David Brooks on Obama

Just to show that I have nothing against David Brooks, take a look at his editorial on Obama this morning in the New York Times here. He nails it. A noteworthy line:

"If he values independent thinking, why is his the most predictable liberal vote in the Senate? A People for the American Way computer program would cast the same votes for cheaper."

Exactly. And this does illustrate and important distinction between McCain and Obama. McCain could be classified as "independent" (or not conservative) based on his stance on a number of issues (campaign finance, immigration, taxes, the environment, etc.) His independent streak is why he is the focus of so much disdain within the bases of the Republican party. But as a result he does have "crossover" appeal, to the detriment of his conservative appeal.

Obama is an independent in rhetoric only. I cannot find one issue of substance that separates him from the "Democratic wing of the Democratic party." If there was one small difference, it would be his health care proposal, which was pounded for months by Hillary and Edwards for not being "univeral enough." In there eyes, Obama is a crypto-Republican because his plan would not...gasp....mandate health coverage for every American, even though it would still establish a government sponsored health plan! It's a difference between who would socialize medicine more. Fidel would be so proud.

I would love to see one issue where Obama goes against the grain of the Democrat party establishment. Just one! I'd have maybe an inch more respect for the man. As of now he's still Ted Kennedy with a great stump speech.