Thomas Friedman (again?!): Obama 'is leading by not giving in to this blackmail'

[Newsjock]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/opinion/friedman-us-fringe-festival.html
U.S. Fringe Festival
By Thomas Friedman

... In other words, the only thing standing between mainstream Republicans and a hellish future of kowtowing to Ted Cruz, never seeing the inside of the White House and possibly losing the House is President Obama’s refusal to give in to the shutdown blackmail that Cruz & Co. have cooked up. The more pragmatic Republicans, who know that this is a disaster for their party but won’t confront Cruz & Co., have settled on this bogus line: “Well, sure, maybe Cruz and the Tea Party went too far, but it’s still President Obama’s fault. He’s president. He should negotiate with them. He needs to lead.”

President Obama is leading. He is protecting the very rules that are the foundation of any healthy democracy. He is leading by not giving in to this blackmail, because if he did he would undermine the principle of majority rule that is the bedrock of our democracy. ... If we do not preserve this system, nothing will ever be settled again in American politics.

... America needs a proper right-of-center conservative party to challenge a left-of-center Democratic Party. Without a healthy opposition party — one that is ready to win some and lose some and learn from its losses, one that has a real agenda for upward mobility, not just a low-tax obsession and boiling anger — our two-party system doesn’t work, and neither does the country.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

1. Is Tom trying to make up for his shilling the Iraq invasion?

[calimary]

5. Well, whatever the case, good to see. However, I don't feel like trusting him completely.

For a long time, he's spouted in support of them. But at least he sees this one clearly and accurately.

[Skittles]

2. CORRECT

[99th_Monkey]

3. It is so refreshing to feel so totally in sync with POTUS again ..

What with all the NSA stuff, it's been awhile.

[rhett o rick]

4. Well said. I dont want the Republican Party to die, I just want them to get

rid of the terrorists leading their party. This country needs a healthy two party system.

[calimary]

6. I actually do.

The terrorists are part and parcel of what the GOP has become. Sometimes I find myself hoping we have an unbroken succession of Democratic presidents over the next 20 years or so - to give our side to time to clean up the mess, protect and preserve and rehabilitate the Supreme Court, and improve the Affordable Care Act so it's thoroughly ingrained in the system beyond any attempts to chip away at it. Things that liberals fought for, and won (women's right to choose, voting rights), and almost won (like the ERA), are on the ropes now, because that side has been allowed to run amok while everybody on our side has tried to play nice and be patient with the crazy uncle who's brought down from upstairs, against anyone's better judgment, and reliably proceeds to shit on the Thanksgiving dinner table every year.

We need time to fix things and reverse trends, and it's not going to happen overnight. And it sure as hell won't happen if we leave it to the GOP, OR allow them to weigh in and be able to fuck things up! I would rather see them neutered - but good - for long enough to set a few things in stone. The republi-CON party has shriveled to a mercifully low level here in California - so few of 'em they can't cause any trouble anymore. And we have no more red ink on the state ledger and the unemployment picture is brightening, among other things. No obstruction of Democrats in Sacramento and the whole state has been turned around to more and better fiscal health and sanity. THAT'S what we need nationwide. republi-CONS so decisively defanged and declawed that they're not in any position to do any damage anymore.

[rhett o rick]

7. If the Republican Party dies, where do you think the old Republicans will end up?

Since there is only one party, bingo-bango they will become Democrats. Now let's be clear, just because you call yourself a Democrat doesnt mean you believe in Democratic principles, ala. Lieberman.

Oh to dream that we have one party of good guys to "fix" the system. Please rethink how practical that is.

Our system works best with two competing parties that will keep each other in check.

[calimary]

14. I suspect they'd scatter. Attempt to rise again either overtly or covertly.

I'd expect some of them to try to preserve the "Republican Party" as we know it now OR maybe as we have known it in the past. Others can be expected to try to form their own party. I'd expect that of the insurrectionists and teabaggers. In such an event, they'd take care of "the-killing-of-the-GOP" themselves. There'd actually be two or more parties rising from the ashes of the GOP as we've come to know it. Which would be a divide-and-conquer victory for our side. The moderates and maybe some back-room schemers and wolves in sheep's clothing would try to keep the conventional GOP alive, while the ding-dongs and nutcases and wacko-birds would veer off into their own ridiculous miasma of a "party." Neither one with enough critical mass to get a majority of the vote. UNLESS of course, the more moderate party thinks it needs to band together with the nut-jobs to reach that critical mass. In THAT case, it'd mean trouble because they might have the numbers to do it. We'd have to hope the moderate left-overs would realize just how much of a deal-with-the-Devil they'd be making and how bad it is - because it'd be similar to the mess we have now. It'd just depend on how badly they want victory - ANY kind of victory. Victory at all costs. And the cost to all the rest of us would be huge.

Please understand, rhett - I don't advocate a permanent one-party government forever and ever and ever. I think it's necessary for maybe another couple of decades or so, just long enough to level the playing field. Like hitting the reset button. Then HOPEFULLY those left wandering in the wilderness on the opposing side will come back ready to play fair again. And if not (and I'd expect the "not" option to be the more realistic one), then at least we all start up again - on a playing field that's flat and level again and everybody starts from the same place. And yeah, they can be expected to try to start rigging the game again. That's just who they are. And we need to understand that. But I'd rather they have to start from a level starting-place rather than one that's already tilted so badly in their favor that there's no way for US to compete on an equal level.

[madokie]

17. Spot on with this

We need the time it takes to set things right once again.


"We need time to fix things and reverse trends, and it's not going to happen overnight. And it sure as hell won't happen if we leave it to the GOP, OR allow them to weigh in and be able to fuck things up! I would rather see them neutered - but good - for long enough to set a few things in stone."

[blkmusclmachine]

8. Send the Drones to Boner's house.

[ErikJ]

9. Longtime fan of Friedman

I know he wrote a book defending Free trade (very bad) but I have long been a fan of his longtime criticism of gas guzzlers and higher MPG regulations. He has been almost alone voice calling for higher gas taxes to stimulate alternative energy spending and investment.

[Downtown Hound]

13. He was also a ginormous Iraq War whore

Every six months he came out with a new article telling us that we were winning, all we had to do was wait six more months.

Friedman could turn himself into the most flaming liberal ever from this point on, but until he apologizes for his shameful whoring I will never give him the time of day.

http://fair.org/take-action/media-advisories/tom-friedmans-flexible-deadlines/

[calimary]

15. Yeah, I remember that "just another six months" crap.

We were "give it another six months and then we'll see"'d UP THE ASS. How'd that work out for everybody then?

[world wide wally]

10. Maybe if moderate (only sick Republicans... not the insane ones) stood up for their side of things,

they wouldn't have to live in constant fear of the tea baggers. I find it hard to believe the tea slackers are that popular to begin with.

[xfundy]

11. "a left-of-center Democratic Party"

No, we've been dragged to the 'right' for years.

I do hope we find our way again, but suspect that will take years, if not another period like the 60s, though not the way some Greedy Old Pig asshole commentator claimed it was now the cancervatives' turn. They were the ones who cheered shooting college students for demonstrations against their "thought" base.

A rebellion is coming, akin to the 60s, I think, once the repigs unleash just a little more of their iron-fisted rules. I was too young to participate in the original protests, but I do hope to see the naked protests on youtube. I'm only human.

[calimary]

16. DAYUM, xfundy! I LOVE THAT!!! "Cancervatives." It's certainly what they are.

They're a cancer on America. Definitely! GREAT idea! Should be said, read, and SPREAD! But it works best when seen as a written word. Speaking it is a little more difficult to get the message across because it still sounds the same as the conventional word. But visually, it works like a champ!!!

[ffr]

12. Middle paragraph speaks volumes.

K&R