To Moderates on Obama: Well, Duh!

David Brooks column in the New York Times Tuesday is at the same time laughable and sad. Brooks, who considers himself a moderate conservative, as I do, was almost elated when Obama won the presidency, because he though Obama would bring a new era of moderate political leadership to the country.

But the Obama budget is more than just the sum of its parts. There is, entailed in it, a promiscuous unwillingness to set priorities and accept trade-offs. There is evidence of a party swept up in its own revolutionary fervor - caught up in the self-flattering belief that history has called upon it to solve all problems at once.

So programs are piled on top of each other and we wind up with a gargantuan $3.6 trillion budget. We end up with deficits that, when considered realistically, are $1 trillion a year and stretch as far as the eye can see. We end up with an agenda that is unexceptional in its parts but that, when taken as a whole, represents a social-engineering experiment that is entirely new.

My only question is, Mr. Brooks, why are you surprised? I predicted as much during the fall campaign, and Obama himself wavered back and forth on the fiscal responsiblity issue. This was a President who never (I repeat NEVER) went against his own party's dogma. So why now is Brooks amazed when Obama is following the party line to a 'T'?

Now, Brooks is surprised when Obama leads like a liberal:

Those of us who consider ourselves moderates - moderate-conservative, in my case - are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was. His words are responsible; his character is inspiring. But his actions betray a transformational liberalism that should put every centrist on notice.

Again, why are you surprised? Brooks and others like him attacked people like me when we stated the truth: that Mr. Obama is a dedicated but honest liberal, who has not been a moderate at any moment during his life. He never acted like a moderate, never legislated like a moderate, and is now not presiding like a moderate. For Brooks to lament this fact is laughable, and sad.

The only positive out of this is that Brooks realizes what must be done: that the liberal extremism that has gripped the Obama presidency must be blocked; interesting that he may alter his verbage, but ultimately he is calling for the 'failure' of Obama's proposals...wonder if he will get attacked like Limbaugh did. No, because we are a poltically correct society, and saying these things nicely instead of brutally factual means something.

The other irony is that Brooks is basically accepting the conservatives argument that Obama, despite his powerful victory in November, does not have a mandate to move the country this far left; he did not campaign on anything of the sort. Liberals are elated, because he is supporting liberal ideals that the didn't profess during the campaign. The irony is moderate Brooks agrees with Patrick Buchanana, who also had an editorial on the subject on Tuesday, and has a very similar view to the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal. Welcome aboard, David.

Brooks then calls for an alternative vision, led by moderates. Well, come join the club. I consider myself a moderate conservative, though I view Brooks as more moderate, less conservative. It will be interesting to see what policies Brooks oppposes, and which he proposes, in the coming months as an alternative to the Obama policies.

I think the first things that conservatives need to do is stop the infighting. We will not agree on everything. But Michael Steele attacking Rush Limbaugh is useless. I don't agree with everything Rush says, but he has a voice, and a following, and should be part of the discourse. We as conservatives can agree on certain principles: that Obma's government is too big, too expensive, and that we need to hold down those costs as much as possible. Can't all of us conservatives, whether moderate or right wingers, agree that the supposed stimulus, with its 'shovel-ready projects', are not likely to create much real stimulus? When even John McCain can agree that too much pork is in these bills, don't you think the right and middle of conservatism can at least join on these central issues? We are a weak party right now, and only a unified front, including with RINO Republicans, can hope to stop the charge of liberal extremism.

But to Mr. Brooks, I congratulate him on finally waking up. It is 6 months too late, but better late than never.