Leftists knocking Friedman ?

I'm commenting on a recent long post which basically knocks 
Milton Friedman and claims that Paul Samuelson was his 'opponent'.
The author also falsely claims that Keynes' theories disprove Friedman.

I disagree on all three issues and suggest that the following analogy
is apt.
1.  the discovery and development of antibiotics was a great 
contribution to humanity.
2.  the discovery that pathogens become immune to antibiotics 
was a further great contribution.
3.  the later developed/ing methods of trying to manipulate
antibiotics usage to manage the problem of pathogens becoming 
   immune, is a further later refinement.

Analagously Keynes showed that/how government intervention
  could prevent the destructive trade-cycles common since antiquety.

 After some decades [eg. the 70's stagflation] the market anticipated
and became immune to the state manipulations.

Rightly so, Friedman pointed out that decades of post war lack of
 market discipline had had inevitable results, and that shock
 treatment had become necessary.

My reading of Samuelson, starting back in the 60s as an econ.
 student is that he understood the whole picture.

The leftist author, who's against globalisation, is right, as I guess
Friedman too fully realised, that "economics must be understood
within it's social context".  So yes, once the discipline of the
market was reduced after WWII, many parasites learned to work
the welfare system.   Nothing is constant, except that it takes
about 7 years to forget the lessons of the previous cycle, so the
economists/pathologists must just keep managing the mixture.

If the cause of the present/pending credit crisis had not been 
stimulation by Bush's reaction to 9/11: telling the people to 
'go out and shop', which promoted the disgusting expressions:
"shop till you drop", "Yea babe, I've maxed-out all my credit
cards", another later cause would have brought the inevitable
pandemic around.

Now that obsesty has replaced hunger as the 'economic' 
problem, a new paradigm is needed.  It's not new/revolutionary;
just it needs to be sold.   As Friedman refined Keynes, so we too
need to refine [away] the growth mantra.

Use different rules for different stages of a society/human-life:
when you're a child you need to grow, later it's called obesity and
even cancer.