I never really liked David Brooks, conservative columnist for the NY Times. He’s written books disparaging “bobos” (bourgeois bohemians), yet he seems like a bobo himself. (I believe that he has admitted this; takes one to know one). The whole bobo concept seems like a lame version of “yuppie” from the 1980s (especially lame since the yuppies, i.e Young Urban Professionals, aren’t young anymore). Brooks himself seems like a lame version of the late, almost great William F. Buckley. “Brooksie” doesn’t seem to have much going for him; in my book, he’s only good for selective tributes to virtue, anti-collectivism, restraint from interference with personal choice, and for other selective conservative bosh.

But lately, Brooks has written a lot about Barack Obama and has actually said a lot of insightful, almost admiring things about Obama. Despite their great disagreement about the role of government in society, Brooks seems to relate to Obama’s call for national unity transcending political interests. Strange bedfellows, for sure. (But here’s another conservative who admires Obama — again, quite strange).

Anyway, Brooks just wrote a column about Hilary Clinton’s declining chances to take the Democratic nomination, and the great damage that her refusal to surrender will cause if she goes all the way to the convention in late August. I have to admit, bobo-Brooksie convinced me that it really is time for Hilary to do the noble thing and give up. The longer she fights, the greater the chances are that McCain will be the next president (which Brooks would still prefer). Given the self-inflicted wounds caused by Obama’s response to the Wright videos, and all the other non-patriotic stuff that Obama and his wife have put out there for the Republican attack machine, every week that Hilary continues to struggle brings Obama closer to the point of no return.

Could Hilary make a stronger run against McCain? Very likely. Can she thus convince the superdelegates to overturn the wave of popular support that Obama has gained within the Democratic Party? Very unlikely. The only real options now for Hilary are to scorch the earth and watch Obama lose in November (the so-called “Tonya Harding option”; perhaps she hopes to run in 2012, when she will be 65 and McCain will be 77), or to do the right thing and get out of the way (not exactly what the Clintons are famous for, but never too late to start!). She can choose “told you so”, or she can direct her attack-dog instincts against McCain, so as to give Obama enough cover to seize the economic issue. That’s the high-ground that the Dems need to reclaim if they are to avoid snatching defeat from the jaws of seemingly inevitable victory this fall.

Barack Obama’s chances of becoming President are entirely in the hands of Hilary Clinton right now. It would be quite touching if she were to somehow decide to swallow her raging Clintonian ambition and allow Obama have his day. David Brooks himself would no doubt be impressed (even though he will still vote McCain). Stay tuned!