Sunday, May 10, 2009

It’s OK Because Friedman’s A Liberal

Tom Friedman’s advocacy of failed liberal policies is the only reason I can think of for why there isn’t “a firestorm” of criticism from Greenies and Progressives following this report by Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross at the San Francisco Chronicle's SF Gate blog - - -

Judging by the $75,000 speaking fee it paid to New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District has plenty of green to burn even in these lean times.

The agency, which gets its money from business permits and federal and state sources, booked the Pulitzer Prize-winning pundit to appear this past week at its big climate summit in downtown Oakland's Fox Theater, attended by 500 invited bureaucrats.

In addition to Friedman's speaking fee, the air board picked up his tab for a night at the
Claremont Resort.

Air district spokeswoman Lisa Fasano put the summit cost at $200,000 - or about $400 per participant.

Fasano said the idea was to bring together managers and planners to "spark even greater movement" in the effort to reduce the Bay Area's greenhouse-gas footprint.

Friedman spent about two hours with the group, including answering questions and autographing copies of his latest book, "Hot, Flat and Crowded" - in which he argues that a national strategy of "geo-Greenism" is needed to save the planet from global warming and to make the country more productive.

As for reports that Friedman's talk was almost identical to a speech he gave in November in Florida at a National League of Cities confab - which is available online for free?

"That very likely may be," Fasano said. "But this certainly is much more moving and inspirational to see and hear in person."

For that price, we hope so.


Question for Tom Friedman: What should your readers do who’ve saved those columns you’ve written about the need for the government to spend money wisely?

Another question for Tom Friedman: What’s that you’re always saying about the need for America to stop “lavishing money on itself” and instead spend it helping underdeveloped countries?

Suggeted title for Matier and Ross’ post: “Liberals in action.”


Anonymous said...

Grafs three and four are same as grafs five and six.
Tarheel Hawkeye

JWM said...

Dear TH,

Bless you.

I've deleted them.

You've given me one more reason to appreciate your comments at JinC.



Ken said...

The AQMDs here in California exist to provide employment for otherwise unemployable bureaucrats, to soak up large quantities of public money and to harass any heretics from the State's official religion, environmentalism. They, like the Coastal Commission and various other boards and agencies accomplish nothing but making our greenies feel good about themselves while causing chaos to property owners, businesses and anyone else who might be productive. California is approaching bankruptcy but we have money to throw away on lavish get togethers for the green elite.

At one time the AQMDs fought smog. Today they simply provide the lifestyle of the rich and famous to the favored few.