NYT Columnist, Pathetic Joke David Brooks Caresses Barack Obama’s Pants Crease

How bad is the leftist bias over at The New York Times? Their “conservative” columnist, David Brooks, just penned a column called “I Miss Barack Obama.” This isn’t too much of a surprise, of course, coming from the man who said that Obama would be a tremendous president because of the sharp crease in his pants. But now Brooks has gone completely out of his supposedly-conservative mind:

As this primary season has gone along, a strange sensation has come over me: I miss Barack Obama. Now, obviously I disagree with a lot of Obama’s policy decisions. I’ve been disappointed by aspects of his presidency. I hope the next presidency is a philosophic departure. But over the course of this campaign it feels as if there’s been a decline in behavioral standards across the board. Many of the traits of character and leadership that Obama possesses, and that maybe we have taken too much for granted, have suddenly gone missing or are in short supply.

For Brooks and many other faux conservatives, conservatism has always been about attitude, not about policy. Conservatism is about civility, about acting in gentlemanly fashion, about hashing out compromises over steak at The Capitol Grill. That’s why they don’t like Ted Cruz and find him offputting – he cares less about civil chat and more about getting conservative things done. Brooks makes that clear when he describes the Obama administration in terms far removed from reality:

The Obama administration has been remarkably scandal-free. Think of the way Iran-contra or the Lewinsky scandals swallowed years from Reagan and Clinton. We’ve had very little of that from Obama. He and his staff have generally behaved with basic rectitude. Hillary Clinton is constantly having to hold these defensive press conferences when she’s trying to explain away some vaguely shady shortcut she’s taken, or decision she has made, but Obama has not had to do that. He and his wife have not only displayed superior integrity themselves, they have mostly attracted and hired people with high personal standards. There are all sorts of unsightly characters floating around politics, including in the Clinton camp and in Gov. Chris Christie’s administration. This sort has been blocked from team Obama.

Remarkably scandal-free? How about the IRS targeting political conservatives? How about the Obama administration covering up Benghazi? How about corruption at Eric Holder’s Justice Department, Kathleen Sebelius’ Department of Health and Human Services, at the Environmental Protection Agency? How about the fact that Hillary Clinton was Barack Obama’s Secretary of State? How about Fast and Furious? The list of scandals in the Obama administration is virtually endless. But for Brooks, they don’t count, because Obama is so genteel, don’t you see.

Then Brooks caresses slowly up the crease in Barack Obama’s pants, praising Obama’s “sense of basic humanity”:

He’s exuded this basic care and respect for the dignity of others time and time again. Let’s put it this way: Imagine if Barack and Michelle Obama joined the board of a charity you’re involved in. You’d be happy to have such people in your community. Could you say that comfortably about Ted Cruz? The quality of a president’s humanity flows out in the unexpected but important moments.

Well, actually, I wouldn’t trust the Obamas to be involved in a charity. Michelle Obama pulled down a $300,000 job for doing nothing at the University of Chicago Medical Center. Barack Obama has targeted charities at the IRS, including religious charities like the Little Sisters of the Poor. And as for his “basic care and respect for the dignity of others,” this ignores Christians at home and in the Middle East, Jews in Israel and in France, and Muslims being murdered by other Muslims all over the planet, among others.

Brooks continues by stating that Obama has a “soundness in his decision-making progress.” Vladimir Putin, ISIS, Bashar Assad, the leadership of China and the mullahs of Iran all agree!

He then states that Obama has exhibited “grace under pressure.” He adds, “I happen to think overconfidence is one of Obama’s great flaws. But a president has to maintain equipoise under enormous pressure. Obama has done that, especially amid the financial crisis. After Saturday night, this is now an open question about Rubio.”

It’s easy to show grace under pressure when you can say everything that happens in your administration is a mystery to you, and you only find out about current events from the news. And I was unaware that grace under pressure involves lying to the families of people murdered by terrorists in Libya.

Finally, Brooks praises Obama for his “resilient sense of optimism.” He smacks “Sanders or Trump, Cruz and Ben Carson…[who] wallow in the pornography of pessimism.” But Obama is upbeat!

This is laugh-out-loud funny. Of course he’s upbeat: he’s fundamentally changing the greatest nation in the history of the planet. Why wouldn’t he be happy about what he’s doing? Pessimism is for those who aren’t tearing down America in search of leftist utopian. And Obama hasn’t been relentlessly optimistic about Americans: he has repeatedly castigated Americans for their close-minded xenophobia and racism. He spouts pretty phrases about the arc of history, but he slanders those who actually make the world a better place, from police to the military.

Brooks writes, “People are motivated to make wise choices more by hope and opportunity than by fear, cynicism, hatred and despair. Unlike many current candidates, Obama has not appealed to those passions.”

Really? Hasn’t he? How about the constant denigration of Americans who support traditional marriage, worry about radical Islam, and believe in the general honesty of the police officers who keep us safe? How about arrogantly dismissing Americans who oppose abortion? Obama has been relentlessly polarizing.

But again, conservatism for Brooks is all about attitude. Every item of praise Brooks bestows on Obama, in cloyingly vomit-inducing fashion, could apply equally to leftist dictators across the world. And Brooks, presumably, would celebrate them too. After all, they have servants to crease their pants properly. And isn’t that what great leadership is all about?

Brooks concludes:

[T]here is a tone of ugliness creeping across the world, as democracies retreat, as tribalism mounts, as suspiciousness and authoritarianism take center stage. Obama radiates an ethos of integrity, humanity, good manners and elegance that I’m beginning to miss, and that I suspect we will all miss a bit, regardless of who replaces him.

Ugliness is creeping across the world because of our petty, weak, vicious president – and because of his media enablers, who care more about his clichéd poetics than about his actual nastiness. People suffer and die because faux conservatives like Brooks carry Obama’s agenda forward, all in the name of upholding a veneer of elitist gentility.