"Her interviews with New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman and talk show host Rush Limbaugh catered to the far left and far right, but they produced no news."
Produced no news, he says? How about the shocking revelation that New York Times foreign affairs columnist Thomas Friedman pleases far leftists?
Friedman supports the Iraq war, still. At last count, that puts him to the right of about 60% of the country.
Since the invasion, he has harshly criticized the Bush Adminstration, not for going to war, but for not being fully committed to completing the mission. That's a criticism, but certainly not a leftist criticism.
Friedman's stances on other issues? He thinks that Russia and China are irresponsible for not supporting Bush's attempt to impose economic sanctions on Iran. His views on Israel are so comfortably "right" that he wouldn't be unwelcome in Israel's governing party, Kadima. And Friedman dismisses left-of-centerists (John Edwards, Lou Dobbs, etc.) who criticize free trade agreements.
The only even vaguely lefty viewpoint Friedman has expressed in print lately is his belief that the U.S. should increase gasoline taxes to make the non-fossil energy industry more economically viable. Friedman thinks that the U.S. is unhealthily addicted to foreign oil. Guess what? So does President Bush!
Friedman's a smart, immensely talented writer and I agree with him more often than I don't.
But little about him is pleasing to the "left" or "far left."
0 comments:
Post a Comment