David Brooks, in his latest column, says of Obama’s decision to wage war in Libya, “President Obama took this decision, I’m told, fully aware that there was no political upside while there were enormous political risks.”
Obama couldn’t have possibly been “aware” that there was no political upside. There was at least one political upside: Brooks, who is NYTimes’ token “conservative” columnist, is a full-throated supporter of Obama’s action, as he reveals in the rest of his column.
(Any time someone praises a politician for making a decision without regard for the political consequences, we should suspect that the politician made the decision partially because he expected to be praised for having made a decision without regard for the political consequences. But there is an additional reason in this case: the person praising the politician is not only praising him for making a decision without regards for political consequences, he is also praising him on the substance.)
It seems like David Brooks thinks Obama thinks there is no political upside but Brooks thinks there is an upside and doesn’t care if Obama doesn’t think there is a political upside. He is not worried about weather the politician wants to praised for disregarding the political consequences. Heather, Wilmette Il