David Brooks Has Already Decided That President Hillary Clinton Isn't Leading

Anybody who’s ever read David Brooks knows he hangs every other column on the hook that all would be fine President Barack Obama would just “lead,” a nebulous concept by which Obama proposes exactly what he has already proposed but in such a way that the obstinate GOP House magically drops its ideological intransigence.
You may have gotten the sense that this was less a substantive critique of Obama than a portable, one-size-fits-all complaint meant to resolve the tension between Brook’s wonky policy prescriptions and his party’s hair-on-fire extremism. Brooks’ hypothetical on Meet the Press this morning of how Hillary Clinton becomes president should confirm that:
She’s got the process right. She’s got all the campaign staff, all the money. But that’s all relatively unimportant in the campaign. She doesn’t have the substance yet. How is she going to govern so it looks different than under Obama? How is she going to work with a Republican Congress?
Not “How is the legislative branch with the lowest approval ratings in its history, one-half of which is controlled by the party with the lowest approval ratings of its history, going to work with the enormously popular candidate?” but, “How will Clinton propose 10:1 entitlement cuts to revenue increases in a way that will make Tim Huelskamp happy?”
Thus are four-to-eight years of “Why won’t Hillary lead?” columns born.

This blog is sponsored by: http://visitwebpages.info/paypalchecks