David Brooks begins his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Stay Sane America, Please!" by observing:
"In January of 2017 someone will stand at the U.S. Capitol and deliver an Inaugural Address. This is roughly the place where Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan once stood. I am going to spend every single day between now and then believing that neither Donald Trump nor Ted Cruz nor Bernie Sanders will be standing on that podium. One of them could win the election, take the oath, give the speech and be riding down Pennsylvania Avenue. I will still refuse to believe it.
Yes, I know what the polling evidence is telling us about Trump, Sanders and Cruz, but there are good reasons to cling to my disbelief.
First, these primary campaigns will not be settled in February. They won’t be settled in March or April. Sometimes a candidate can sweep Iowa and New Hampshire and cruise to the nomination. But that candidate has to be broadly acceptable to all parts of the party. Trump, Cruz and Sanders are not."
Oddly enough, there is not a single mention of Hillary in Brooks's opinion piece.
Indeed, a candidate must be "broadly acceptable to all parts of the party," but shouldn't a candidate also be broadly acceptable to all parts of electorate? Americans' opinion of Hillary is horrifically unfavorable, and it stands to get much worse if she is indicted.
Brooks calls for America to "stay sane"? What about Mrs. Clinton? Consider the following from Edward Klein's October 10, 2015 New York Post article entitled "Clinton’s camp says she ‘could have a serious meltdown’":
"Hillary is furious — and while Clinton advisers think that may save her, it’s making the lives of those who work for her hell.
'Hillary’s been having screaming, child-like tantrums that have left staff members in tears and unable to work,' says a campaign aide. 'She thought the nomination was hers for the asking, but her mounting problems have been getting to her and she’s become shrill and, at times, even violent.'"
Brooks goes on to say in his opinion piece:
"America has never elected a candidate maximally extreme from the political center, the way Sanders and Cruz are. According to the FiveThirtyEight website, Cruz has the most conservative voting record in the entire Congress. That takes some doing."
Apparently Brooks has forgotten that Obama was elected president notwithstanding the fact that he was ranked the most liberal senator in 2007. Is it beyond the realm of imagination that Obama will be replaced by the most conservative senator given the president's poor job approval rating? I don't think so.
[Yesterday, I stated that Iran was behind the abduction by a Shiite militia of three Americans in Baghdad. Well, Iran has already initiated the bargaining with respect to their release.]