Skip to main content

NYT's Friedman Bemoans 'False Indignation' at Rosen's Slam of Ann Romney

Matthew Balan's picture

On Friday's CBS This Morning, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman did his best to brush aside the controversy over liberal diehard Hilary Rosen's attack on Ann Romney, claiming that the issue was "our latest example of false indignation." Friedman also defended the class warfare argument of the frequent visitor of the Obama White House: "I think everyone knows the point Hilary Rosen was trying to make."

The left-leaning columnist also claimed that the defense of Mrs. Romney was a cynical ploy for the votes of women: "When you have a close race like this, that is so close, you need every vote, particularly if you're in Romney's casenineteen points behind on women – you're going to seize on anything...this was a chance to jump on it- you know, use it as a wedge issue, get some more votes." [audio clips available here; video below the jump]

Friedman had been brought on for his take on North Korea's recent missile launch, but since his segment immediately followed correspondent Norah O'Donnell's report on the Rosen firestorm (where the CBS journalist played up the supposed "gender canyon" between President Obama and Mitt Romney), anchor Charlie Rose led by asking about the controversy: "You watch American politics pretty do you size up what this is and what it says about the campaign and the way American politics work?"

The writer immediately launched his attack on Republicans/conservatives defense of the mother of five:

Thomas Friedman, New York Times Columnist; & Charlie Rose, CBS News Anchoe | NewsBusters.orgFRIEDMAN: Well, Charlie, it strikes me- this is our latest example of false indignation of- oh, my God- you know, what did, you know, Hilary Rosen say today about women? I think what you're seeing here- it's not that there was an important point- but when you have a close race like this, that is so close, you need every vote, particularly if you're in Romney's case – nineteen points behind on women – you're going to seize on anything. I think everyone knows the point Hilary Rosen was trying to make, but this was a chance to jump on it- you know, use it as a wedge issue, get some more votes. It's going to be like this, I think, every day.

Rose followed up by asking, "You see this as both an important race, but also a close race?" Friedman replied by bewailing the apparent state of the presidential contest: "It's hugely important, but it's the way it's being fought. Now, both guys are looking for 50.00001 percent to win. Nobody's going big here. This is going to be about these little issues, unfortunately."

The stagnant economy and how women are affected by it is a "little issue"? If anything, it's Rosen, Friedman, and their fellow travelers on the left who are using wedge issues, such as the alleged "war on women", and their tried and true use of class warfare and the race card.

Over a week earlier, on April 2, 2012, the New York Times columnist slammed Mitt Romney on NBC's Meet the Press by hinting that even the native peoples of New Zealand and Australia were mocking the former Massachusetts governor: "I just came back from New Zealand, okay? I mean, you have people living in the outback of Australia who look at Mitt Romney and say, 'Ha, ha. Not authentic.' I is just so obvious."

[Update: The transcript of the relevant portion of the Thomas Friedman segment, which began seven minutes into the 7 am Eastern hour of Friday's CBS This Morning, can be found at]


#1 Like the "False Indignation"-Turned-"War-on-Women" . . .

. . . that the Obama Campaign and DNC threw at the RCC and GOP when the RCC objected to the contraceptive mandate violating their religious freedom.

#2 Neither is Friedman

Friedman should watch his own " authenticity". What a buffoon. My Finlaw and Minlaw think he is ths smartest man alive in media. That is why I try to see less and less of them each year.

 "A lot of briefing for a 2 hr. special with Dan Rather. Saw the show & wonder why we bothered".             Ronald Reagan                                                           

#3 "...19 points behind on women

"...19 points behind on women ... "
BS flag, fifteen yards and loss of down!
Today's Rasmussen poll shows Obama ahead by 6 points with women, Romney ahead 6 points with men.
From today's Rasmussen report: "In a hypothetical Election 2012 matchup, Mitt Romney earns 48% of the vote, while President Obama attracts 44%. "
Not exactly a ringing endorsement for either candidate, certainly not for Teh Won, the Lightworker, Healer of the Planet, Lowerer of Sea Levels, President for Life, Ear Leader, Tsar Obama 1.

"A communist is someone who reads Marx.  An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx."  Ronald Reagan

#4 Friedman says

I think everyone knows the point Hilary Rosen was trying to make. She was saying that Mitt Romney was dumb a** for listening to a stay at home Mother.

#5 Yeah, that about sums it

Yeah, that about sums it up.

Keep talking Democrats.

#6 One of the great sources of

One of the great sources of entertainment this summer will be to watch lefty slaggers like Friedman on constant cleanup duty, sweeping up the messes the Obama team will leave all over the place.

"This is not your mother's Democratic Party"--Andrew Breitbart, CPAC, February 2012

#7 Reality

If the successful jobs and wealth creation Romney directed in private industry and public life were in part to listening to Ann then I hope Mitt keeps listening. Whoever Obama's been listening to - Moochelle, Mrs. Alinski, or Mrs. Marx - has given really bad advice.

#8 Shack! Hoist the Bravo Zulu Flags! Fire for Effect!

Shack is what AF bomber crews like to hear after completing target attacks.

The Navy likes to see the B Z flags which signify a bullseye.

Fire for Effect is what the Army says when you're on target and they want you to keep them coming.

"Fighters are fun but bombers make policy"

#9 Mr Balan

What does it take to properly call Friedman a Leftist columnist instead of "Left-leaning" columnist?  Friedman's leaned so far that he's in the next zip code.

#10 LOL

Haha, yeah, I like to change up the labels a bit, instead of the usual "liberal" and "leftist."

#11 Variety

Variety may be the spice of life but these Leftists are so spicy they have given me heartburn.

Like Ford and his model T, wasn't it common car joke in the USSR that you can have any color you want as long as it's black? Through his many columns on what's wrong with America, as well as praise of China's Communism, Friedman displays he does not believe in the fundamental political structure America was found on, for which modern Conservatism is the closest political ideology to the Founding Fathers. As such, I'd rather call Friedman what he truly is in the tradition of the one-size-fits-all of fellow travelers - a Leftist.

#12 Friedman is "wife" to a

Friedman is "wife" to a reeeeal rich woman...who would listen to the p-ssy anyway? He's a joke. He thinks the gubmint in China is better that ours...First class A-hole!!

#13 Friedman is a stay-at-home Obamabot.

He lives sequestered in a palatial Maryland Mansion (ha ha, Maryland Mansion... get it?) and phones it in to the "New York" Times.

I wonder how he pronounces 'thumb'... tum?

#14 11,400 Square Feet

Even some Greenies don't appreciate the 1%'er Friedmans

Possible reason Tommy-boy is a little pissed off at capitalism - his wife's family fortune was reduced to a pittance less than $25 million.

#15 Just curious. But how many

Just curious. But how many polls show Romney down19 points among women?
Which ones? What do the internals look like?

#16 Tom's career was built on HIS false indignation.

He hyperventilates like an emphysema patient on every issue and at every conservative. His entire life is an exercise in manufactured outrage, astroturfed political causes and movements, and delusions of self-importance.

If you ever need to know what the right thing to do is, just do the opposite of Friedman. He's not completely useless--the world needs bad examples like him to use when warning children, "Don't do that or you'll end up a crackpot like Tom Friedman."

#17 Define indignation*

Explain this indignation Mr Friedman!

Let's see, Ms Rosen worked for Human Rights Campaign and was there while Sandra Fluke was working at a "sub group" of HRC. Then Ms Rosen and her partner adopt twins so she decides to be a SAHM for awhile. Her partner leaves her so she goes back to work as a consultant for Anita Dunn who then connects her with Debbie Blabbermouthshultz. After 35 visits to the white house, out comes Ms Fluke and goes bust, so enters Ms Rosen, who goes bust. And we all know how well Ms Rosen's "consulting" has helped Ms Shultz....LOLOLOL

#18 I see her point

"I think everyone knows the point Hilary Rosen was trying to make."

I see the point she was trying to make: she's a hypocrite! After complaining that women can't even afford to pay for their own contraceptives, let alone afford to raise a family, she bemoans a woman who can because of a loving husband who provided for not only his wife, but his entire family as well! According to Rosen, Mrs. Romney is the stupid one for choosing a husband who isn't a dead-beat, who does provide for his family, how actually CARES about his wife!

Well, hay, who's the stupid one here, the woman who chose a husband who doesn't provide for a family or the one who did?

By the way, Tom, did YOUR mom stay at home to raise you, likw most mom's have done thoughtout the history of mankind?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court

Or Anwar al-Awlaki.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.