Tom Friedman's Flexible Deadlines (FAIR)

[swag]

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2884

5/16/06

New York Times foreign affairs columnist Tom Friedman is considered by many of his media colleagues to be one of the wisest observers of international affairs. "You have a global brain, my friend," MSNBC host Chris Matthews once told Friedman (4/21/05). "You're amazing. You amaze me every time you write a book."

Such praise is not uncommon. Friedman's appeal seems to rest on his ability to discuss complex issues in the simplest possible terms. On a recent episode of MSNBC's Hardball (5/11/06), for example, Friedman boiled down the intricacies of the Iraq situation into a make-or-break deadline: "Well, I think that we're going to find out, Chris, in the next year to six months—probably sooner—whether a decent outcome is possible there, and I think we're going to have to just let this play out."

That confident prediction would seem a lot more insightful, however, if Friedman hadn't been making essentially the same forecast almost since the beginning of the Iraq War. A review of Friedman's punditry reveals a long series of similar do-or-die dates that never seem to get any closer.



"The next six months in Iraq—which will determine the prospects for democracy-building there—are the most important six months in U.S. foreign policy in a long, long time."
(New York Times, 11/30/03)


"What I absolutely don't understand is just at the moment when we finally have a UN-approved Iraqi-caretaker government made up of—I know a lot of these guys—reasonably decent people and more than reasonably decent people, everyone wants to declare it's over. I don't get it. It might be over in a week, it might be over in a month, it might be over in six months, but what's the rush? Can we let this play out, please?"
(NPR's Fresh Air, 6/3/04)


"What we're gonna find out, Bob, in the next six to nine months is whether we have liberated a country or uncorked a civil war."
(CBS's Face the Nation, 10/3/04)


"Improv time is over. This is crunch time. Iraq will be won or lost in the next few months. But it won't be won with high rhetoric. It will be won on the ground in a war over the last mile."
(New York Times, 11/28/04)


. . . more

[speedoo]

1. Thanks for that post. Does Friedman still have a reputation?

If that summary of his "predictions" does not strip away any semblancce of respect for this bullshit artist, I don't know what will.

[swag]

2. "Bullshit artist." You nailed it.

[RobertSeattle]

3. In the next six months, Friedman will say in the next six months...

.several more times.

[orwell]

4. I's like to say he flip flops...

...but I think he's a flop whose flipped.

[wtmusic]

5. Tweety is right--he IS amazing

he manages to keep selling the same crap over and over again. Snake Oilman par excellence.

[wellst0nev0ter]

6. What's Amazing Is Their Long-Term Memories

In any case, Flat-Earth Friedman has already said he supports the Shiites and Kurds in a civil war, so why does he bother?

[yurbud]

7. because his individual columns SOUND reasonable especially compared

to the virulent know-nothing bludgeoning by most of the right wing press. My favorite prediction of his:

Depending on how the war went, that impact could be very bad and lead to a sharp spike in oil prices, like $60-a-barrel oil. But -- wait a minute -- it could also be very good, and lead to $6-a-barrel oil that would weaken OPEC and, maybe, also weaken the Arab autocrats who depend on high oil prices to finance their illegitimate regimes and buy off opponents.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,11319,769845,00.html

He said it would go up to $60 if the war went badly and Arab oil states imposed an embargo. He was half right. There was no embargo, but oil is over $60 a barrel today.

[mountebank]

8. Anybody have his e-mail at NYT? Hard to get it now with TimeSelect. nt