office of President of the United States. Let's drink to the health of our country, because it's becoming clear that that's the only way that we're going to come close to getting comprehensive universal healthcare in this media environment.
Here is David Brooks's schtick: I am the conservative that liberals like! Liberals like me because I take a "serious" look at their candidates. This time I chose to compliment the decent man, not the mean lady! But I didn't really choose the decent man. I never really liked him all along! All along I've been for McCain! So while I've been puffing Obama up and saying he's great, it hasn't really been true! I've been convincing you that I'd take one of your candidates seriously! And if I do that, then you'll see my eventual dissatisfaction with him and take it very, very seriously! And it will make my decision to back McCain, already made long ago, seem so much more serious! But that's what I meant to do all along! Because I'm sooo smart! Don't you get it. I'm sooo smart. Anyone who falls for his thing is a total idiot.
Just because he wrote that book Bobos in Paradise doesn't mean that he'd ever vote like one. He was always going to come home to McCain. To think otherwise is silly.
We should all give a flying shit about what that piece of crap thinks about anything, naturally.
Marc,
Does this mean I can go back to hating/dismissing David Brooks? Because I was getting a little uncomfortable there... It seems to me that there are many Republicans who have "endorsed" Obama in the primary, but stated they wouldn't vote for him in November. Fair enough. Then, there are actual people who identify themselves as Republicans (if not Republican leaning pundits) who have actually publicly supported Obama for the presidency, not just the nomination. That should be seen as a different phenomenon from Brooks getting the vapors, then going back to his real job.
Is this anything? As a rule of thumb, Marc, if it doesn't pass the Letterman Test, it's not worth posting.
Just wait til Obamacans like David Brooks see the video of Obama slyly giving Hillary the finger, there'll be a lot more falling out of love: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/04/obamaflipsoffcl.html Sorry, flag pins aside, this is no way for a potential President to act.
If I were Marc Ambinder, any sympathy I had for Obama would have disappeared long before the 300th comment thread taken over by ill-mannered, self-centered, sophomorically condescending Obamatrons. I also would have instituted comment control - starting with foully insulting posts - a long time ago. I suspect that instead he hardly even bothers to read these threads anymore, and that those of you who feel the need to criticize him are wasting your virtual breaths.
LOL. Thanks for that link, Vnd. I don't think that "The Onion" could have done a better job of satirizing the how absolutely inane and trivial the media has become. That was meant as a joke, right?
Vnd, If you watch closely you'll see the girl on the right saying "Vnd, you're the stupidest man on earth." I don't think she's right, Doug Feith is still alive.
Eventually there had to be a post about "bittergate" costing Obama someone's support. The voters don't seem to care, so David Brooks will have to do.
Brooks was never in love with Obama. Maybe slightly intrigued by some of his appeal but definitely not an Obama enthusiast by any measure I can conceive.
Vnd - won't republicans like him better for giving Clinton the finger?
neilrlca: Not Republicans who are like David Brooks. For all I disagree with him, he's got basic respect, courtesy and manners. Something that seems to be lacking in most Obama supporters (and as my Sicilian grandfather used to say, the fish stinks from the head).
David Brooks is welcome to fall out of love with Obama, but just because McCain keeps saying Obama's taking his 100 years comment out context doesn't mean Obama actually is. He's been asked about it a number of times and he's been completely honest: McCain wants to stay in Iraq as long as he thinks it necessary. I don't think anyone disputes that's what McCain was saying, and it's that which Obama is arguing against, not some strawman about staying there for 100 years.
Check out http://www.savagepolitics.com AWESOME political analysis!!!!!!!!!!!
So good to see Petey back in the comments. Petey, my man, if Edwards had won Iowa, we'd be picking out the drapes for the White House already. I'm very, very disappointed - and very, very nervous.
Commenting has been disabled on the stories that follow this one. Is the Atlantic having technical problems, or are comments being phased out of this blog?
Commenters--in fairness to Marc, let's try a little harder to detect irony, shall we? I really doubt he (or anyone else) is surprised that Brooks' affection for Obama turns out not to have run very deep.
Did you ever really think Brooks would support Obama all the way into November? Reading his books (and it was almost physically painful to do so) really shows.... well that's he's a misguided human being really.
Funny... Marc posts about 12 anti-Obama posts in a row, then wonders at all the invective. That's like poking a sleeping tiger then being indignant when he claws at your face.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Well, if Obama actually secures the nomination, General Electric will be next to fall out of love with Obama.
General Electric is just trying to hand the nomination over to Obama before they turn to McCain for the general election.
I wonder why that would be?
Posted by Petey | April 18, 2008 7:22 AM