New York Times Columnist David Brooks in a debate at an American Enterprise Forum made some telling remarks. In effect he castigated the Republican Party for its rigidity. If one read between his lines there was definitely a tacit assertion of Republicans inability to govern.
David Brooks was one of the few Republican columnist that actually talked to President Obama and many Liberals in a rather objective fashion and was willing to express their point of view as a matter of fact as opposed to a matter of deride. While I will never agree with even his more moderate brand of Conservatism, his statement acknowledged what most intelligent Republicans know, that is that President Obama and his administration are not socialist at all.
David Brooks statement that President Obama and his administration is Liberal shows how far right the politicians have moved. I would love if President Obama and his administration governed like Liberals. David Brooks Liberals is nothing but yesteryear’s moderate Conservatives. While President Obama I believe is intellectually liberal, I believe for pragmatic reasons he is functionally moderate, and very moderate at that.
David Brooks went even further by stating that the administration was comprised of very intelligent people who had faith in a more planned society than he likes. He as well stated that they favored more redistribution than he did.
Ironically from a mathematical point of view, the Liberals point of view in economic management has proven to be correct however the Right has tried to distort. The numbers are absolute that supply side economic methods have failed to grow an economy. This can be seen empirically based on economic activity versus the type of policies in effect and could be modeled mathematically. My gut tells me that reputable professors that would get accolades for such modeling would not do so for fear of consequences from the plutocracy.
The President has accomplished in his twenty three months in office more than most Presidents have accomplished in an eight year term. Whether we like it or not it was due to his discipline in obtaining results at all costs as opposed to taking a stance for Liberal ideological rigidity. In effect
David Brooks Reveals His Problem With Republicans
The York Times columnist David Brooks debated Republican Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) at an American Enterprise Institute forum Thursday and, amid a large degree of back-patting, the writer came to the conclusion that the GOP, in its current legislative form, is exhibiting a sort of obstinate "rigidity" that is damaging to the political process.
Here's what Brooks had to say about the current debate over deficit control by cutting taxes and spending (transcript via ThinkProgress):
BROOKS: And my problem with the Republican Party right now, including Paul, is that if you offered them 80-20, they say no. If you offered them 90-10, they'd say no. If you offered them 99-1 they'd say no. And that's because we've substituted governance for brokerism, for rigidity that Ronald Regan didn't have.
And to me, this rigidity comes from this polarizing world view that they're a bunch of socialists over there. You know, again, I've spent a lot of time with the president. I've spent a lot of time with the people around him. They're liberals! ... But they're not idiots. And they're not Europeans, and they don't want to be a European welfare state. ... It's American liberalism, and it's not inflexible.
Brooks also explained his vision of the Democrats' ideology. "They have much greater faith in planning than I do, and the health care plan that came out of that, it reflected their faith in planning that bunch of smart guys sitting around in Washington can plan the health care system in this country," Brooks said. "They want to have -- if you read what they've written for the past 20 years -- a more actively planned society which does a little more redistribution."