► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘thomas friedman’

Thomas Friedman of The New York Times – The cry of the ‘robbed cossack’

by Mojambo ( 119 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Israel, Media at August 6th, 2012 - 2:00 pm

A very long but worthwhile column regarding the increasingly ridiculous and strident columns by Thomas Friedman, the self described sage of all worldly things. Friedman seems to me to be trying to take advantage of his Jewish name in order to spread the most libelous accusations against Israel as if that would inoculate him of the charge of Jewish dual loyalty.  I actually think he is the the opposite of a self-hater, he is a narcissist who is more concerned by what his non Jewish friends say to him at dinner parties about those “stubborn, stiff necked people in Tel Aviv”

by Martin Sherman

‘Robbed Cossack’: Hebrew idiom for a villain who complains about the wrongs (imaginary or not) done to him that he has done to others.

Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided
– Sen. Barack Obama (D-Illinois) at the annual AIPAC conference, June 4, 2008

Congress maintains its commitment to relocating the United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and urges the President, pursuant to the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995… to immediately begin the process of relocating the United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem…. None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be available for the publication of any official government document which lists countries and their capital cities unless the publication identifies Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
– Section. 212 of the “Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003,” relating to “United States policy with respect to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel,” sponsored by Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Delaware), cosponsor of the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act.
[…]
Keep these excerpts in mind – their relevance will soon become evident.
The cry of the ‘robbed cossack’?

It is, of course, possible to conceive of more deplorable examples of shoddy and shallow journalism than Tom Friedman’s mendacious and misleading rant, titled, “Why not in Vegas?” against Mitt Romney’s visit to Jerusalem this week. However, I must confess, none springs readily to mind.

Friedman launches into his derogatory diatribe by accusing Romney of (gasp) fund-raising. Of course, coming from an Obamaphile, that is rich.

After all, while there may be many reasons for Obama’s victory over Sen. John McCain in 2008, clearly far from the least significant among them was Obama’s massive funding advantage, outdoing his rival by a ratio of over 3:1 – and half-a-billion dollars – after opting out of the public funding option, despite a pledge not to.

[…]

People in glass houses

Friedman seems to be particularly upset by the support of Las Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson for Romney.

He attempts to wax sarcastic: “Since the whole trip was not about learning anything but about how to satisfy the political whims of the right-wing, super pro- Bibi Netanyahu, American Jewish casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, why didn’t they just do the whole thing in Las Vegas? “I mean, it was all about how big a jackpot of donations Adelson would shower on the Romney campaign in return.

Vegas would have been so much more appropriate than Jerusalem.

“They could have constructed a plastic Wailing Wall and saved so much on gas.”

Putting aside the tone of misplaced contempt for a moment, one might get the impression that Obama lacks support from like-minded plutocrats such as the shadowy George Soros, who has donated heavily to Obama-philic causes.

So why the disdain? Or is it just that Friedman feels that political opponents have no right to their positions and, hence, all attempts to enlist resources to promote them are to be belittled and besmirched.

Obama has engaged in intensive efforts to raise funds abroad. According to one source, “Obama has out-raised [Romney] almost 3:1 from ‘off-shore donors.’” The Wall Street Journal reported that an “invitation for an August fund-raiser asked guests to join “Americans Abroad for Obama and special guest George Clooney for a reception in Geneva,” with dinner costing $20,000 a head, or $30,000 a couple.

The Hollywood Reporter also mentions the Clooney event, and gives details of Obama’s fund-raising efforts in… China.

[…]

So perhaps a plastic replica of the Great Wall of China in Hollywood would suffice?

Doubletalk, double standards

Friedman seems to have taken particular umbrage at Romney’s statement designating “Jerusalem [as] the capital of Israel.” He jeered that “it was all about money – how much Romney would abase himself by saying whatever the Israeli right wanted to hear.”

Really, Tom? Take a look at the introductory excerpts above, espoused by the president and vice president – not only designating Jerusalem as the capital of Israel but averring that it should remain undivided.

[…]

Indeed, in light of these unequivocal declarations as to the indivisible unity of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, would Friedman suggest that the Obama-Biden duo were “abasing themselves by saying whatever the Israeli Right wanted to hear” when they made them? Or were they “abasing themselves by saying whatever the Israeli Left (and the Palestinians) wanted to hear” when they went back on them?

Shades of Walt and Mearsheimer

Friedman continues his Stephen Walt- John Mearsheimer-compliant Judeophobic bluster that he began when he alleged that the standing ovations Netanyahu received during his 2011 address to the US Congress were “bought and paid for by the Israel lobby.”

In his new article, he writes: “The main Israel lobby, AIPAC, has made itself the feared arbiter of which lawmakers are ‘pro’ and which are ‘anti-Israel’ and, therefore, who should get donations and who should not – and you have a situation in which there are almost no brakes, no red lights, around Israel coming from America anymore.”

So there you have it. According to Friedman, the Jews control US foreign policy and America is no more than a banana republic, where elected representatives are willing to sell their nation’s – and hence their constituents’ – interests to the highest bidder and can be bought by conniving Judeo-plutocrats – with hooked noses? What more could subscribers to the Walt-Mearsheimer doctrine ask for? But perhaps – just perhaps – Friedman, in his (il)liberal arrogance, is missing a point that Romney isn’t.

[…]

Clearly, the idea of placing a wedge between the US and Israel was a deliberate choice of the current Democratic administration. And it is not entirely implausible to surmise that – judging from the tenor of some of his previous articles – Friedman had a role to play in the conception of the “wedge/daylight policy.”

Having helped create the problem, he now bemoans the consequences.

[…]

‘You didn’t get there on your own’

Friedman’s bile and bias are evident in his attempt to belittle Israel’s technological achievements and entrepreneurial culture; and his chiding Romney for comparing it favorably with the Palestinian culture. Although he does acknowledge that “Israel today is an amazing beehive of innovation [and] something Jews should be proud of,” he attributes this – in the best “you didn’t get there on your own” tradition – in large measure to “an influx of Russian brainpower [and] massive US aid.”

But the Palestinians have received massive international aid for over two decades and have not been able to achieve anything approaching economic stability. So maybe it is a cultural thing, which by the way is why there was such an influx of Russian brain power.

[…]

Until Friedman realizes this, he will not be able to make any useful contribution to the discussion, beyond the fatuous, feckless and fraudulent offerings he has provided up to now.

Read the rest here: Fatuous, Feckless Friedman

Tags: ,
Posted in Barack Obama, Israel, Media | 119 Comments »

Tom Friedman hits rock bottom, continues to dig

by Mojambo ( 171 Comments › )
Filed under Anti-semitism, Conservatism, Elections 2012, Israel, Mitt Romney, Palestinians, The Political Right at December 15th, 2011 - 8:30 am

Thomas Friedman, a Communist Chinese admirer takes issue with Newt Gingrich’s and Mitt Romney’s support for Israel while he channels his inner Walt and  Mearsheimer. I have noticed that Friedman has become increasingly deranged (almost like Charles Johnson) as his inner Jew hatred starts coming out and Obama is exposed as the most anti-Israel president ever.

by Jennifer Rubin

Today’s Tom Friedman’s column has set off a firestorm. Now, he says and writes many wrong-headed things, about China and other dictatorial regimes, primarily. But today he hits rock bottom:

I sure hope that Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, understands that the standing ovation he got in Congress this year was not for his politics. That ovation was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby. The real test is what would happen if Bibi tried to speak at, let’s say, the University of Wisconsin. My guess is that many students would boycott him and many Jewish students would stay away, not because they are hostile but because they are confused.You see, in Friedman’s eyes, the entire U.S. Congress is bought and paid for by a cabal of Jews.

Rep. Steven R. Rothman (D-N.J.) is the first elected leader to go on the record. He has released this statement:

Thomas Friedman’s defamation against the vast majority of Americans who support the Jewish State of Israel, in his New York Times opinion piece today, is scurrilous, destructive and harmful to Israel and her advocates in the US. Mr. Friedman is not only wrong, but he’s aiding and abetting a dangerous narrative about the US-Israel relationship and its American supporters.

I gave Prime Minister Netanyahu a standing ovation, not because of any nefarious lobby, but because it is in America’s vital national security interests to support the Jewish State of Israel and it is right for Congress to give a warm welcome to the leader of such a dear and essential ally. Mr. Friedman owes us all an apology.Others are weighing in as well. Former deputy national security adviser Elliott Abrams responds by citing recent Gallup polling that shows support for Israel is at an historic high. He writes:

[…….]
On Capitol Hill, Republicans and Democrats alike were fuming. A senior GOP adviser e-mailed me: “Bibi’s standing ovation in Congress was bought and paid for by the American taxpayers who overwhelmingly support Israel. They vote, they pay our salaries and they stand with Israel. Statements to the contrary can be chalked up to frustrated leftists who can’t understand why they stand alone.”

A Senate aide on the other side of the aisle put it this way: “Today, Tom Friedman did a cheap imitation of [Steven] Walt and [John] Mearsheimer as he charged that the ‘Israel lobby’ bought a congressional ovation for Bibi. If Friedman did actual reporting rather than opining from his anti-Israel perch at the Times, he would have learned that, in an otherwise polarized Congress, there is genuine, bipartisan support for Israel that reflects America’s heartland.”

The good news here is that, while Friedman’s views are ingested readily on the Upper East Side, he’s entirely irrelevant where it matters — everywhere else in America.

Read the rest – Tom Friedman, hitting rock bottom

The guys from Powerline weigh in

by John Hinderaker

Tom Friedman isn’t the worst of the New York Times columnists–not while Paul Krugman is around–but he is the most overrated. If Friedman has ever had an original thought, he has chosen not to share it with his readers. Unfortunately, the thinkers he recycles keep going downhill. Now he has come to the bottom of the barrel, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt.

In his current column, Friedman blasts Newt Gingrich for his “invented people” riff and Mitt Romney for saying he would move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a long-time Republican Party Platform plank. These criticisms are par for the course for Friedman, a loyal Democrat. But he goes on to bash, simultaneously, all of Congress, the “Israel lobby,” and Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israeli government:

[……]

I can’t explain the weird obsession that so many on the Left have with the “Israel lobby.” In some cases, it is transparently driven by anti-Semitism; Mearsheimer and Walt appear to fall into that category. But that diagnosis doesn’t seem to apply to Friedman. Maybe in his case, like so much that one reads in his columns, it is just a reflexive repeating of something he heard someone else say. But one hardly needs a nefarious “Israel lobby” persuading Congressmen–let alone bribing them, as Friedman claimed–to support Israel.

Israel enjoys broad support among the American people, and it is natural to see that support reflected in Congress. This graph from Gallup shows how Americans have answered the question, “In the Middle East situation, are your sympathies more with the Israelis or more with the Palestinians?” from 1988 to 2011:

Support for Israel is strongest among conservatives, but the poll data suggest that it is likely the broadest bipartisan consensus that Americans share on any contentious issue. As for the claim that Congress has been “bought and paid for by the Israel lobby,” Jennifer Rubin notes the blowback from Capitol Hill.

Friedman’s thinking on this entire subject is hopelessly confused, as shown by his casual smear of Newt Gingrich:

That thought came to mind last week when Newt Gingrich took the Republican competition to grovel for Jewish votes — by outloving Israel — to a new low by suggesting that the Palestinians are an “invented” people and not a real nation entitled to a state.

Stop to consider that for a moment. Gingrich and other Republicans are “grovel[ing] for Jewish votes” by supporting Israel? How much does Friedman know about the demographics of America west of the Hudson? As of 2010, there were 6,190 Jews in Iowa out of a population of more than three million–0.2% of Iowa’s population. How many of those do you suppose are Republican caucus-goers? A few hundred? Then there is New Hampshire, where Jews represent 0.8% of the population; Republican Jews, a smaller proportion still. Or South Carolina, where a little over 11,000 Jews are sprinkled among a population of more than 4.5 million. And finally–I can’t resist this one–ask John Thune what he thinks about Israel. Thune represents South Dakota, home to a grand total of 395 Jews, which rounds to 0.0% of the state’s population.

Friedman is unable to think outside the crude boundaries of stereotype, but it is obvious that the GOP presidential contenders are not “groveling for Jewish votes.” Rather, they are reflecting the strong support of conservatives generally, and Christian conservatives in particular, for Israel.

It isn’t easy to display such comprehensive ignorance of a topic in the space of a 900-word newspaper column, but Tom Friedman has pulled off the trick.

Read the rest – Tom Friedman goes Mearhseimer and Walt

 

 

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Anti-semitism, Conservatism, Elections 2012, Israel, Mitt Romney, Palestinians, The Political Right | 171 Comments »

Friedman: White House disgusted with Israel

by Kafir ( 242 Comments › )
Filed under Egypt, Islamists, Israel, Muslim Brotherhood at February 15th, 2011 - 2:00 pm

M: I’m disgusted with the White House AND Thomas Friedman.

Three time Pulitzer Prize winner, Thomas Friedman, shows a total lack of bias in his latest New York Times Op-Ed. We also found out he’s pretty bendy, since he is bending over backwards to slam Israel at every opportunity, while twisting their words and side stepping their very real concerns.

If the White House is disgusted with Israel it would not surprise me one bit. It is probably not the first time they expressed that feeling, and I’m sure it won’t be the last. Someone should remind this administration that Obama isn’t President of the World.

Friedman seems believe there is no reason for Israel to fear this popular revolution! Democracy now! It always works out! It’s POPULAR! What could go wrong?!

Too many things, I am afraid.


Friedman: White House disgusted with Israel

Senior New York Times columnist describes Israeli cabinet as ‘out-of-touch, in-bred, unimaginative and cliché-driven’; says Jerusalem unable to adjust to changes in Egypt

The Israeli cabinet is cliché-driven and Jerusalem used the crisis in Egypt to to score propaganda points to the point where the White House was disgusted with Israeli interlocutors, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote Sunday.

Friedman, who visited Cairo following the recent uprising, described the Israeli government as out-of-touch, in-bred and unimaginative. He expressed concern over Israel’s future due to its inability to adjust to changes in the region as it sided with Mubarak until the very last moment.

Instead of listening to what the democracy youth in Tahrir Square were saying, Friedman says, the Israeli government frantically called the White House telling the president he must not abandon Pharaoh – and “used the opportunity to score propaganda points: ‘Look at us! Look at us! We told you so! We are the only stable country in the region, because we are the only democracy.'”

Ugh.

Ok, after I subjected you to Friedman’s opinion, I’ll make it up to you with this article by Martin Shirman on Thomas Friedman:

Go figure Tom Friedman
Op-ed: Top columnist writings on Israel ludicrous, offer wildly contradictory advice

Tom Friedman is journalist of undoubted talent. He has produced numerous insightful and thought-provoking columns on both US domestic politics and on international affairs that range from the ascent of modern India to the potential profitability for inventiveness in environmentally friendly technologies.

However, when it comes to Israel – specifically the Israel-Palestinian question – his writing morphs from the lucid to the ludicrous.

Indeed, since the beginning of the Obama Administration in late 2008, Friedman has sallied forth with series of articles that have not only been harshly critical of Israel, but also decidedly haughty and hostile. But as irritating as his condescending and contemptuous style may be, what is far more troubling is how the substance of his writings has become so detached from reality and/or so devoid of context.

[…]

Surely the time has come to treat Friedman with the disregard his undisguised bias and his unacceptable bile clearly warrant.

Hear, hear!

(hattip to Nevergiveup for the links)

Tags:
Posted in Egypt, Islamists, Israel, Muslim Brotherhood | 242 Comments »

Leftists Love Their Autocrats

by tqcincinnatus ( 60 Comments › )
Filed under Democratic Party, Liberal Fascism, Politics at September 9th, 2009 - 3:08 pm

When it comes to Friedmans, I’ll take Milton every time.  Especially when the other one – the one who writes for the New York Slimes –  extols the virtues of autocracy,

Watching both the health care and climate/energy debates in Congress, it is hard not to draw the following conclusion: There is only one thing worse than one-party autocracy, and that is one-party democracy, which is what we have in America today.

One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century. It is not an accident that China is committed to overtaking us in electric cars, solar power, energy efficiency, batteries, nuclear power and wind power. China’s leaders understand that in a world of exploding populations and rising emerging-market middle classes, demand for clean power and energy efficiency is going to soar. Beijing wants to make sure that it owns that industry and is ordering the policies to do that, including boosting gasoline prices, from the top down.

I want to park here for a moment and ask a fair enough question: When did Friedman resume his crack-smoking habit?  Seriously.  He makes it sound as if China is this up-and-coming world leader in environmentally-friendly “green” technologies.  Has he seen China?  The China where the rivers are so polluted you grow a third eye just by eating a fish pulled from one of them?  The China where you get your daily nutritional allowance of cadmium merely by breathing?  The China that makes the old Soviet Union look like an environmentalist paradise?  THAT China? 

And I find it appalling – A.P.P.A.L.L.I.N.G. – that he thinks that a political oligarchy that uses slave labour, executes petty criminals so that their organs can be harvested, bullies its neighbours (Taiwan, India) with overt threats of military aggression, and denies its citizens even basic civil liberties is “a reasonably enlightened group of people.”   What a sick puppy.

But I digress.

Our one-party democracy is worse. The fact is, on both the energy/climate legislation and health care legislation, only the Democrats are really playing. With a few notable exceptions, the Republican Party is standing, arms folded and saying “no.” Many of them just want President Obama to fail. Such a waste. Mr. Obama is not a socialist; he’s a centrist. But if he’s forced to depend entirely on his own party to pass legislation, he will be whipsawed by its different factions.

Look at the climate/energy bill that came out of the House. Its sponsors had to work twice as hard to produce this breakthrough cap-and-trade legislation. Why? Because with basically no G.O.P. representatives willing to vote for any price on carbon that would stimulate investments in clean energy and energy efficiency, the sponsors had to rely entirely on Democrats — and that meant paying off coal-state and agriculture Democrats with pork. Thank goodness, it is still a bill worth passing. But it could have been much better — and can be in the Senate. Just give me 8 to 10 Republicans ready to impose some price on carbon, and they can be leveraged against Democrats who want to water down the bill.

Ayep, here we go.  Here’s why Tommy (un)Friedman has suddenly become so enamoured with autocracy – it would let people like him more easily impose their idiotic economic, social, and environmental agendas onto us, without those annoying relics of democracy like “political opposition” and “debate.”  Since the Republicans just aren’t playing ball, maybe its time to scrap that whole democracy thing, and find ourselves a charismatic, lovable autocrat around whom we can all rally.  

And I’m sure he already has one in mind.

Shoot, it’s not like the Democrats haven’t already been headed that way.   When you have Democrat Congressmen who basically tell their constituents point blank that it doesn’t matter what the people want, they’re gonna get the Democrat agenda shovelled down their throats regardless – that’s a sign that you have a problem.  I’d like to say that it’s nothing a good election couldn’t solve, but hey, since we’re already on the whole autocracy kick anywise, who needs elections?  I wish I could say that I’m just kidding, but with the direction the Democrats have been taking anywise, I can’t.

Once again, it’s stuff like this that shows why you simply cannot trust people on the Left – period.  They do not support American values.  They do not support consensual debate.  They do not support representative democracy.  They do not support the people voicing their will.  They do not support leaving the people alone to live their own lives.   They do not believe in freedom.  They are un-American, in the deepest and most fundamental ways possible. 

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Democratic Party, Liberal Fascism, Politics | 60 Comments »