Obama Comedown Syndrome
David Brooks makes some good points about "OCS", the hypocrisy of Barack Obama, and the blindness of his followers in his recent column, entitled "When the magic fades":
... and then he points out the rampant hypocrisy and the sad truth behind "Change":
At first it seemed like a few random cases of lassitude among Mary Chapin Carpenter devotees in Berkeley, Cambridge and Chapel Hill. But then psychotherapists began to realize patients across the country were complaining of the same distress. They were experiencing the first hints of what’s bound to be a national phenomenon: Obama Comedown Syndrome.
The afflicted had already been through the phases of Obama-mania — fainting at rallies, weeping over their touch screens while watching Obama videos, spending hours making folk crafts featuring Michelle Obama’s face. These patients had experienced intense surges of hope-amine, the brain chemical that fuels euphoric sensations of historic change and personal salvation.
... and then he points out the rampant hypocrisy and the sad truth behind "Change":
As the syndrome progresses, they begin to ask questions about The Presence himself:
Barack Obama vowed to abide by the public finance campaign-spending rules in the general election if his opponent did. But now he’s waffling on his promise. Why does he need to check with his campaign staff members when deciding whether to keep his word?
Obama says he is practicing a new kind of politics, but why has his PAC sloshed $698,000 to the campaigns of the superdelegates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics? Is giving Robert Byrd’s campaign $10,000 the kind of change we can believe in?
If he values independent thinking, why is his the most predictable liberal vote in the Senate? A People for the American Way computer program would cast the same votes for cheaper.
How is a 47-year-old novice going to unify highly polarized 70-something committee chairs? What will happen if the nation’s 261,000 lobbyists don’t see the light, even after the laying on of hands? Does The Changemaker have the guts to take on the special interests in his own party — the trial lawyers, the teachers’ unions, the AARP?
The Gang of 14 created bipartisan unity on judges, but Obama sat it out ...
Kennedy and McCain created a bipartisan deal on immigration. Obama opted out of the parts that displeased the unions ...
Sixty-eight senators supported a bipartisan deal on FISA. Obama voted no ...
... And if he were president now, how would the High Deacon of Unity heal the breach that split the House last week?
Good to see that editorial gettnig a lot of play in the blogosphere.
www.lukevargas.com
Don't fire your political musket until you can look 'em in the eye.
Nixon, at least dangled a "secret plan", Obama offers an extension of a Bobby Kennedy, "they say you never had it so good, I say you ought to have it better," with few honed details of how...
if she wins ohio, texas, and then pennsylvania, the outcome is by no means assured. but it should drag the race out to its bitter end, where lawyers go to work, and suspicion and allegations to tremendous harm to the democrats.
for which republicans are truly grateful.
Brooks is a man of nuanced opinions. Don't mischaracterize his writing to ram it into a shrill blog post.
Buckley, Brooks mentor, never backed off his stances, but he was honest with himself and his readers. A good blogger must do the same.
i put stuff up to explain my points of view, to enlighten and stir discussion. but this blog was not meant to be the end-all and be-all of discussion.
anyone without the sense to shop around for alternative points of view before forming their own opinions has to be a total rockhead.