Friedman nearly tops the "Bin Laden Scholars" op-ed with his latest opus.
I have no idea who is going to win the Democratic presidential nomination, but lately I’ve been wondering whether, if it is Barack Obama, he might want to consider keeping Dick Cheney on as his vice president.
Friedman once was a serious Middle Eastern journalist. The time has come to put him out to pasture. A twenty year-old blogger can write better columns than this drivel. Friedman isn't pushing interesting ideas or so great wordsmith that can get any with faulty arguments.
The New York Times op-ed section is New Orleans after Katrina. There is one disaster after the other. Maureen Dowd compared Hillary Clinton to a dominatrix. David Brooks wrote a highly dishonest defense of Ronald Reagan's Philadelphia, Mississippi campaign kickoff. The town is famous for the murders of three civil rights activists. Racists legally used state rights to block segregation. T
The paper of record can do better than this. There are sensential that could make The Times op-eds pages relevant again. The talent pool at The American Prospect and within the paper is a good place to start looking for replacements. The newest columnist is John Tierney. His writing is so bad it's good. Not qualities that should apply to Murderers' Row.
“When you hear politicians calling you an addict and warning that you'll be cut off, try my plan for energy independence…. After you fill up your tank, twist the rear-view mirror so you can gaze at yourself. Repeat these words: ‘I'm good enough, I'm rich enough, and doggone it, people in the Middle East like my money.’"
The above quoted text is reason why fewer people read newspaper op-ed sections.
No comments:
Post a Comment