Friday, December 21, 2012

David Brooks, "Strangers in the Night": Doo-Be-Doo-Be-Doo to You, Too

Groucho: "That's in every contract, that's what you call a sanity clause."
Chico: "You can't a fool a me there ain't no sanity clause"

- Groucho/Chico in "A Night at the Opera"

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Strangers in the Night" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/21/opinion/brooks-strangers-in-the-night.html), David Brooks offers sound advice to Republicans:

"Don’t get hung up on some incremental tax increase for the rich. Instead, make sure America doesn’t have another credit downgrade. Make sure the economy doesn’t fall into another debt-exploding recession. Prepare a comprehensive tax and entitlement reform strategy for 2013. Call Obama’s bluff on health care reform. In case Obamacare doesn’t bend the cost curve, get Obama to agree to some automatic triggers — plans that will kick in and bring down health care spending."

Makes sense? You bet. But on the eve of Christmas, sanity is increasingly hard to come by in Washington.

As long as we're on the topic of sanity, it should come as no surprise that The New York Times has yet to weigh in on Obama's looming nomination of former senator Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense, when even The Washington Post opposes Hagel's candidacy (see: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/chuck-hagel-is-not-right-for-defense-secretary/2012/12/18/07e03e20-493c-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_story.html).

What's wrong with Hagel? For starters, in 2006 Hagel was one of 12 Senators who wouldn't ask the EU to declare Hezbollah, Iran's surrogate in Lebanon, a terrorist organization. Hezbollah was responsible for the 1983 Beirut Barracks Bombing, which killed 241 American soldiers.

Brooks wants sanity from Republicans at a time when Obama wants to nominate Hagel as head of the Pentagon?

Dooby-be-doo-be-do to you, too, David.

1 comment:

  1. I was thinking .... Hagel is pro-Iran. Is his nomination part of promises Obama made to Putin?
    I really think about it. Look ... you have a situation when a far right (can I risk Nazi right) politician who is a supporter of Islam terrorists is promoted by a "left" (ha,ha, ha, ha) President.
    I does look like an explanation can be only found in the area of my expertise (anti-semitism)

    ReplyDelete