Brooks and the whittling away of the middle-class.

Brooks,

The "former" class of which you speak is indeed facing an economic reality that could lead to its extinction. Of course, in a country that continues to see the gap widen between its richest and poorest members how could it be otherwise?

Any 'democracy' where 10% of the population controls 70%+ of the national wealth (with the top 1% controlling 40%) while its poorest 40% control less than 1% of the national wealth is doomed to see its center, its core, its middle, succumb to a fate that is less than kind.

As long as the rules that allow for this perverse concentration of wealth remain unchecked then 'staying-middle-class' will continue its downward trend. With the "American Dream" becoming too rich for most. A mirage.

Those seeking to preserve the currently flawed stock-market and offshore trading system under the guise that capital investment in innovation must be protected at all costs have no interest in altering the status-quo to help the middle-class. Their only interest is in preserving the elite's privileged position. Nothing will change until new oversight mechanisms are introduced that will prod American investors to look first to the needs of the domestic economy rather than allow them to move their profits offshore.

Obama dull? Hardly Mr. Brooks.

Mr. Brooks,

Your fear that Obama may turn out to be "an observer" rather than a "leader" is unfounded. Evidence suggests Obama will be anything but a passive president. Criticized early on by people like you on the right for his soaring rhetoric, Obama was forced to dial down his passionate pleas to the electorate in order to mitigate baseless attacks that tried to pigeonhole him as an empty lofty dreamer. Yet, once the election is over Obama will be free to reengage the voters on an emotional level, to reengage the issues on a personal level, to speak once again in the language of a purposeful poet with a heartfelt vision for the future.

If anything, Obama post election will be free to shed the yolk of blandness his strategists rationalized he needed to project net votes from the heartland. He will be free, once again, to be 'himself'.

Far from a remote and 'dull' figure, in office, one should anticipate that with his passion unfettered by cold electoral calculations, he will yet again bring an engagement and driven approach to the issues. I believe there is little danger he will manifest decision-making paralysis - if anything his administration will one of activist compassionate pragmatism borne of a purpose not witnessed in decades.

Far from a 'celebrity', Obama is, in every sense of the word, a national politician. And at this juncture in American history that is exactly what is needed. Blind ideologues like Bush, and me-firster's like Clinton have had their chance. The country is ready to embrace a true politician.

Brooks- "The Testing Time"

fr: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/opinion/07brooks.html

October 7th, 2008 7:57 am
Brooks,

While it is true that a realignment of the world trading system is in order, the one thing missing from your piece is a prescription for how the middle classes in all Western Industrialized nations will be protected from the future global capital flow that cares little for domestic circumstances until it interferes with its ability to profit seek offshore. Perhaps it is time a mechanism was introduced to slow the flow of funds between the world's stock-exchanges? Unfettered securities and stock trading in times of crisis does little to shore-up confidence. All it does is lead to panic selling - which, as you point out, is erratic and irrational at best. Why should we rely on the same traders who got us here in the first place to somehow sort out the morass? Clearly, from Iceland to Denmark, from London to Paris, from Shanghai to New York - more oversight is needed.

— BeerBellyBuddah, Winnipeg, Canada

Brooks faults leadership - a little too late.

fr: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/opinion/30brooks.html

September 30th, 2008 0:00 am
Mr. Brooks,

Toxic politics begets toxic and weak leadership. How could it be any other way? The failure is yours- you should have recognized the downside of the inherent inbreeding between America's politicians and capitalists years ago.

Where were you then?

Ah, that's right, you were championing the causes of many of those culprits who got us here. Well done.

— BeerBellyBuddah, Wpg., Canada

Brooks Goes to Far

from: http://community.nytimes.com/article/comments/2008/09/26/opinion/26brooks.html

September 26th, 2008 3:27 am
Mr. Brooks,

"If McCain is elected"[?] - Surely you jest!

Your punditry suffers when old habits (and allegiances) die hard. Your saying McCain lacks the depth of "a sophisticated conceptual thinker" but is, nevertheless, "a good judge of character" rings false. The candidate's recent actions actually lead one to believe he no longer has any concept of what constitutes 'good character'. Neither in a Veep, nor in himself.

Blaming the campaign silly season for not allowing us to see that McCain is "above all ... a serious man prone to serious things" will not wash. For this is precisely the season, more than any other, when a candidate's true character must shine through. There are no 'do-overs'. And on this account, John Sidney McCain has failed miserably. To pretend otherwise, or aver we are not now seeing the 'real McCain' is beneath you.

Mr. Brooks, if it is true that "old soldiers never die - they just fade away"; better sir for all concerned with preserving their dignity, to abandon old allegiances, and allow this particular old soldier, this GOP candidate, to mercifully fade away.

— BeerBellyBuddah, Wpg., Canada