Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

It Is Time to Send Maureen Dowd Packing

Posted by Don Hazen, AlterNet at 12:12 PM on August 15, 2008.


Journalism should be about afflicting the comfortable, and comforting the afflicted. Dowd just afflicts everyone.

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd has evolved into a destructive force. Her pieces are almost purely gossip, innuendo, and meanness; worst of all they are often wrong. I used to enjoy her writing; she was frequently funny, and her cutting take seemed more focused on the forces of evil. Now, more often than not, she is the evil, generating paranoia without a purpose -- her own brand of the politics of destruction.

Did something happen along the way to reprogram her writing brain? Was it the publishing of her book and how it was received that has stimulated her inner misanthrope? The work she has been producing is not good journalism or op-ed writing. I don't know what her family was like growing up, but it must have been pretty vicious -- playing gotcha all the time, and forcing her to make stuff up as she went along.

So a thank you to Salon's Joan Walsh, who today gleefully writes:

I'm always happy when events conspire to prove that a nasty Maureen Dowd column was fantasy as quickly as possible. It only took a day to disprove her fanciful depiction of Hillary Clinton trying to topple Obama in Denver, "Yes, She Can."

Dowd was pushing the line that Billary and their forces were at work to undermine the Obama effort by insisting on a separate roll-call vote. But it seems that Barack and Hillary can actually get along when the chips are down.

The Clinton and Obama campaigns announced jointly that her name will be put into nomination Wednesday, Aug. 27, in Denver, and there will be a roll-call vote. The two teams are still working out the mechanics, a Clinton aide said, but it looks like each state will announce its tally for both candidates "I am convinced that honoring Senator Clinton's historic campaign in this way will help us celebrate this defining moment in our history and bring the party together in a strong united fashion," Obama said in the campaign statement.

The role of Dowd in the larger political landscape is increasingly a topic of hand-wringing.

Booman of the Booman Tribune is irate about those people who are stuck in time and still believe that Dowd is a member of the left.

This is a message to my old friends trapped in amber. Maureen Dowd doesn't root for Democrats. She uses her column to mock Democrats, drive wedges between Democrats, and to reinforce negative stereotypes about Democrats.

But Booman's real message is that Dowd is all about destruction.

While the column [same one Walsh is writing about above] is ostensibly about the Clintons' 'solipsistic' behavior, the real motivating force is to light a match to the raw feelings that have carried forward in the Obama and Clinton camps from the primary.

Booman adds:

It's August 13th. Dowd does two columns a week. If she doesn't take any time off, she'll write thirty-three more columns between now and the election. I guarantee you that the majority of them will not be helpful to the cause of Barack Obama.

And how many will criticize John McCain?

So yes, Dowd's column gets read a lot -- she is frequently at the top of the list of most read articles in the Times -- but is this all that matters to the Times? Things are bad enough in society that we don't need to celebrate viciousness twice a week in one of the most powerful editorial platforms in news. Journalism should be about afflicting the comfortable, and comforting the afflicted, but Dowd's writing is about afflicting everyone, without a purpose in sight.

Digg!

Tagged as: journalism, clinton, obama, new york times, mccain, maureen dowd

Don Hazen is the executive editor of AlterNet.


Study Shows 'Center-Right Nation' Narrative Spiked Immediately After Election Day
We're not talking about theory anymore - we're talking about empirical fact.
Post by David Sirota. November 21, 2008.
Will Gen. Jim Jones Be Obama's National Security Advisor?
Although not as bad as keeping Gates as Secretary of Defense it would still be a very disappointing selection.
Post by Chris Bowers. November 21, 2008.
Obama's (Rumored) Pick for Secretary of the Treasury Makes Wall Street Happy
He's going to be the Secretary of the Treasury in the midst of a financial crisis, so it's probably worth taking the time to get to know him.
Post by Steve Benen. November 21, 2008.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Thomas Friedman first!
Posted by: fanny666 on Aug 15, 2008 2:14 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dowd is just a gossip columnist. She is not to be taken seriously. On the other hand, Thomas Friedman has never met a war he doesn't like. I say we make sure he gets fired within the next 6 months.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thomas Friedman first! Posted by: weenie
You'd have to be living in a cave for the past 10 years
Posted by: Quannah on Aug 15, 2008 2:21 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
not to already know this about Maureen Dowd. This is the same schtick she's been writing for over a decade now... and you're just now realizing this?

MoDo should have been gone a long time ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MoDo's Mojo?
Posted by: davidt on Aug 15, 2008 5:51 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
MoJo comes from a conservative Irish family and her father was a cop.

She started to give Duhh some well-deserved criticism and she got dirty looks from her family & their friends (both of them!)

Never married, doesn't date--at least during the time of Bushworld she wasn't. I never made it through the whole book I got tired of all the literary embroidery.

She likes to put on airs and I am sure sees herself as THE political maven of NYC, if not the US.

I think some time off & a stint in the military would do her a world of good. Or volunteer work.

MoJo is just tired. She is the type that will half-brag "I don't get out much...and I'm PROUD of it. After all, by the looks of things, I'm not missing much. I can stick knitting needles in my OWN eyes if I want to."

But the real story is she thinks that she is sticking them in other people's eyes aka her targets du jour, but she IS sticking the needles in her own eyes.

Dowdy is getting dowdy.

David T. Gray
Claremont, NH

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: MoDo's Mojo? Posted by: james_allen
» RE: MoDo's Mojo? Posted by: weathered
Dowd's an insult to my intellignce but...
Posted by: rancespergl on Aug 15, 2008 6:02 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think Brooks, Kristol and Friedman are more destructive in their intellectually-based fantasylands.

Any one of them meeting with an unfortunate accident would go a long way towards rectifying...something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What about the Times?
Posted by: BobbieP on Aug 15, 2008 7:21 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They hire and fire all the people we love to hate. It's their show. How does that make you feel about the Times? Are they really liberal?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Are they really liberal? Posted by: Sparks56
MoDo, Tommy Freedom, David Brooksie, and Willy Kristol
Posted by: Thebigkate on Aug 15, 2008 8:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am with Fanny666 and the other comment about the NY Times Op-Ed writers. Maureen Dowd is a satirical, sassy Cassandra, but it is easy to disagree with or, or simply to dismiss her. Not so with Thomas Friedman (aka Tommy Freedom), David Brooks and William Kristol. They are pretend seriousers (or perhaps serious pretenders), and push the Neo-Con agenda in subtle and not so subtle ways at every opportunity! I think Friedman, especially, is a dangerous writer--he is rich and has lots of power! And he was instrumental at the NYT in planning and cheering for the Iraq occupation! In fact, he had his own plans--called "Tom's War!" How about that for some crazy narcissism??? That is the guy to get rid of. Just laugh or get mad at MoDo! But follow the Neo-Con money!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» don't forget Bob Herbert! Posted by: Moira61
Liam on the Left
Posted by: Liam on Aug 15, 2008 10:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just got so tired of the NYT and their idiot right wingers I canceled it - screw 'em - Frank Rich can only carry them for so long.

Most of these media losers live in another world and only know what the power elite tells them!

ITT - The Nation - Harpers - Jim Hightower - and watch Keith O - Seek the truth and it shall set you free!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Liam on the Left Posted by: Quannah
Chas Madden
Posted by: ChasMan on Aug 15, 2008 11:34 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Come On and Take A FREE Ride!
I haven't even taken "the time" on this occasion to read Maureen Dowd... And, I read her column... But, it was just a matter of time before (someone else) called her on her writing... Thought I would allow somebody else to say it... Stupid B-R-O-A-D... You were W-R-O-N-G long ago when you would appear on Imus... Dumb Broad! The FREE RIDE is over... And, I didn't have to be the first to say so. And, I still haven't read (and won't read) this latest whatever (shame on you) "ck" "bs" "gar-bage" you have written that is the conseqence for comment. And, I (regretfully) will not. You use to be a somebody...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Chas Madden Posted by: jimidee
» RE: Chas Madden Posted by: helenwheels
Chas Madden
Posted by: ChasMan on Aug 15, 2008 11:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
YES! Friedman... another who should have long ago been "called-on"... Smug A-hole.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hey, Don Hazen. Here's a solution to your problem with Maureen Doud.
Posted by: HughScott on Aug 16, 2008 2:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't read her shit!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obamillary?
Posted by: ankhet on Aug 16, 2008 2:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"it seems that Barack and Hillary can actually get along when the chips are down."

This really isn't a good sign, is it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Obamillary? Posted by: jimidee
Why do we read them?
Posted by: zippoflash on Aug 16, 2008 3:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We waste far too much time fulminating over the utterances of idiots. They have no clothes. Let's move on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dowd should go
Posted by: janelynne on Aug 16, 2008 3:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I thought it was me. I went from reading her twice a week to avoiding everything she writes. Dowd has became utterly paranoid, over Hillary. I have been trying to figure out if Maureen is being encouraged by the NY Times and others to peddle an inverted political premise, a la Joe Leiberman, or if we are watching someone's journalism career slowing slipping away. My eye is on the editors.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dowd should go Posted by: Lauren
New York Times - correction to factual error
Posted by: Lauren on Aug 16, 2008 4:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Correction to the New York Times this morning. It was printed that there was no effort to impeach Pelosi. Wrong. Here it is:

Sign a Petition to the US House of Representatives

Because the Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has failed to take her oath of office seriously we signatories are asking the House to vote to either impeach her or replace her with a Representative who will take his or her oath seriously.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Nancy Pelosi is weak Posted by: janelynne
[YAWN!]
Posted by: soowee on Aug 16, 2008 5:40 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Po' widdle liberals boo-hoo about being picked on by Marueen Dowd! That she should DARE to point out that their hallowed icons also have feet of clay is not to be tolerated by the desperate lefties still pining for control of the White House, irrespective of the cost to their own integrity.

Bush is not the only creep on the planet, although he gives a good imitation thereof. Certain "liberal" icons like the Clintons and Barack Obama are just as creepy. I am sorry to have to say that about Obama, but his recent declarations of intent to EXPAND Bush's "faith-based" nonsense, and his votes for FISA and the USA PATRIOT Act are creepy, indeed.

The self-important "liberals" of this universe better get real. Their plaster saints are mired in the same ol' mud.

H. Watkins Ellerson
PO Box 90
Hadensville, VA 23067
(804) 457-4243

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: [YAWN!] Posted by: jimidee
» RE: jimidee Posted by: soowee
» RE: jimidee Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Lauren Posted by: soowee
» RE: jimidee Posted by: Quannah
» RE: jimidee Posted by: jimidee
Amen to the call for Dowd's departure
Posted by: ekinney on Aug 16, 2008 5:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for your call for Dowd's departure. Her "journalism" is not a contribution especially since it is often not true.

EDK

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And you actually BELIEVED that Obama really wanted to say that?
Posted by: jimidee on Aug 16, 2008 5:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hogwash! The last thing that the Obama campaign wanted to have to do was to have a roll call for Hillary at the convention...think about it. How could that possibly seem like it was bringing the Dems together and make Obama appear stronger to the average Joe in Scranton, Penn.? Or Morning Joe, for that matter, who will have a field day with this. MoDo was right-on in her article.

Like MoDo says about the Clintons, "their solipsistic behavior is “disgusting.”"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And who says it is not true...
Posted by: jimidee on Aug 16, 2008 5:54 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it looks spot on to me. Only some Clinton supporter would say that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clinton IS trying to take down Obama- Wants 2012
Posted by: Purple Girl on Aug 16, 2008 6:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please get your Clinton machine manufactured rose colored glasses off your face!
Hillary endorsed McCain in the Primary (buddy from the Armed Services Com (con)
Hillary parroted Mac's "Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran"...'Obliterate Iran'????
Hillary was the cross bearer for the Oxymoron, historical re writing, of 'Reagan Democrats'- No such beast lived Then or Now!
Bill & Geraldine threw the Racist card
Used the Womens Movement to divide & Conquer those who are poponents of Equal Rights!Pitting Gender against Race- an Ideolgical atrocity!!
HER Big Corp Donors and Advisors (Minions) are flooding his campaign- an Ultimatium?Take them or feel their wrath
She refuses to reqest a $1.25 for her 18 million supporter to clear her debt- instead is trying tosuck money of Obama's small donors
She has not conceded, Not releasd her delegates and now she has gotten a Roll Call at the Convention!!
I voted for Bill 2x's in the '90's, I was an AVID defender of both- I LikeD Hillary and would have voted for her still in'04.BUT she has changed (or revealed her true self) Just like McCain (who I used to respect too).
Get a Clue Hillary is DICK in Drag- She has used the Handbook given to her by Cheney Corp and has Merged with His Regime!
Hillary's RED SLIP was showing the entire campaign. Penn developed, perfected and handed over all their work to Mac's handlers for their Use Now!
If it looks, acts & walks like a Duck....It's a fucking Duck!!
Dowd may have some strange ideas lately- but she hit the nail on the head with this one- didn't take a politcal science major to figure this one out!Hell Mac has already promised her only one term if he 'Wins'- the drool on her chin is apparent!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wipe the Koolaid from Your Lip Posted by: Purple Girl
MoDo just a dodo, but Brooks, Kristol and Friedman are dangerous.
Posted by: thornwolf on Aug 16, 2008 6:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maureen Dowd's columns are just a bunch of swirling hot air. She likes to hear herself sound off. She's become her own personal entertainment venue, I suppose. It's quite tiring, actually, which is why I pass her up now. A clever turn of phrase without some substance underpinning it is just cleverness, certainly not valuable insight.

The truly dangerous Times columnists are the racist ivory-tower knee-jerk reactionary snob David Brooks (living in a private dream world completely divorced from reality), the fact-free knee-jerk reactionary intellectual snob William Kristol (probably the most consistently wrong prognosticator of all time), and the pseudo-liberal war-loving reactionary snob Thomas Friedman (who never hesitates to move his line in the sand whenever the facts disagree with his fantasy).

All these from the NY Times, which gave us (without apology!) the war-mongering BushCo shill Judith Miller. Like my 3rd-grade teacher used to say, consider the source.

Bob Herbert seems like an honest man with a brain. He elevates the Times by his presence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» In praise of Krugman Posted by: thornwolf
Cut and Run?
Posted by: oakgroveinn on Aug 16, 2008 6:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's all the fuss, Don Hazen? Chill! I'm a 53-year-old teacher and writer and Maureen Dowd is a known quantity I can handle. I agree that the tone of much of her work, especially during this campaign, has made me wince. Much of it has also made me smile, wryly. Her allegiance to the beleaguered female candidate in the middle of the room is out of the closet along with her increasingly hard-bitten bachelorette status. And there's her (imho) plebian bedazzlement with celebrity news. But I enjoy the hell out of her sharp skills in deft satire and literary allusion. She is one of the few columnists I like to parse gently to enjoy her wordsmithing like gourmet food. So get a grip, Don Hazen et al. "MoDo" isn't a campaign buzzkill. We have many more dastardly foes at the door.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

bennel62
Posted by: bennel62 on Aug 16, 2008 6:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dowd's been unreadable for the past year. She has completely lost it -- her once meager talent for writing an op-ed column.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maureen provides spice to afflict the booring
Posted by: bill@wwilliam.com on Aug 16, 2008 6:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I’ll always be indebted to MD for her observation that Conoliza Rice is George Bushe’s foreign policy wonk and workout partner. Nobody has said it better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Her Real Role
Posted by: Mo MoDo on Aug 16, 2008 7:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dowd conflicts that afflicted and afflicts the conflicted.

Hillary's speech at the convention will not be and endorsement of Barack, but will be the kick-off of her 2012 campaign.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Like, whatever dude... Posted by: form5166
Not so 'Mighty Mo' NO MO...
Posted by: Urmutt on Aug 16, 2008 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I used to LOVE Maureen Dowd and even referred to her as 'MIGHTY MO' because I took so much delight at her DESERVED Bashing of the Bushies.

But I started to go off her also some time ago when I realized she had become just an Equal Opportuniy 'Basher' with obviously no real Ideology of her own other than Bashing itself.

I would also agree with the comment writer who critized her for her "literary embroidery". We got serious PROBLEMS going on in this world and the last thing we need is references to Jane Austin and the Bard that seem to serve no purpose other than to bolster Mo's Ego and prove what a good education she got. It's gotten to be a tired 'formula'...

And OH YES, while she's been busy knocking any one and every one about, she should be aware that Frank Rich knocked HER out of the Box a long time ago in the realm of what we can call an Objective Journalism of CONSCIENCE...

But perhaps the best advice we could pass on to Mo, is that "Maybe it's time to BURY that Shilalagh your DA 'Brought from Ireland'. A bit more compassionate Estrogen and a lot Less Testosterone would become ye Lass. We got an excess of the latter fouling our atmosphere as it is these days..."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think it's fun!
Posted by: writemrbond on Aug 16, 2008 7:27 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I disagree. I enjoy her comments on Billary and think that you'll be surprised in Denver as Bill and Hill seek to keep themselves in the spotlight as long as possible. I think you guys are underestimating their egos and slamming Dowd unjustly. She has been spot on in her assessment of the sore loser Hillary supporters throughout the campaign. I know quite a few of them, and they are in fact as she describes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Huh? the article is quotes ABOUT Dowd, but the problem, in part, is gossip?
Posted by: Beck on Aug 16, 2008 7:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why not have a article that actually has quotes from Dowd and refute them? I didn't think from the title that the article would consist of what others think of her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I Still Love Her
Posted by: grokagain on Aug 16, 2008 7:36 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So she's like me, a humanistic misanthrope. Humanity has a way of constantly letting you down so I relate. To me she's gorgeous and brilliant. Oh how I would love to take the lady to dinner.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One column a week for all.
Posted by: whealeydj on Aug 16, 2008 7:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
who reads Dowd regularly? Brooks and Kristol are much worse. I think NYT should double the op ed columnists and halve the biweekly columns. It will sharpen their writing and get more people chance at the microphone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maureen Dowd - the modern Erma Bombeck
Posted by: war_on_tara on Aug 16, 2008 8:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Why don't men ask for directions?" Ha ha ha!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ridiculous subhead wrecks this analysis before it starts
Posted by: derekclontz on Aug 16, 2008 8:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The subhead on this opinion piece - "Journalism should be about afflicting the comfortable, and comforting the afflicted. Dowd just afflicts everyone" - is ridiculous on the face of it and discredits this "analysis" before it starts.
Just to dot the i's and cross the t's, journalism is about pursuing and disseminating, to the extent that it is humanly possible, facts and, as some people might characterize it, "the truth" ... at which point the chips, rightly, ought fall where they may.
Journalism is not about "comforting the afflicted." That was Mother Teresa's job. Journalism is not about "afflicting the comfortable." That's better left to know-it-alls, ego-maniacs, the sophomoric and the self-righteous.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Have a heart ... for yourself
Posted by: QCao009 on Aug 16, 2008 8:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Come on, guys and gals. In this day and age of self-incrimination and delusion, we need more cult figures like Maureen. We were laughing at her when she made fun of Bush, didn't we ?

It's not us the afflicted by MD's writing we should worry about. We should be compassionate about her. She is self-afflicted and a few minutes on the couch with Dr. Phil or Oprah is just what is called for. That or take two Valiums and talk to Rush in the morning. Treat venom with poison and all will be restored to equilibrium and harmony !!! In the meantime, there's a campaign to be lost, people to pester and tyrants to depose...obviously nothing as important as MoDo. And we say we are better than the mainstream gossip garbage !!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Look back, way back, at her first columns
Posted by: 113121 on Aug 16, 2008 8:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Back when Bill Clinton first got elected she spent most of her ink trashing Hilary and bragging about her ultra conservative family. She had an affair with Raines a married man who gave her the job at the Times. Her job there now is to trash whatever and whoever. I quit the Times back during the fake Whitewater crap they printed without offering any corrections. If I need to look at the Times I take one out of the recycling box. Seriously,it's the same fake stories day after day for weeks at a time. How anyone could trust them after Judith Miller is beyond my understanding.When we were children we were told that Pravda wasn't a real newspaper.I guess that's what Bush saw when he looked into Putin's soul.When they give Rachel Maddow a regular column I'll reconsider.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Does no one notice?
Posted by: ajmartin on Aug 16, 2008 11:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why does no one note that she is a lousy writer? I find it hard to understand why she is employed at the NYTimes or anywhere.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »]