Naomi Klein assesses Obama's chief economic adviser Austan Goolsbee to be a University of Chicago economist on the left side of a spectrum that stops at the center-right, who, unlike his more Friedmanite colleagues, sees inequality as a problem. Klien tells us Goolsbee's primary solution is more education--a line you can also get from Alan Greenspan. Klein does not mention that Friedman also saw inequality as a problem. On page 54 of Friedman's book Capitalism and Freedom, you will that find his solution to inequality was to abolish fractional reserves and to stabilize the money supply. A stable money supply, versus an elastic money supply like we have today, would eliminate recessions/depressions that cause unemployment and loss of homes and small businesses. While touting themselves as Friedman adherents, the economists who rule our nation have allowed fractional reserves to mutate into hedge funds, subprime mortgage bundles, derivatives and currency issued on debt for collateral. Psychiatrist and author Scott Peck called this kind of action--that is, doing one thing while saying you are doing and believe another--the definition of evil. He called those who practice it the People of the Lie. There is no freedom without a stable money supply. Our current money supply is in no way compliant with the stable money dictated as lawful money in the Constitution. We the People have become the People of the Lie without even knowing it. Obama is a candidate of choice for a progressive uprising, but actually he and McCain are both just a continuation of all that is wrong with our nation!

Read my Choosing Honor, coming out on July 4!

Mary T. Ficalora
Avail Press

Calabasas, CA

Don't say we didn't tell you so.

Susan L. Petry

Durham, NC

Yup, Obama's a real conservative alright--so much so that he invited Joseph Stiglitz to be one of his advisers. Stiglitz turned him down, but he and fellow liberal economist Edmund Phelps endorsed Obama back in April.

Meanwhile, John McCain's advisers include Arthur "Laffer Curve" Laffer, Carly "trash two corporations, get platinum parachute" Fiorina and Phil "Just Eeeewww" Gramm.

Tamara Baker

St. Paul, MN

Gosh. Now Naomi Klein notices that Obama is not a progressive in domestic policy, has never been a progressive in domestic policy, progressives just assumed he was. Paul Krugman tried to tell us. Oh, well.

As to his stance on NAFTA, though his website claims he has always opposed it and that his adviser was incorrect, Canadian reporters stand by their story.

Leta Alexander

Miami, FL

Thank you, Ms. Klein. The last media sound bite that I heard from Obama was a sharp veer to Wall Street. I don't know that Wall Street is any better than K Street, but I wouldn't trust either one to have my best interests at heart. I can understand why Obama would have to pander to Wall Street, but it will bear watching to see if he begins pimping for the gluttons.

Ms. Klein: Please be ready for all the corporate apologists to come after you, but at least know that you do have an audience out here. Don't give up.

James Pinette

Caribou, ME

Ms. Klein has at least twice referenced a letter from the University of Chicago faculty criticizing the Milton Friedman Institute. Yet no such letter can be found online. I suggest that Ms. Klein produce said letter so that the public can evaluate its full content.

Michael Pouliot

Hampton Falls, NH

I am troubled by Naomi Klein's continuation of the NAFTA rumor. Obama's web site addresses this issue here.

Canadian Embassy Has Denied The Report. "A spokesman for the Canadian Embassy to the United States, Tristan Landry, flatly denied the CTV report that a senior Obama aide had told the Canadian ambassador not to take seriously Obama's denunciations of Nafta..."

“The news reports on Obama's position on NAFTA are inaccurate and in no way represent Senator Obama’s consistent position on trade. When Senator Obama says that he will forcefully act to make NAFTA a better deal for American workers, he means it."

So why continue this inaccurate or unverifiable rumor as fact?

Timothy J. Wright

Chicago, IL

06/15/2008 @ 5:47pm

"Now, just two years later, Friedman's name is seen as a liability even at his own alma mater." Wishful thinking on the part of Ms. Klein. The fact of the matter is, the classless signers of that "protest" were of the old-leftist ilk one would find in iron-fisted control of the tenured liberal arts jobs at most universities. And to assume conventional wisdom judges "free trade" discredited is to acknowledge the success of saying it enough and scaring people. Free Trade is a recent phenomenon, rising from the ashes and misery of collectivist states that mired billions in misery.

The state of the poor in China is not because of the business practices of Walmart or Nike or Hanes. But the anti-Friedman faculty represents the left's desire that conventional wisdom assume it as such.

The fact is that the economies of the world that have embraced Friedman economic philosophies have improved their standard of living. Additionally, the improvements in depressed societies like China are due to more acceptance of open markets and the liberty to trade and work. Even the long-smitten socialists of Europe have been moving more toward Friedman than Keynes. And the newly freed societies in Russia and Eastern Europe have shown more interest in free markets than the centralized horrors of redistributed resources, rations, long lines and the misery they all know it caused. Ironically, it’s the US via Obamamania that’s tilting the other way. As far as Obama goes, his economics will probably settle more toward pleasing the left of left center than Mr. Freidman’s group; it’s just a wonder why the man gets the ideological shoulder tap the moment he seems to explore an avenue of his Chicago days that aren’t truly embarrassing.

Hugh Maguire

New York, NY

I really disagree with Naomi Klein's assessment of Jason Furman. Furman's pick gives me confidence in Obama's abilities to pick great people.

I had the privilege of taking a Macroeconomics course with Jason Furman at Columbia University. He is a brilliant man and a great teacher, who explains economic concepts clearly and usefully. Obama should consider himself lucky to have someone of Furman's caliber on his team.

My Microeconomics professor, Richard Robb, was also from the University of Chicago, and is also brilliant. Neither of these two men are caught up in some Milton Friedman cult. They are both progressive in outlook and orientation. They both clearly understand economics. The law of supply and demand works whether you are conservative, liberal, socialist, whether you want it to work, whether you don't want it to work.

I find the Furman appointment reassuring, and I'm someone who regularly criticizes Obama from the left.

Dan Wentzel

Santa Monica, CA