John Podhoretz is the editor of Commentary magazine, a former editorial-page editor of The New York Post, and co-founder of the Weekly Standard. As you can see, he's not exactly left-leaning.
He wrote a piece at Commentary, calling it, "Time to Get Serious." Here are a couple of excerpts, including the following head-scratcher that implies golfers can't also be Very Serious People:
Barack Obama is a serious man. Yes, he likes to golf, and yes, he ran a campaign with cutesy Facebook pictures and seemingly inane Flash slideshows like “Life of Julia.” No, he does not seem interested in the mechanics of legislation, nor does he seem adept at negotiation. But the weird condescension his opponents display toward him is ludicrously wrongheaded. They seem eager to believe he is a lightweight, and he is not. Obama is very possibly a world-historical political figure, and until those who oppose him come to grips with this fact, they will get him wrong every time.
I'm not entirely sure his opponents can even "come to grips" with the fact that Obama twice won the presidency, was born in this very country, isn't a French gay Marxist Kenyan socialist commie, and doesn't want to take away our guns while presiding over death panels that consist of undocumented brown-skinned immigrants who can't wait to convert every ballot to Spanish while making a hobby of having multiple daily abortions.
He describes some of President Obama's accomplishments, albeit not in very flattering terms, but does add:
That isn’t luck. It’s skill. Rare skill. Political genius of a kind.
But then it gets really entertaining when he starts in on Willard M. Romney:
Mitt Romney proved to be so inept as the chief executive of his own campaign that his polling was based on faulty assumptions that could easily have been corrected, his get-out-the-vote machine failed because it had never been tested, and his Facebook page crashed.
His Facebook page crashed on top of all that other stuff? That's hilarious! Why don't I remember that?
Podhoretz does get a few things wrong, including the part where he calls Obama a "post-1960s left-liberal." Seriously? Did he not read the reports of President Obama's willingness to cut Social Security benefits? Or his strong consideration of signing off on a disaster-in-waiting (see: State Dep’t. draft report looks promising for backers of Keystone XL pipeline)? Or his indefinite detention of detainees at Guantanamo Bay? Or his stance on wiretaps? Or his reluctance to go after Bush, Cheney, and company for lying us into a fraudulent invasion of a sovereign country and torturing prisoners? Or allowing nearly all of the Bush tax cuts to remain in place? Some liberal.
He ends by again referring to the president as "a serious man" ...whose era-- the dreaded "Age of Obama"-- must end.
But I give him credit for what he got right and especially for allowing me a brief Moment of Schadenfreude.