NYT’s Tom Freidman has gone bonkers
The New York Times has long prided itself as a publication of impeccable reputation in the world of newspaper journalism. It claims to be staffed by the finest editors, columnists and reporters in the nation – producing the best writing to be found. And a lot of folks on the left — who like to think of themselves as sophisticated — view the Times as their journalism bible. The Times is often referred to as “the newspaper of record” – a rather ill-defined term that at least suggests superiority over all other rival publications.
Of course, not all of America shares that snobby view. I have long viewed the Times as just another neighborhood publication that reflects the views of the local community – sort of a big city version of the Des Moines Register Mail.
I once was criticized for expressing my belief that the folks in middle America would not even cross the street for a free copy of the Times. A friend volunteered to set up an experiment. A sign was erected on one side of a street in a suburban Chicago community — with an arrow offering a free copy of the Times on the other side. For further enticement, my friend played the role of a barker to further encourage people to get their free copy. After making the offer to scores of average American people, no one took the bait. Of course, it was a silly experiment, but we did get a good laugh out of it. And at least I have some documentation for my claim. But I digress.
The Times has always been a left-leaning publication. But it has abandoned the standards of journalism– at least in political matters – to take up the cause of partisan advocacy. It has become a communications vehicle for the Democratic Party.
Even having watched the newspaper shed any semblance of balance, I was not prepared to see the unhinged performance of one of the Times’ premier columnists, Tom Friedman. Appearing on CNN with Anderson Cooper, Friedman seemed on the verge of hysteria. His emotional argument was that the Republican Party must be stopped from winning any elections in future elections if the American Republic is to avoid total collapse. This has been a theme among the left, but Friedman proffered it with disturbing emotionalism.
In Friedman’s paranoid mind, a Republican takeover of the House, Senate or presidency in the coming years will herald the end of the American democracy. The Republic will fall. He was not informative in terms of what would follow, but he seemed to be suggesting a Trump dictatorship.
Friedman says he has never had a greater fear for the future of America than he has today. For him, it is not only preferential that Democrats win, but essential. He repeatedly called on Democrats to play their A-game.
Friedman lamented that the political arena has no common ground anymore. We should be able to agree as Americans on certain things that transcend political division, he says. Of course, those common beliefs that we all much embrace are … no surprise here … his beliefs. There should be no differing opinions on things like Infrastructure Bills, masking, vaccination mandates, school curricula, immigration, taxation, etc..
To me, it was Friedman’s fearmongering screed that had the ring of despotism. You know, where the wise leader tells the people how authoritarian one-party leadership is good for the masses – as if democracy depends on the people to yield power and shut up.
In many ways, Friedman represents that which he purports to disdain. He proffers for an arrogant authoritarian one-party system in which an elite class rules over the less able, the less intelligent and the less noble.
Friedman should cool down and notice how the Democrats’ sky-is-falling strategy failed in the last election. The idea that every race across America is about former President Trump is not true – and therefore the public is not buying it. The Republic is in no imminent danger – unless it is from the left’s tightening grip on government.
In this past election, the voters demonstrated the collective wisdom of the masses. They saw past the hyperbolic political malarky. It is not possible for me to know if Friedman is a corrupt propagandist or is in the midst of some sort of emotional breakdown. But whatever the cause might be, he is one unhinged columnist.
So, there ‘tis.