As I suggested yesterday, Jill Abramson of The New York Times has lost her patience with Obama (http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/06/new-york-times-us-is-secretly.html). Alluding to a lead online Times article entitled "U.S. Is Secretly Collecting Records of Verizon Calls" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/us/us-secretly-collecting-logs-of-business-calls.html?_r=0) by Charlie Savage and Edward Wyatt, I observed:
"What has happened to The Times? After refusing to participate in Eric Holder's off-the-record discussion, they are now investigating violations of Americans' basic First Amendment rights? Is Jill Abramson finally getting wise to Obama's 'Little Shop of Horrors'?"
But who would have thought that The New York Times would then write an editorial entitled "President Obama’s Dragnet" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/opinion/president-obamas-dragnet.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&pagewanted=all&) and declare:
"The administration has now lost all credibility. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it."
But not so fast! Needless to say, the language of this editorial was subsequently edited to read (italics added):
"The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue."
Was there a certain livid West Wing staffer who called The Times to demand this amendment? Easy enough to find out: Simply check the phone records collected by the NSA.
And of course, the redaction was necessary given how credible the Obama administration remains vis-à-vis the IRS scandal, the Benghazi travesty, the AP/Rosen horror, and its spurious overseas "red lines." Yeah, right.
Given all of the above, David Brooks today decides to wade into the fray (. . . not) with a Times op-ed entitled "The Power Inversion" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/opinion/brooks-the-power-inversion.html) in which he contends (yawn) that "city governments are likely to be more dynamic than the federal government." Brooks writes:
"There’s a weird calm around Washington these days. The Obama administration only has a year before the lame-duck status sets in. Yet you don’t get a sense of urgency. White House officials seem busy running the government, but they are not filling the public space with a transformational second-term agenda."
"A weird calm"? Sorry, David, this is not "sclerosis" but rather paralysis. The West Wing no longer knows where from where the next scandal is going to arise, and there is no place for a "transformational second-term agenda" when White House staff are worrying who will be forced to testify before Congress.
Write about PRISM, Verizon, Benghazi, the IRS, AP/Rosen, Syria, Iran? No way! David Brooks appears intent upon avoiding these topics like the plague, except to the extent that Benghazi tarnished the reputation of his friend Victoria Nuland (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/05/david-brooks-next-scapegoat-benghazi.html).
Time to wake up, David. Time to take a stand.