I saw this as a teaser to an article at Townhall.com:
"Candidate Barack Obama promised immigration activists, "I think it's time for a president who won't walk away from something as important as comprehensive reform when it becomes politically unpopular.""
I haven't read the article yet, which is by Victor Davis Hansen. Though he's talking to immigration activists, I don't know if Obama's referring to immigration reform or health care reform or some combo thereof. What strikes me is the lie inherent in the statement. Actually, there are two. The first is that he is somehow more courageous in meeting such challenges, such as whatever reform it is about which he speaks, as if other presidents are actually frightened by the prospect.
The second is that reform, of either or really, any kind, is what is politically unpopular. This is the same kind of lying that goes on when the Gore-ites insist that their opponents deny there is warming, when everyone who pays attention knows that the "deniers" are referring to man's part in it. It isn't reform that people reject, for most people do indeed believe reform is necessary for both areas. The opposition, the unpopularity revolves around the means of reform. What it will look like under plans and proposals Obama favors.
As with GW Bush's plan for comprehensive immigration reform and WJ Clinton's plan for health care reform, we see the same scenario playing out regarding BH Obama's health care reform (and likely whatever immigration reform he may have in mind, I'm very sure). The plain fact is that in every one of these scenarios, the people know better. They can see that each of these proposals are/were rife with flaws and that they would be damaging to our nation.
So the hunt for the legendary Obama brilliance goes on. No evidence of any has ever been revealed. Who could stand up and insist such reform packages are good ideas and hold claim to brilliance at the same time? I know, however, that I'm sure to get some true brilliance out of that VD Hansen article.