Tom Friedman Should Hang Out (Up?) in His Closet for a Few Days, And

"Radical in the White House" is the title of an over-the-top column by Thomas Friedman in the Jan. 21st New York Times. Early-on he states:

"Indeed, dare I say, I hope Obama really has been palling around all these years with that old Chicago radical Bill Ayers. I hope Obama really is a closet radical.

Not radical left or right, just a radical, because this is a radical moment."

Here is my reaction.

Friedman is confusing "radical", the adjective, with "radical", the noun. Speaking to Friedman directly:

You hope that Obama has been palling around with Bill Ayers? All radicals are not alike. Your "gee-whiz" attitude has become "cheese-whiz". In any case, what you want President Obama to try to accomplish is fully within the law, not outside the law, as Ayers once operated. Overturning the status-quo is a far cry from overthrowing the government. The term "Radical President" is better applied to the new ex-President, George W. Bush.

Your hope that Obama is a "closet radical" demeans him. He has been very forthright about what he wants to accomplish. I think you should go to your own closet and hang out (up?) for a few days until you simmer down.

And

A Worm for The Big Apple?

"When the Action Moves On" is the title of a rather silly article in the Jan 16^th NY Times. It starts out with

"This week, the eyes of the world will be on Washington as perhaps two million people descend to bask in the Obama glow. City officials expect more than 10,000 tour buses to roll into the area. Hotels 150 miles away have been booked for months. Even campsites are booked."

Later it states

"Even Portland, Ore., seems to have borrowed New York's smugness. Recently, one civic group's television spot was picked up and circulated as a YouTube video portraying blissful bicyclists pedaling past tree-lined streets and frame houses behind a graphic reading, 'Is Portland the most European city, or is Europe the most Portlandian continent?'

Isn't that supposed to be New York's line?"

It also puts in a dig at Detroit.

The article details some of the city's losses during the recent economic downturn, as if this hasn't been happening in cities all across the country.

Here is my reaction.

Whadda yah mean, "New York is losing its swagger and sense of pre-eminence"? Hasn't Washington, D.C. been the capital for quite some time? Since when has New York been considered a European city? New York has always been New York. Washington, on the other hand, was built on a swamp, to look like Paris. Well, it is certainly no Paris, although it still may be a swamp.

As for the inauguration, look how it is paralyzing the D.C. area. For New Yorkers, it would be a mere walk in (maybe Central) Park. So get over it! I'm sure that, before long, the Obamas will be spending weekends in New York.

Friedman's column: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/21/opinion/21friedman.html

Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/18/fashion/18york.html?hp