Monday, February 11, 2013

David Brooks, "Carpe Diem Nation": Seize the Day or Look the Other Way?

Before reading David Brook's New York Times op-ed entitled "Carpe Diem Nation" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/opinion/brooks-carpe-diem-nation.html?_r=0), have a gander at Richard Cohen's latest Washington Post opinion piece, "The Obama Doctrine — look the other way" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/richard-cohen-on-syria-obama-looks-the-other-way/2013/02/11/d979eaf0-7478-11e2-aa12-e6cf1d31106b_story.html?hpid=z3). Chastising Obama for his refusal to lift a finger to ameliorate the devastating humanitarian crisis resulting from Syria's civil war, Cohen concludes:

"Recently, Obama has been likened to President Dwight Eisenhower. There are, of course, some similarities — there always are — but in one significant way, cited in the book by David A. Nichols ('Eisenhower 1956'), they’re different. In the Suez crisis of 1956, Ike strongly condemned the invasion of Egypt by Britain, France and Israel — three allies — even though some thought it was politically unwise to do so. 'I don’t give a damn how the election goes,' he told British Prime Minister Anthony Eden on Election Day itself. His paramount concerns, he said, were the revolution in Hungary and the Suez invasion.

At the moment, it’s impossible to imagine Obama making a comparable statement. (He couldn’t even fully support same-sex marriage until Joe Biden forced the issue, and he was likewise mute about gun control until after the election and the massacre at Newtown, Conn.) His foreign policy has similarly lacked any sense of moral urgency. As a result, the situation in Syria has worsened. It is now becoming a regional catastrophe that will soon enough pull in the United States anyway. Obama purportedly feared making the war worse. By inaction, he has."

Obama similar to Eisenhower? Yup, Obama also likes golf.

Cohen suggests that Obama refused to act in Syria in order to to play it safe and win re-election. Cohen, however, is wrong. America's Procrastinator-in-Chief simply has a hard time deciding. Consider how long it took Obama to make the tragic decision of escalating American ground involvement in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, David Brooks in his Times op-ed eyes the forthcoming State of the Union address and America's crumbling economy. Observing that Americans were once accustomed to "sacrificing the present for the sake of the future," the US is now spending on health care benefits for retirees at the expense of future growth. American C.E.O.’s, who "serve short stints," focus on short-term financial results and don't "build for the long term." American banks have changed course over the past decades and are currently lending disproportionately for "consumption" instead of "investment."

Brooks's conclusion:

"But it would be great if Obama gave an imaginative speech that reframed things as present versus future.

If the president were to propose an agenda for the future, he’d double spending on the National Institutes of Health. He’d approve the Keystone XL pipeline. He’d cut corporate tax rates while adding a progressive consumption tax. He’d take money from Social Security and build Harlem Children’s Zone-type projects across the nation. He’d means test Medicare and use the money to revive state universities and pay down debt.

Would Americans buy that agenda? Maybe. Americans are neglecting the future, but I bet they’re still in love with it."

Wouldn't it, couldn't it . . .

Obama is steering the US in the direction of an iceberg. Don't expect anything else. No experience, no leadership traits. It's simply who he is.


No comments:

Post a Comment