When Reality Bites

The New York Times ^ | 2/12/08 | David Brooks

[MartinaMisc]

There’s a big difference between the Republican and Democratic campaigns: The Republicans have split on policy grounds; the Democrats haven’t. There’s been a Republican divide between center and right, yet no Democratic divide between center and left.

But when you think about it, the Democratic policy unity is a mirage. If the Democrats actually win the White House, the tensions would resurface with a vengeance.

The first big rift would involve Iraq. Both Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have seductively hinted that they would withdraw almost all U.S. troops within 12 to 16 months. But if either of them actually did that, he or she would instantly make Iraq the consuming partisan fight of their presidency.

There would be private but powerful opposition from Arab leaders, who would fear a return to 2006 chaos. There would be irate opposition from important sections of the military, who would feel that the U.S. was squandering the gains of the previous year. A Democratic president with few military credentials would confront outraged and highly photogenic colonels screaming betrayal.

There would be important criticism from nonpartisan military experts. In his latest report, the much-cited Anthony Cordesman describes an improving Iraqi security situation that still requires “strategic patience” and another five years to become self-sustaining.

[Lancey Howard]

David Brooks finally shows he has interesting thought patterns.
Democrats are mindless. They want “change”. Uh, whatever that means.
America could have a difficult time recovering from four years of either of those disgusting scumbags, Obama and Hillary.

[ari-freedom]

My guess? The centrists would win.
-

not until after the nomination

[bruinbirdman]

Jeepers, with a font like that, reading the NYT is almost painful> It's reason enough to stay away from it.

I am sure my confuser is set to show the font of the sender.

yitbos

[Ben Ficklin]

"My guess? The centrists would win"

The article author points out the real issue.

It is not just who can put together a coalition to win an election, but who can put together a coalition to govern.

The author, when he says the centrists will win, fails to mention that the winning centrist coalition will include centrists from both parties.

[gusopol3]

that’s obama’s whole argument. If you agree with me, then you’re for unity, if you don’t, you’re a divider.

[samtheman]

that’s obama’s whole argument. If you agree with me, then you’re for unity, if you don’t, you’re a divider.

Not quite. The whole argument is going to go like this:

If you agree with me, then you’re for unity, if you don’t, you’re a racist working to divide us.