Matt Taibbi: Someone Take Away Thomas Friedman's Computer Before He Types Another Sentence

[marmar]

via AlterNet:



Someone Take Away Thomas Friedman's Computer Before He Types Another Sentence

By Matt Taibbi, New York Press. Posted January 22, 2009.

Reading Thomas Friedman is like listening to the man talking to himself. His latest book, Hot, Flat and Crowded, is no different.



When some time ago a friend of mine told me that Thomas Friedman's new book, Hot, Flat and Crowded, was going to be a kind of environmentalist clarion call against American consumerism, I almost died laughing.

Beautiful, I thought. Just when you begin to lose faith in America's ability to fall for absolutely anything -- just when you begin to think we Americans as a race might finally outgrow the lovable credulousness that leads us to fork over our credit card numbers to every half-baked TV pitchman hawking a magic dick-enlarging pill, or a way to make millions on the Internet while sitting at home and pounding doughnuts -- along comes Thomas Friedman, porn-'stached resident of a positively obscene 11,400-square-foot suburban Maryland mega-monstro-mansion and husband to the heir of one of the largest shopping-mall chains in the world, reinventing himself as an oracle of anti-consumerist conservationism.

Where does a man, who needs his own offshore drilling platform just to keep the east wing of his house heated, get the balls to write a book chiding America for driving energy-inefficient automobiles? Where does a guy whose family bulldozed 2.1 million square feet of pristine Hawaiian wilderness to put a Gap, an Old Navy, a Sears, an Abercrombie and even a motherfucking Foot Locker in paradise get off preaching to the rest of us about the need for a "Green Revolution"? Well, he'll explain it all to you in 438 crisply written pages for just $27.95, $30.95 if you have the misfortune to be Canadian.

I've been unhealthily obsessed with Friedman for more than a decade now. For most of that time, I just thought he was funny. And admittedly, what I thought was funniest about him was the kind of stuff that only another writer would really care about -- in particular his tortured use of the English language. Like George W. Bush with his Bushisms, Friedman came up with lines so hilarious you couldn't make them up even if you were trying -- and when you tried to actually picture the "illustrative" figures of speech he offered to explain himself, what you often ended up with was pure physical comedy of the Buster Keaton/Three Stooges school, with whole nations and peoples slipping and falling on the misplaced banana peels of his literary endeavors. .......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.alternet.org/environment/121617/someone_take_away_thomas_friedman%27s_computer_before_he_types_another_sentence/

[leftchick]

1. god I love me some Matt!

he can turn a phrase better than most....

First of all, how can any single person be in three holes at once? Secondly, what the fuck is he talking about? If you're supposed to stop digging when you're in one hole, why should you dig more in three? How does that even begin to make sense? It's stuff like this that makes me wonder if the editors over at the New York Times editorial page spend their afternoons dropping acid or drinking rubbing alcohol. Sending a line like that into print is the journalism equivalent of a security guard at a nuke plant waving a pair of mullahs in explosive vests through the front gate. It should never, ever happen.

<snip>

My initial answer to that is that Friedman's language choices over the years have been highly revealing: When a man who thinks you need to break a vase to get the water out of it starts arguing that you need to invade a country in order to change the minds of its people, you might want to start paying attention to how his approach to the vase problem worked out. Thomas Friedman is not a president, a pope, a general on the field of battle or any other kind of man of action. He doesn't actually do anything apart from talk about shit in a newspaper. So in my mind it's highly relevant if his manner of speaking is fucked.

But whatever, let's concede the point, forget about the crazy metaphors for a moment and look at the actual content of Hot, Flat and Crowded. Many people have rightly seen this new greenish, pseudo-progressive tract as an ideological departure from Friedman's previous works, which were all virtually identical exercises in bald greed worship and capitalist tent-pitching. Approach- and rhetoric-wise, however, it's the same old Friedman -- a tireless social scientist whose research methods mainly include lunching, reading road signs and watching people board airplanes.

Like The World is Flat, a book borne of Friedman's stirring experience of seeing an IBM sign in the distance while golfing in Bangalore, Hot, Flat and Crowded is a book whose great insights come when Friedman golfs (on global warming allowing him more winter golf days: "I will still take advantage of it -- but I no longer think of it as something I got for free."), looks at Burger King signs (upon seeing a "nightmarish neon blur" of KFC, BK and McDonald's signs in Texas, he realizes: "We're on a fool's errand."), and reads bumper stickers (the "Osama Loves your SUV" sticker he read turns into the thesis of his "Fill 'er up with Dictators" chapter). This is Friedman's life: He flies around the world, eats pricey lunches with other rich people and draws conclusions about the future of humanity by looking out his hotel window and counting the Applebee's signs.



:rofl:

[exboyfil]

2. The hilarious thing is that the same argument

can be applied to Al Gore and most of the Hollywood beautiful people who preach about globabl warming while living lives unimaginable to most.

A cap and trade system is just a way for Al Gore and his friends to feather their nest. If you are going to do something about global emissions, then a direct carbon tax at the point of sale is a far better approach (it is less confusing and less prone to manipulation).

[marmar]

4. Butter in the middle and on top, and a large Mountain Dew for me.....

:popcorn:

[trumad]

5. Dumb comparison and most likely written by a troll.

[kristopher]

8. Who does your thinking for you?

"The Tax Foundation

September 19, 2006
Al Gore Suggests Carbon Tax Replace Payroll Taxes

by Gerald Prante

Former Vice President Al Gore, who has long been concerned with environmental issues, has suggested that the U.S. should impose a tax on carbon emissions in place of the current payroll tax, which is about 15 percent (combined employee/employer) and is used to finance Social Security and Medicare. From MSNBC:

Former Vice President Al Gore has a novel approach for dealing with global warming: tax carbon dioxide emissions instead of employees’ pay.

“Penalizing pollution instead of penalizing employment will work to reduce that pollution,” Gore said Monday in a speech at New York University School of Law.

The carbon tax would replace all payroll taxes, including those for Social Security and unemployment compensation, Gore said. He said the overall level of taxation, would remain the same.

While taxation of carbon emissions may or may not be proper public policy, Gore’s suggestion that we would be penalizing pollution as opposed to penalizing work ignores the question of who would bear the burden of a pollution tax. Most likely, much of a carbon tax would be borne by workers of companies that emit carbon, meaning you would still be “penalizing” some work.

To the extent that a carbon tax is borne by the firm, it would encourage lower carbon emissions. However, to the extent that the tax would fall on workers, the distributional effects of this may not be desirable for progressives like Gore. Much of the polluting is done by companies whose workers are blue-collar, while white collar positions often involve companies with little, if any, carbon emissions.

Also, unless other countries agreed to impose the tax as well, this would put U.S. based firms at a competitive disadvantage compared to other locations. Thereby, you may get less pollution in the U.S., but the pollution would merely move to a separate country without U.S. employees. Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution, however, thinks that U.S. leadership could possibly solve this international public goods problem."


Gore wants to end the use of fossil fuels and replace them with renewable energy sources; so I'm not sure what the man's home size or wealth has to do with his work to restructure our energy system. Could you explain that for me?
The best thing I can figure out is that people who make that connection have an IQ just south of ditchwater.

[exboyfil]

9. Al Gore's conversion to carbon tax ?

I was not aware of his change in his philosphy.

Here is a quote from June, 2008

http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/al-gore-climate-security-act-47060207


Al Gore is putting his considerable reputation as a "climate crusader" behind the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, which the Senate will debate today.

“We have the first global warming bill in history that is comprehensive, bipartisan and that enjoys support across the country – from labor and agriculture to the business and the environmental communities," Gore said in a statement released by the Environment and Public Works Committee, chaired by Sen. Barbara Boxer. "Of course the bill needs to be stronger, but it's vital that Congress begin to act. While it’s important that people change their light bulbs, it's even more important that we change the laws.”

Most major national environmental groups are lining up behind the legislation, which would aim for a 70% cut in greenhouse gas emissions below 2005 levels by 2050. The cap-and-trade regulation would put a price on carbon dioxide, allot credits for existing polluters, and set up a system so that those facilities whose emissions fall beneath their quotas can sell the balance to those who do not.

The legislation sure looks like cap and trade. I am for a straight carbon tax and not for "cap and trade".

As far as whether his home has any bearing on the debate. I suggest reading "Animal Farm" - "Some animals are more equal than other animals". I am irritated by individuals who preach one thing but live another. He can purchase as many credits as he wants, but his personal behavior, as all individuals personal behavior, enters into the discussion. It is only because he is one of the "elite animals" that allows him to live with a massive carbon footprint. It sends the wrong message. In addition many of these so called "carbon credits" have proven to be a sham.

I am all for switching to renewable energy. That is why I propose a direct carbon tax that will be much less subject to manipulation etc, and not require nearly the level of oversight etc that a carbon tax does. If he now favors a straight carbon tax, then more power to him.

[kristopher]

10. He has long favored a carbon tax.

That doesn't mean he would reject cap and trade since that is a distinct improvement over hat we have now.

I can't detect anything in your criticism of his lifestyle that doesn't reek of envy and right wing character assassination. What is his carbon footprint? You say it is "massive" so you must know what it is, right?
You also say "many of these so called "carbon credits" have proven to be a sham." Do you mean specifically programs Gore is associated with are a sham; or are you casting a worldwide net to say that since some scams exist in this business area, 1)Gore is responsible 2) they are all bad and the entire approach to carbon trading is a failure?

Gore has done more to create inertia for action on climate change than almost any other single individual out there. Since the right wing media is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the fossil fuel industries, they focus on demonizing Gore - after all he is their number 1 enemy.

Why are you parroting their bullshit?

[exboyfil]

11. I don't have any envy about his lifestyle

He is welcome to it.


From http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17718399/

Gore favors a “cap-and-trade” program for the U.S. economy, not just specific sectors such as electricity or manufacturing, which would set an overall limit on warming emissions but allow industry to meet the target by trading pollution allowances.


From http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/GlobalWarming/story?id=2906888
Gore's carbon footprint

Armed with Gore's utility bills for the last two years, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research charged Monday that the gas and electric bills for the former vice president's 20-room home and pool house devoured nearly 221,000 kilowatt-hours in 2006, more than 20 times the national average of 10,656 kilowatt-hours.
...........
Kalee Kreider, a spokesperson for the Gores, did not dispute the Center's figures, taken as they were from public records. But she pointed out that both Al and Tipper Gore work out of their home and she argued that "the bottom line is that every family has a different carbon footprint. And what Vice President Gore has asked is for families to calculate that footprint and take steps to reduce and offset it."
...........
The vice president has done that, Kreider argues, and the family tries to offset that carbon footprint by purchasing their power through the local Green Power Switch program — electricity generated through renewable resources such as solar, wind, and methane gas, which create less waste and pollution. "In addition, they are in the midst of installing solar panels on their home, which will enable them to use less power," Kreider added. "They also use compact fluorescent bulbs and other energy efficiency measures and then they purchase offsets for their carbon emissions to bring their carbon footprint down to zero."

In fairness to Al Gore the solar panels and bulbs make perfect sense. Preferential buying of power does not make much sense since electricity is fungible. I guess if he paid a premium for his particular power, then it might make more sense. The carbon credits - well see below.

Carbon credits

Here is one example from an environmental activist group regarding the problem with carbon credits-

http://www.fern.org/pubs/briefs/forestfraud.pdf

Gore's carbon credits may be perfectly good and valid. The very fact that their is a question goes to my point regarding the complexity of a "cap and trade" versus a carbon tax.

The real reason (besides some folks can get rich off the concept of a "cap and trade" - ie credit brokers etc) that "cap and trade" is popular is that it hides the true cost of carbon emissions reduction from the consumer. In a few years will be wondering why this industry is getting profits off carbon reductions.

I am in favor of a carbon tax so I would not be characterized as right wing.

All leaders have feet of clay, It hurts Gore's message to not live what he is preaching. Does he really need 20 times the average electrical usage to live his life? I was making a point about him and Friedman both preaching to us while living lives contrary to their message. I actually like Friedman's books and studied them in my Globalization class.

[tom_paine]

13. You have a legitimate point regarding the validity of carbon trading.

What kills youir credibility is that you use the Right-Wing Pre-Designed hannity-Savage-O'Reilly-Template-To-Distract-Idiots to make said point.

Your position and my position and Gore's POSITION on these issues are the only thing that is important. In cases of extreme hypocrisy at times it can be enough to discredit a person completely.

But the Bushiganda Machine has made a very successful enterprise of using their Mighty Wurlitzer to lower the bar for their enemies to make jaywalking a sufficiently hypocritical move while raising the bar for Bushies so that Multiple Serial Felonies and Treasons committed by the Bushies just isn't enough to get our panties in a bunch about.

:puke:

So, and I say this with the utmost respect, please take that Hannity BULLSHIT elsewhere. If you've got a legitimate beef with carbon trading, as I do, too, then say why.

But smearing Gore for using more power, as ALL people who make more money, own larger houses, etc., do, is ludicrous and con-man distraction for infantile minds. At the end of this most recent post I am replying to, you sound like yours is not an infantile mind.

So why repeat what people with infantile minds are reepating endlessly? As I said, I agree that carbon trading seems like it is mostly a hypocritical bullshit band-aid.

But what the fuck does that have to do with Gore being rich and having a bigger house, which requires more to heat it, etc.?

To that point, Taibbi's criticism of Friedman's personal home is off-base, but the actions of his wife's development company do have a little more, but still not alot, to do with it.

To my mind, the article is quite illustrative that, through constant exposure and repetition, like any good advertising, The Bushie False Reality and Bushigandan Frame affects us all...it is as ubiquitous as the air we breath, and as pervasive.

The Bushiganda False Reality Generating Lie Machine has made it "permissable" in the inasanity that passes for National Dialogue and Conventional Wisdom, to smear someone over such trivia as the fact that pretty much everyone who's wealthy uses a lot more everything than the rest of us, and so Taibbi, it seems to me, has reached for this low-hanging fruit, too.

Why not? It's easier than thinking stuff up. What makes it a little sad is that Taibbi certainly has plenty of non "Bushie Framed" ammo to use on Friedmann, he didn't need to resort to using Bushie-Style-Smears to make his point.

[lostnotforgotten]

3. I Agree - Have Often Felt Friedman Was Somewhat Delusional In His Thinking

eom

[islandmkl]

6. great smackdown by matt...

friedman is one of those people who are, as my grandmother would say, "distracted by their own image"...

[leftchick]

7. his 11,000 square ft home is worth almost 9 million bucks

I wonder how man y solar panels he has? :eyes:


http://www.zillow.com/homes/map/7117-BRADLEY-BLVD-20817_rb/

[XemaSab]

12. Tom Friedman is a hoplite in the Neocon army

n/t

[tom_paine]

14. Neoliberal flavor. But in essence, the same thing. A Bushie.

But a Bushie with a little more Plausible Deniability than the rest of their cadre of neo-assholes, like Chris Matthews, who is currently in Plausible Deniability Mode.