Dr Doom of the New York Times Predicts Doom for Democrats?

 Throughout the ages the soothsayers, conjurers, quacks and wizards have warned us of doom. Nostradamus,[1]has predicted several cataclysmic events and even the end of the world. Of course, there are variants of disaster as each of us may experience our own private little dooms day. On a grander scale, however, there are legions that hope for such doom and drool at the prospect of personal gain in political power and wealth. The ignorance of the populace propels this continuum of disasters. How many good citizens were surprised that the Cheka[2] visited them in the night and shot the whole family? That was a form of doom for many who opposed the left.

David Brooks or the BabblingBrooks as I refer to him announces the new title from his new perch:

“So my role today is Dr. Doom — to break through unmerited confidence and raise the anxiety level in both [McCain and Obama, ed.] camps.”[3] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

We know that the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[4]-- always praises and anoints the person or cabal that is farthest to the left of the left so we know how this doom must end. They also have little or no contempt for the Cheka, KGB or Moscow Central Planning.  But, our Babbler strokes some firm histrionics from recent primary history and extracts some terrifying observations, some of which are, unexpectedly, true.

“Since effectively wrapping up the nomination, Barack Obama has lost 7 of the last 13 primaries. Obama’s confidants say that this doesn’t matter. In states like Pennsylvania and Ohio, primary election results are no predictor of general election results.”

“…Obama has only a 0.7 percent lead over McCain in the RealClearPolitics average of polls. His favorability ratings among independents has dropped from 63 percent to 49 percent since late February.”

This is heresy. Does he still have a job after the last primary, which is today?

There is a lot of obvious stuff missing in this interesting piece. We don’t hear very about Jeremiah Wright and other dead buzzards that hang around Obama’s neck, but we get this anti-McCain—anti-Bush fluff:

“Finally, the Obama people are too convinced that they can define McCain as Bush III. The case is just factually inaccurate. McCain will be able to pull out dozens of instances, from torture to global warming to spending, in which he broke with his party, as Rush Limbaugh will tell you.”

Obama’s racism and those who hate America flock to the senator and are repellent to many white voters who would vote for Hillary. This stuff is dismissed by referring to Bush, as the new hope [insert ‘change’] of the future is anchored in the past.  Big government and ever higher taxes are the only two important factors for the left.

"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."[5]-- Barack Obama

This is not a issue?

Here is the point that makes the difference:

“More fundamentally, McCain’s problem is that his party is unfit to govern.”

The word ‘unfit’ here might apply to the criminal blowhard from Massachusetts [pick one] or to the senile Senator Byrd or maybe Rep Jefferson from LA who has been indicted. Gee, no problem with their ‘fitness?’ Hillary Clinton is not mentioned in this blurb so is she ‘unfit?!’

The Babbler gets to the economics of the middle class with this result from years of study:

“I’ve spent the past few years trying to find conservative experts to provide remedies for middle-class economic anxiety. Let me tell you, the state of free-market thinking on this subject is pathetic.”

We have a very low unemployment rate ‘[Germany is 9.1%] and the most prosperous middle class in the free world, but they seem to have some anxiety. We could ask about the effects of tax cuts and then wonder how tax hikes to pay for free health care and other benefits for illegal aliens might affect this ‘anxiety.’ We can also wonder how the high cost of gasoline, an issue now, might figure into this anxiety. The new ‘carbon tax’ legislation submitted by Barbara Boxer would burden our economy with several trillion dollars worth of phony and expensive carbon ‘credits.’ We had 3500 murders in the inner cities in the top biggest cities (in 2007 alone[6]) mostly because of business problems with drug sales.

Can we inquire about the opposite of a free-market economy and ask what that might look like? Oh! Like Europe? Like France or Germany or England, all strangling in socialism, protectionism and swarming with Islamo-Fascists who preach death to the infidel on the street corners of major European cities? Even the NYT suspects there were some problems with the USSR dream. Perhaps. Never the less, the quest for a command economy is central to the economic logic of the New York Times. They can only dream of high taxes and bigger government. [7]

Brooks sums up with:

“This election will be asymmetric. Obama has to come up with a personal narrative voters can relate to. McCain needs to come up with a one-sentence description for why he represents a clean break and a compelling future. …Neither campaign has done that. I don’t know what they’re so happy about.”

We wonder if the McGovern, Dukakis, Mondale, Gore and Kerry campaigns produced “asymmetric” political contests. What personal narratives did McGovern and Kerry offer to us? How about the personal narrative we heard from Obama in Philadelphia?[8] How does this square with his sudden exit from a racist environment[9] that we thrived in for 20 years.? What can we derive from his personal narratives where denigrated white middle class voters and their guns and religion and pickups? Was Gore ‘fit’ to lead? Did his Marxism, or that of Kerry, affect the votes? Do the voters really think that we can provide a free community college education all of our citizens when 53% of blacks cannot finish high school?[10]

The Babbler babbles about emotional factors that are important to voters, but cannot be quantified without exit polls after the general election. The expected tautological droning on about ‘the issues’ is notably missing from this doomsday proclamation. Personalities now are more important to Brooks than tax policy. Overt racism by Obama and his angry black wife are not ‘fitness’ factors or ‘issues’ in this contest? What do we do about terrorists? Offer them voter status and pay reparations?

The final doom envisioned by Brooks is not described. The anxiety is his. Apparently he thinks Obama might lose the election. If he does, can Brooks blame Obama? And, for what? Unfitness?

At least Hillary and Bill are out of the way. (They think). Billary won 8 straight political contests. Were they ‘unfit?’

Brooks is frantic [anxious] and it shows.  Is he our modern Nostradamus?

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com