comment #1

Rob says ...

Brooks is right, and this doesn't make me want to vote for Obama any less.

But it's really irritating that after a year of listening to people praise Obama's "new style" of high road politics over "calculating, ambitious" Clinton, they're realizing that he's just as calculating (and I would argue, more so, since Hillary was always gracious enough to wear her ambition on her sleeve, as opposed to Obama's Pollyanna act).

Still, I'm relieved that Obama's politician seams are starting to show. It actually makes me more confident about his ability to win in November.

comment #2

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Well, we'll see how well purity holds up as an electoral position. Clinton may have been smarter to run as a man whose flaws were all public.

This is worth reading; some may recall that I mentioned this local race a year ago here:

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/06/obamas_no_i_cant_moment.html

comment #3

thevisceral says ...

But I thought he was perfect...

comment #4

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Oh, and if you think calling him "Fast Eddie" is merely a reference to The Hustler, poker-faced Brooks has made a much nastier allusion in Chicago politics-- one that's especially barbed for a black politician:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Vrdolyak

comment #5

supertaster says ...

People say McCain is terrible without a teleprompter, but listening to Barack speak extemporaneously is like watching paint dry while pulling teeth.

Even more concerning are his plans to turn Social Security into a welfare system: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121391705573990175.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

You may want to dismiss that as Murdock-owned shite, but then Barry is also leaving us with very few options when it comes to energy ... doesn't want us to drill *anywhere*, doesn't want to expand nuclear power ... despite both of these things being able to be done cleanly and safely, he's breaking his own by pandering, not to lobbyists, but the most radical environmentalists in this country. He's effectively working against cleaner air (in the case of nuclear power plants) and a safer country (in the case of reducing our reliance on foreign oil), seemingly without logic.

He says drilling will decelerate the movement off of oil, but that won't happen for another twenty years ANYWAY, so what are we supposed to do until then??

This is not a non-partisan approach to government, this is turning into a disturbingly extreme-left agenda-driven campaign.

I could look past a few ideological differences for a man I believe is smart and has a good heart (because I recognize I'm not always right), but suddenly there is a lot doubt creeping in, as I'm beginning to disagree with almost everything he says. I knew this might happen once he started tackling issues and not just "hope," but damn, I didn't think it would happen this fast.

comment #6

DarthCorleone says ...

Can someone explain to me exactly how this public financing works and what all the ruckus is about?

We're talking about the $3 donation I check on my income tax form, right? (Is that all we're talking about? How many people actually check that box?) Does that money only come into play now, or has it been used throughout the Presidential campaign process? I ask because i don't much see the point of applying my $3 to the frontrunner nominees of the two-party system once they are selected. I'd rather the public financing have gone toward candidates earlier in the process who aren't given as much of a voice. Or did it already go to them, and we're just talking about the money that's remaining with the idea that the two candidates would have a precisely even playing field?

If the public financing is not used, where does that money go? And if Obama and McCain were suddenly to revert to using only public financing, what would they presumably do with the private financing they have received that has not yet been used?

I don't really get why the two of them made this tacit agreement in the first place. Even not using the government funds, isn't Obama's campaign financing still essentially "public?" As long as the contributions are transparent and don't include egregious corporate lobbying, I don't see what the big deal is.

comment #7

115thDreamer says ...

So now the Republicans are going to bash him for NOT being a pussy? Brilliant. I'd accuse them of flip-flopping, but I guess they're just following the lead of their presumptive nominee....or is he following their lead?

I've also noted a harder edge to Obama lately, but I think I can live with it. Look - any politician who makes it to the national stage does so in part because they have the "sharp elbows" that Brooks speaks of - otherwise the machine would eat them alive. I can't imagine I'll always agree with Obama, but I agree w/ Supertaster that he seems like a smart guy with a good heart, and actually wants to help people. That's about the best we can hope for, I think, and it's the reason I put up with Bill Clinton back in the day - whatever his um, inclinations, he always seemed to be trying to actually help people that needed help. If we hold out for perfection in our politicians, we're going to be waiting a long while. As the saying goes, "Wish in one hand...."

comment #8

George Prager says ...

David Brooks? Boring.

Hey, do you think Norm Coleman and his wife were really in the same room when this was filmed? It reminds me of some of the Sopranos scenes using old footage of the late Nancy Marchand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnGietqs9cA

comment #9

nemo says ...

I guess David Brooks must have had Fast Eddie Vrdolyak in mind when he made the Fast Eddie Obama reference. And I guess Brooks must have had Vrdolyak's reputation for both sleaze and hardball politics in mind when he made the reference.

But I wonder whether Brooks knows that Fast Eddie Vrdolyak was and still is closely identified with the goal of keeping the blacks down and in their place during the 1980s Council wars between Harold Washington (Chicago's first and only black mayor) and white city councilmen like Vrdolyak.

Fast Eddie since became a Republican, a party more welcoming to politicians who want to keep the blacks down. And he's shifted his political base to Cicero, a Chicago suburb that Martin Luther King considered more racist than Mississippi in 1968. Maybe David Brooks doesn't know any of that, or doesn't care, or doesn't expect his audience to know.

comment #10

Arizona Joe says ...

Obama is a politician. And given some of his choices, not always a brilliant one.

However, I do believe he wants to be a genuine agent of change. And I think he is the best chance to put aside the main chance that we have seen in a long time.

David Brooks is a partisan tout. And his column was the portent of a sore loser, not just a lament for McCain, but for modern conservatism as we have seen it.

The "Fast Eddie" metaphor was a stretch, and I think that column was inaccurate and unfair.

comment #11

Midwest Doug says ...

There's a dust-up in the Michigan papers about Obama's campaign refusing to allow two Muslim women, in head scarves, to sit behind Obama (and be visible on TV) during his recent rally.

In both that case and the campaign finance case, I understand completely why he did it. But they are the not pristinely ethical choices -- they are pragmatic ones. And I agree with them. But remember, just as we pilloried Billary for their win-at-all-costs attitude, means-justify-the-ends, we should beware.

And we should also be ready for a solid month or so of mainly negative coverage of Obama from the 'mainstream media', both in backlash to their perceived kids glove treatment of his primary campaign and because the media always cycles on it. After Obama goes through the mill through early July, then it'll be McCain's turn, then it's convention time.

comment #12

dinther says ...

"I could look past a few ideological differences for a man I believe is smart and has a good heart (because I recognize I'm not always right), but suddenly there is a lot doubt creeping in, as I'm beginning to disagree with almost everything he says."

I've not met Obama, but friends who went to law school with him say he is the real deal. One professor described him as the smartest student he'd ever had. And he's a decent egg, by all accounts.

But one thing I don't understand is people now complaining that he's not an interesting speaker when engaged in policy talk. I would think that we had seen enough bumper-sticker sloganeering - e.g., the past 7 years. But look past Obama's oft-quoted "hope" speeches to the masses, and when pressed, Obama is a details guy; he knows his stuff, unlike McCain. (From what I hear, McCain has a deep understanding of parliementary procedure and is deft at oiling Congress for bill passage - no pun intended - but is painfully shallow when it comes to his understanding of domestic policy.)

We should be heralding any candidate who both has a substantive understanding of public policy issues and at the same time, can effectivly convey a broader social agenda to the masses.

comment #13

Krazy Eyes says ...

As someone who really didn't mind HC tactics in the primary I think the decision by Obama makes him look stronger in my mind. He's playing hardball. He knows the Republicans are going to be outraged by this action and he doesn't care. Suddenly he doesn't look like the naive pussy that the Republicans have been portraying him as.

comment #14

Arizona Joe says ...

With all this talk of race, the essence of Obama gets lost at times, I think.

He's a multicultural, brilliant guy who is the product of the Harvard Law School and Law Review. And he's Barry, the guy on the basketball team.

He's the right guy at this time in history. Given the waste in Iraq, terrorism, the change in world economics and environment coming from China and India, global warming, high food and energy costs, we need an agent of change.

The dour pedantry of Jimmy Carter will not induce Americans to sacrifice. The deregulated, laissez faire style of Ronald Reagan cannot implement the change that must take place. We need Barry.

comment #15

bb says ...

I've already seen this movie. The last line is "What do we do now?"

comment #16

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Nemo, I'm 99% sure Brooks was taking a very pointed jab at Obama for having become a machine type, servile to the Daleys (as his endorsement of John Stroger over Forrest Claypool demonstrated) and betraying Harold Washington's reform legacy in the process. He's implying that a black politician who falls in line with the Irish machine is no better than a white racist politician of two decades ago.

In other words, Republicans aren't the party who keep the blacks down in Chicago, Nemo, because there aren't any Republicans in Chicago. There's only inside the Machine, and outside the Machine. Get enough blacks inside the Machine, and they won't be numerous enough outside it to cause you any trouble. That's how it's always been, since the days of the "silent six" black aldermen in Daley the first's pocket.

comment #17

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Hey look, some guy just said the same racist thing as that button!

http://www.examiner.com/blogs-73-Yeas_and_Nays~y2008m6d20-Obama-would-make-DC-a-chocolate-city-Lee-says

comment #18

supertaster says ...

He's the right guy at this time in history. Given the waste in Iraq, terrorism, the change in world economics and environment coming from China and India, global warming, high food and energy costs, we need an agent of change.

Ok Joe, I agree, we need change ... but based on the two examples I gave, Obama leaves us more prone to terrorism (reliance on mid-east) and higher energy costs (no drilling) and is offering up an extremely stifling economic plan centered around social security, intent on returning us (or unaware that his proposals would return us) to a period of draconian tax rates that smother economic growth.

Additionally, he is against a source of energy (nuclear) that has been proven throughout Europe to be safe and clean, and thus is not thinkiing progressively about the environment.

So four of the things you mentioned, in fact almost everything you mentioned, Obama will change all right, but instead of moving us forward he's holding us still or, worse, pushing us back.

The image of the man is so much more inspiring than his proposed policies...as someone who was resolved to vote for Obama, this last week has been a disheartening one, to say the least.

comment #19

nemo says ...

All true enough, including the part about Obama's servility to the modern Daley machine, and the part about the Republicans don't keep blacks down in Chicago because there are no Republicans in Chicago. And the part about in Chicago there's only two parties, inside the Machine and outside the Machine.

The part I object to is that Fast David Brooks leaves out the inconvenient fact that the white racist sleazeball politician of two decades ago with whom Fast David is subtly comparing Obama -- that white racist politician is now a Republican in the historically most racist of Chicago suburbs.

Fast Eddie Vrdolyak didn't oppose the Chicago machine. He supported the old machine, but he just didn't want blacks to have any power in Chicago. Like his racist brethren in the old Confederacy, Fast Eddie now finds the GOP a more congenial home.

comment #20

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Okay, so we've established that Cicero is crooked and scummy. That will come as a great shock to its residents, I'm sure.

Meanwhile back in Chicago politics, which are about to dominate the nation...

comment #21

admiralmpj says ...

David Brooks is a liar, but I have come to expect nothing less from him.

Obama made no promise to use Public Financing. He only said in a questionaire that he'd talk to his opponent and see if they could come to an accord. There is a detailed report of where this lie first took life in a Countdown report linked below.

When it became clear that McCain wasn't going to rein in 527 Groups (as Obama has), when it became clear that McCain wasn't going to stop breaking the law that bears his name, Obama's people said screw it and moved on.

And make no mistake, John McCain...by opting into Public financing (using said dollar amount to secure a loan for his campaign), then opting out for the balance of the Democratic Primaries, then opting back in to take a jab at Obama, has broken the law. There is a DNC Lawsuit pending, and we'll have to wait a see what happens.

P.S. David Brooks...there are no Salad Bars in Applebee's.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/vp/25273881#25273881

comment #22

dinther says ...

BB: "I've already seen this movie. The last line is "What do we do now?"

I'm sorry BB, but why are you consistently such a moron? Your posts make you look like an idiot. Seriously.

Obama is easily - easily - the most intelligent presidential candidate in our history. He has organized the most successful, grass-roots progressive, campaign in modern American politics. He has taught Constitutional law. He got admitted to, and did very, very well at, a top law school. I mean, think about it - if you applied to Harvard Law, would they even bother to open your application? And yet you don't hesitate to make an utterly assanine, unfounded statement that he wouldn't know what to do once he takes office?

So, yeah, I bet you had a big guffaw at your little one liner. Woo hoo! That was original! But seriously, dude, just about every time you post, you make yourself look like a fricking idiot.

comment #23

nemo says ...

"Okay, so we've established that Cicero is crooked and scummy. That will come as a great shock to its residents, I'm sure."

Hey, David Brooks was the one who obliquely brought up ancient history about Fast Eddie Vrdolyak, not me.

"Meanwhile back in Chicago politics, which are about to dominate the nation..."

I expect that if he becomes President, Obama will give Chicago politics about as much thought as JFK gave the same subject back in the day, which is barely enough thought to keep both versions of Richard Daley reasonably contented. But you probably mean that the GOP will bring up all the ugly stuff going on in Chicago politics during the run-up to November.

It would have been better if Obama had taken a less cozy, harder line with the Chicago machine a few years ago. But given all the much bigger disasters and scandals the GOP is dragging in its wake the past few years, I doubt the general electorate will care.

comment #24

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Obama makes Thomas Jefferson look like the pussy he is! Obama shits better physics equations than Einstein ever dreamed up! Obama drew so perfect a "Binky" they renamed the Famous Artists School for him!

And the one thing Dinther says that I actually think is fairly true... means that David Axelrod should be our next president.

Nemo, I kind of don't care what whoever brings up, what I wish is that Obama had shown some spine in the Stroger-Claypool race, when he was already bigger than Daley and there wouldn't have been much Daley could have done to him. I'd like to believe he's all those things, but for me, when the biggest test in his life so far came, picking reform over the bosses and crossing the color line, he folded. And starting next week, Cook County residents, including the poorest, will pay an extra 1% sales tax, in addition to our higher real estate taxes and everything else, because Obama looked change right in the eye and said "Not me!"

comment #25

nemo says ...

By the way, I misspoke when I said that Harold Washington was Chicago's only black mayor. After Washington's death in office, Vrdolyak and his cabal installed Eugene Sawyer, also black, as Acting Mayor. Vrdolyak figured he couldn't get away with installing a white Acting Mayor, and that Sawyer would be easier to manipulate than the alternatives, who were loyal to Washington.

Sawyer was never elected mayor, except by the old white machine politicians on the City Council in 1987. That broke the progressive reform coalition in Chicago for good. In 1989 Sawyer lost in a real election to the present Richard Daley, who has served as hizzoner da mare ever since. In two more years Richie will beat his dad's record as longest-serving Mayor of Chicago.

By the time Obama came along, there wasn't any active reform movement left in Chicago for him to align himself with.

comment #26

nemo says ...

The Stroger-Claypool race happened at a time when I was too busy to follow the intricacies of Chicago politics (I haven't lived there since the 70s, there were some serious illnesses and deaths in my family just before then), so I'll have to defer to your superior knowledge.

From the little I know of that crooked tale, Obama did not cover himself with glory. Especially when he endorsed a corrupt machine hack (I gather in part because the hack was black, and had some support among blacks), praising him as a "progressive". Come on!

Neither Obama nor the Clintons covered themselves with glory during the Lieberman / Lamont race, either. We can thank the spinelessness of Obama, both Clintons, and a number of other Senate Democrats for the fact that we have that Bush-kissing backstabber Lieberman in office until 2012.

comment #27

mrbill says ...

The offshore drilling panic parade is approaching full lockstep.
Don't be fooled again.
"By the government's own estimates, granting access to the 85 percent of the continental shelf in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf that is now off limits will not bring much production online until 2030."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080620/cm_csm/eoffshore

Why not nuclear?
"Even if you set aside the problem of long-term waste storage and the danger of operator accident and the vulnerability to terrorist attack, you still have two others that are more difficult," he said.
The first problem was one of economics.
"Nuclear power plants are the costliest to build and they take the longest time and at present they come in only one size — extra large."
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/the-truth-nuclear-is-not-the-answer/2006/11/16/1163266712885.html

Or we could show some real leadership and independence.It is what we do well - or used to.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jan/11/gorenewablenotnuclear

What technology passes the cost/benefit test and would thrive if backed by the will and determination of the american people?
Time to quit bitching and really do something.

comment #28

supertaster says ...

dinther ... the valedictorian of my school used to cheat off me ... and got into harvard law school. That's not necessarily the best qualification to become pres. Just sayin....

comment #29

Chicago48 says ...

None of us know nothing. What scares me about Mr. Obama is his strict rigid evangelism....and the last time a Pres was in office with that kind of evangelism is the one in there now.

Honestly, we don't know what will happen when he's in office....because none of us know what's behind the iron curtain.

comment #30

SaveFarris says ...

admiralmpj, Countdown isn't exactly the most reliable source. Heck, Olbermann has yet to report that James Johnson is off the VP search squad.

In the report Countdown links to, Obama gives an unequivocated 'YES' in that questionaire. Look it up for yourself.

comment #31

dd says ...

None of us know nothing. What scares me about Mr. Obama is his strict rigid evangelism....and the last time a Pres was in office with that kind of evangelism is the one in there now.

Designer Handbags