Fidel Castro took to the Internet last week to call the Republican primary process “the greatest competition of idiocy and ignorance that has ever been.”
Thomas L. Friedman, the Bedrock of the New York Times op-ed page, thought this was such a startlingly insightful observation that he opened this week’s drooling paean to globalization with it:
When Marxists are complaining that your party’s candidates are disconnected from today’s global realities, it’s generally not a good sign.
Aside from the minor detail that Marxists have been complaining about the disconnect between pro-market political parties and “global reality” since the original Marxist sat in the Reading Room of the British Library riffing on the internal contradictions of capitalism, I was struck by Mr. Friedman’s sparkling way with words. I’m not a credentialed Professor of Prose Style at Columbia School of Journalism or anything, but, for the “it’s generally not a good sign ”/ “you know you’ve got a problem ” cliche to work, doesn’t the bit before it have to be something unexpected or unwanted? “When Fidel Castro’s hailing the GOP platform as just the ticket, it’s generally not a good sign.” That sort of thing.
Instead, Friedman goes on to peddle his usual globalist soft-core erotica, none of which Castro would support and none of which his enslaved people have any access to.
Oh, well. When right-wing loons are complaining that your opening paragraph is entirely disconnected from the rest of the column, presumably Thomas L. Friedman takes that as a good sign.
Castro's statement has some truth value.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFriedman, as usual, is precisely wrong. When Marxists are complaining, the world is a better place.
OK. I can go get my housework done. I've had my Mark Steyn fix. Truly. It helps going about the daily tasks knowing that there are men at the watchtowers whose vigilance we can trust and rely on.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"When right-wing loons are complaining"...
I thought it was right-wingnuts and left-wing loons. Could someone please give a tutorial on what we're supposed to call each other?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThat, or John.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt is very amusing...
Except the Marxists must of have been thrilled to see Newt Gingrich and some big names who market themselves in the Conservative arena employ leftist attacks on successful Private Enterprise in this Primary. Gingrich was basically mimicking the "occupy" movement with his ugly "looting" attacks.
Gingrich and a number of so-called Conservative Experts, were taking the GOP towards an anti-Free Market political entity, merely for pure political expediency. Gingrich's unethical folly has exposed the dysfunction amongst us. The shell game of identity politics is sinking the once powerful Conservative Movement.
Sarah Palin takes the cake, her self interest is on par with Gingrich, it knows no bounds. She is trying to sell a whopper, as if an deceitful Washington Beltway Insider of some 40 years, who even peddled influence to Fannie and Freddie, is some fantasy political "outsider".
It is a comedy of errors.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTom "The Twitching Mustache O' Truth" Friedman writes this stuff to keep his grandparents convinced the tuition money wasn't wasted.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIn which case, his grandparents are probably wishing they'd just gone ahead and purchased that condo with a view.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm sure all the Soviet leaders and "press" said the same about Reagan and Thatcher. Dangerous warmongers disconnected from the reality of the nuclear disarmament marchers, etc.
How did that turn out?
If being called an idiot by Castro and his ilk is wrong, I don't wanna be right.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseShame to spoil your excellent point with a trivial inaccuracy: the "original Marxist" sat in the Reading Room of the British Museum, not "British Library". The British Library exists in London, but it was only opened a few years ago.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"I was struck by Mr Friedman’s sparkling way with words."
Never mind the example you cite; take a look at his weak mishmash of superfluous detail he uses as his lede. Compare: "According to the Associated Press, Fidel Castro calls the 'selection of a Republican candidate for the presidency of this globalized and expansive empire...the greatest competition of idiocy and ignorance that has ever been.'" Thirty-four words versus Friedman's 69.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe more relevant observation, which curiously Thomas Friedman never raises, is why El Jefe Maximo withheld his endorsement of the President. Fidel must be anticipating somebody will primary Obama.
After all, just less than two years ago, El Commandante Castro was praising the passage of Obamacare, wasn't he?
As has been previously reported, Obama has been losing some key backers.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFriedman hops on a platter, garnishes it, stuffs a big apple in his mouth, and hands Steyn the carving knife.
Really, Mr. Steyn-- this one was just too easy!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseClunky, uneven prose from Tom. I'd have thought that he could write a more graceful sentence by now.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse