Note how it is always the U.S. that must come bearing the olive branch, taking the steps to heal wounds

Like the Belmont Club (see posting below), New Sisyphus has an outstanding comment on Thomas Friedman's Thursday article in the New York Times:

As a liberal bellwether, Friedman represents the ultimate in conventional wisdom (the good ol' CW). The CW is hopelessly naive about Palestinian intentions; Friedman is hopelessly naive about Palestinian intentions. The CW is that any foreign policy challenge or setback is due to some American failure; Friedman is pretty sure that any foreign policy challenge or setback is obviously due to some American failure. The CW is that Democratic policy provisions are always altruistically motivated and self-evidently good; Friedman thinks that.....well, you get the idea.

Yesterday's Friedman column, An American in Paris, is an exemplar of the genre. Chock full of cliches, lame metaphors and tired thinking--the kind one would expect from a political science professor at Evergreen State College--it was just crying our for a Fisking.

So, without further ado, please follow us to Friedmanland, where everything is always America's fault, Saudi princes have bona fide peace plans and if only Likud would retire from politics the Middle East would be an oasis of peace, science and industry!

…Note how in Friedmanland, it is always the U.S. that must come bearing the olive branch, taking the steps to heal wounds. It's almost as if France, Germany and Russia had absolutely nothing to do with the trans-Atlantic rift by their ridiculously transparent pro-Saddam stonewalling! Nope, France's diplomats can circle the globe stirring up anti-American animosity, but it's all Bush's fault, isn't it? After all, we all know there is no evidence (*cough* oil-for-food *cough*) that parts of Europe were profiting handsomely from the Saddam trade.