sic semper tyrannis

“Is Nothing Sacred?”  Yes, if his name is Barack Obama.

With a tip o’ the fedora to Rod Dreher, the perfect illustration, by the late Gahan Wilson, of the campaign of St. Barack of Obama.

David Brooks, resident New York Times resident “conservative,” on the pending self-destruction of St. Barack of Obama in his column yesterday. David is far too kind to St. Barack, but he does appear to be exactly right in his conclusions:

New politics is all [Obama's] got. He loses that, and he loses everything. Every day that he looks conventional is a bad day for him.

Besides, the real softness of the campaign is not that Obama is a wimp. It’s that he has never explained how this new politics would actually produce bread-and-butter benefits to people in places like Youngstown and Altoona.

The “looks conventional” means that the Obama campaign slinks into the gutter, slinging mud at Hillary. David, wake up and smell the blogs, dude. That’s been happening for some time. Just check any NutRoots website such as Huffington, and check the chatter.

Obama supporters simply hate Clinton. Obama has been a “conventional” politico from the git-go. He’s been a slickster, pretending that he’s just oh so above the fray, a “can’t we all just get along” nice guy.

Obama is dangerous, not least because he is slick. All successful politicos are slick, to some extent. But in Obama’s case, he masks the radical leftist agenda. Claims that he will moderate and be wise and reach across the aisle are just that: claims.

Regardless of the truth of these claims, what David Brooks writes should be taken as gospel: in different words, “there’s no there, there.” No record to speak of; no substance. In the words of the best politico in recent memory, Obama’s whole campaign has been a “fairytale.”