Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

May 7, 2008
By: Kevin Drum

CRUSHING THE BUTTERFLY....I generally try not to read Maureen Dowd's columns because, you know, they just don't pay me enough for that kind of hazard duty. But today's column about Hillary Clinton was a train wreck of epic proportions. I couldn't avert my eyes. Here's the final sentence:

As she makes a last frenzied and likely futile attempt to crush the butterfly [i.e., Barack Obama], it's as though she's crushing the remnants of her own girlish innocence.

This would be embarrassing coming from a 12-year-old. Shouldn't Dowd have an obscure blog, not a biweekly column in the greatest newspaper in the world?

Kevin Drum 12:37 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (96)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

The biggest problem I have with la Dowd is that she doesn't write her columns to organize coherent information....everything is crafted with the goal of creating as many "witty phrases and word plays" as possible in the space of a single column.

It is like eating cotton candy....no real substance remains after consumption.

Posted by: dweb on May 7, 2008 at 12:41 PM | PERMALINK

"not a biweekly column in the greatest newspaper in the world?"
The former greatest newspaper in the world. It has since descended into junk media status.

Posted by: bigTom on May 7, 2008 at 12:44 PM | PERMALINK

Wow, I generally avoid the NYT's opinion page but on your prompting I clicked through. Thanks. a. lot. Kevin.

Posted by: Chris on May 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM | PERMALINK

I've read the NYT for years. It's a great paper with a few flaws. Dowd's smarminess is mind-boggling. Their decision to retain her is as poor as their decision to hire Kristol.

Posted by: steve s on May 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM | PERMALINK

Back before the internet, Dowd had a good gig as the flip and savvy pundit who could come up with telling personal info and quick and dirty psychological insights, as opposed to heavy wonkish analysis. In the internet world there are millions of commentators who, collectively, will come up with keener insights, funnier lines, and more specialized knowledge, and they'll do it quicker. If it's good people willl pass it around at the speed of electrons. Whatever she can come up with, someone is likely to have said on a blog somewhere even before she sits down to write her column. So to keep her job, she has to be more "out there" with her columns, to swing for bigger and riskier hits than ever before. Overall, the results aren't pretty.

Posted by: N.Wells on May 7, 2008 at 12:48 PM | PERMALINK

She didn't get the memo. Hillary bashing is so OVER. Now it's all graciousness in victory - and how can those low-information voters not respond to that kindness? But - they probably don't read the NYT, if they do read. No harm, no foul.

Posted by: ClareA on May 7, 2008 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

I think Dowd's whole point was to use the words "frenzied", "butterfly", and "girlish" in the same sentence. It didn't matter if it made any sense - she's wants to be NY Times next puzzle editor.

Posted by: RobertSeattle on May 7, 2008 at 12:56 PM | PERMALINK

Maureen needs to go into detox. If we're lucky, she'll speedball herself into the next dimension before the election.

Posted by: searcy on May 7, 2008 at 12:57 PM | PERMALINK

Dowd criticized Obama as bitter, while George Will criticized him as elitist. My own feeling is we have too many self-ahating columnists.

Posted by: fafner1 on May 7, 2008 at 12:59 PM | PERMALINK

dowd writes for the FT now? (sarcasm)

Posted by: larrybob on May 7, 2008 at 1:00 PM | PERMALINK

Greatest newspaper on Earth?

Seriously KD, put Inkblot behind the keyboard because at least then I get something coherent.

Posted by: MNPundit on May 7, 2008 at 1:01 PM | PERMALINK

Leave the kitties out of this, MNPundit.

Seriously, Kevin. "The Greatest Newspaper in the World"? Isn't this Keith Olberman's beat?

Posted by: faffo on May 7, 2008 at 1:08 PM | PERMALINK

"the greatest newspaper in the world"

Wait, when did she get a column in the Financial Times?

Posted by: IMU on May 7, 2008 at 1:11 PM | PERMALINK

HEY! Some of us take pride in work done on obscure blogs.

Posted by: Megan on May 7, 2008 at 1:20 PM | PERMALINK

"biweekly" means once every two weeks. I think Kevin meant "semiweekly". A biweekly Dowd column would be an improvement. Of course, a bimillennial column would be a still greater improvement. Someone suggest that to the NYT, please.

Posted by: J on May 7, 2008 at 1:20 PM | PERMALINK

"Butterfly" is a kind of flat-panel vibrator. Interesting that Dowd has named hers "Obama."
.

Posted by: Grand Moff Texan on May 7, 2008 at 1:20 PM | PERMALINK

I love this line:

"Obama is like her idealistic, somewhat naïve self before the world launched 1,000 attacks against her, turning her into the hard-bitten, driven politician who has launched 1,000 attacks against Obama."

Since Maureen launched at least half of those attacks herself against Hillary (and has started in on Obama), it shows a remarkable lack of self-awareness.

Posted by: Teresa on May 7, 2008 at 1:20 PM | PERMALINK

Her column should be called "Phoning it In."

Posted by: clb72 on May 7, 2008 at 1:21 PM | PERMALINK

Her column should be called "Phoning it In."

No, I like it the way it is: "Democrats Don't Make Me Wet."

Don't mess with perfection.
.

Posted by: Grand Moff Texan on May 7, 2008 at 1:22 PM | PERMALINK

Classic stuff from the Worlds Greatest Feminist Concern Troll. Strength and drive in a woman equate with cynicism and ambition, and loss of innocence.

The thing is, the world of bowling alleys, boilermakers and blue-collar workers IS where Hillary comes from. For me, that makes her stuff quite a bit less cynical.

Posted by: Doctor Jay on May 7, 2008 at 1:25 PM | PERMALINK

Dowd's style appeals to some people - I've never met such a person, but I'm sure they exist. And the NYT doesn't want it's Op-Ed page to be ALL pseudo-intellectual nerds - AEI and Brookings plants lamenting Arab failings, and Thomas Friedmans telling Muslims to suck it. That would be kind of a downer.

I'm not quite old enough to know, but I'd guess the NYT wasn't ever what people here would like it to be. Aren't newspapers written on a "smart high-schooler" level? One big difference might just be that, now, there are places where critics can congregate easily.

If newspapers were just kind of uniformly stupid and frivolous, they'd be more harmless. It's their biases which are dangerous, IMO.

Posted by: flubber on May 7, 2008 at 1:28 PM | PERMALINK

"the greatest newspaper in the world"..Indeed? A megaphone for those giant intellects Kristol and Friedman. The NYT is the Titanic of the corporate news business. Its an accident of omission waiting to happen.

Posted by: anon on May 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, at least we should give Dowd credit for a science fiction reference, shouldn't we? (I know you've got SF lovers among your base, Kevin.) I believe the literary allusion she's using here is to Ray Bradbury's "A Sound of Thunder", and I'm pretty sure it implies Hillary's a fascist.

Posted by: Ryan on May 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

The very fact that the NYT has columnists like the unreadable Dowd and the Peter-Principle Exemplar, Frank Rich, ought to suggest to you that it is not (if it ever was) the greatest newspaper in the US.

Posted by: DBL on May 7, 2008 at 1:36 PM | PERMALINK

Some of the left-of-center bloggers used to practically wet themselves over MoDo. They positively went into morning when the Times started charging to read her column. I never saw the fatal attraction myself.

She was on Maher a few times and she basically mumbled, shrugged and let the end of her sentences sort of wander off. It's like she thought she was the coolest kid at the lunch table and people were supposed to automatically get her point and agree without her having to expound on it in any great detail. I was extremely underwhelmed.

Posted by: Joshua Norton on May 7, 2008 at 1:38 PM | PERMALINK

She's already been dumped so many times that the NYT is afraid to fire her. The super will respond to a report of an odor and find her dead under a mountain of ice cream cartons.

Posted by: Steve Paradis on May 7, 2008 at 1:39 PM | PERMALINK

"went into morning"

um.."went into mourning". Sometimes spell-checker isn't your best friend.

Posted by: Joshua Norton on May 7, 2008 at 1:40 PM | PERMALINK

Seriously, Kevin. Not to pile on, but when you use phrases like "the greatest newspaper in the world" you should capitalize, italicize, put quotes around it, or something, so we can be sure you're being ironic.

Posted by: thersites on May 7, 2008 at 1:41 PM | PERMALINK

Sorry, J. "Bi-weekly" can actually mean either one: once every two weeks (fortnightly) or twice a week.
Check the dictionary....

Posted by: Joe on May 7, 2008 at 1:44 PM | PERMALINK

This column seemed to me slightly better than (her very low) average. I saw MD express some uncharacteristic sympathy for the Hillary of 40 years ago that is no more.

Posted by: Richard on May 7, 2008 at 1:48 PM | PERMALINK

The expression greatest newspaper in the world is an oxymoron. There's no such thing as a great newspaper.

That reminds me of an old joke I like: What's the similarity and difference between daily newspapers and blind poodles? On a daily basis the poodles pass their blind poodle shite onto newspaper, whereas the newspapers pass their blind poodle shite onto you.

Posted by: Sean on May 7, 2008 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK

You think the Butterfly piece was bad? Read her previous piece of garbage on Obama not being comfortable drinking a can of bud.

Posted by: leo on May 7, 2008 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINK

OK I give up, why is Obama the "butterfly"? And does this mean McCain is the manly dung beetle? Or let me guess he's a military hero so an army ant?

Posted by: ckelly on May 7, 2008 at 1:56 PM | PERMALINK

Yesterday we learned that Clinton will lose. Today we learned that Dowd can't write. Tomorrow we will learn that the sky is blue.

As a personal favor, Kevin, please don't link to Dowd any more. While the primary blame for my wasted time lies with me for clicking the link and reading the column, some part of it is your fault for providing the link.

Posted by: reino on May 7, 2008 at 1:57 PM | PERMALINK

If Dowd had a blog, nobody would read it.

Posted by: dan on May 7, 2008 at 1:57 PM | PERMALINK

Besides, everyone knows the "Stonestown Mall Weekly Shopper's Guide and Coupon Clipper" is really the greatest newspaper in the world.

Posted by: Joshua Norton on May 7, 2008 at 2:02 PM | PERMALINK

The thing is, the world of bowling alleys, boilermakers and blue-collar workers IS where Hillary comes from. For me, that makes her stuff quite a bit less cynical.

It's amazing how people have bought into that crap. People, listen up! Park Ridge, Illinois in the 50's was anything but a blue-collar world of bowling alleys and boilermakers. It was the Eisenhower era world of stay-at-home moms, nice lawns and bobby socks

Posted by: Shine on May 7, 2008 at 2:02 PM | PERMALINK

Dowd is like cartoonist Richard Ramirez, except she can't draw, so has to spell out the witlessness.

Posted by: Uli Kunkel on May 7, 2008 at 2:05 PM | PERMALINK

Oops -- Michael, not Richard.

Posted by: Uli Kunkel on May 7, 2008 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINK

If Dowd had a blog, nobody would read it.

But Tbogg would make fun of it. In fact, she'd probably be Ann Althouse.

Posted by: Quaker in a Basement on May 7, 2008 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

" It was the Eisenhower era world of stay-at-home moms, nice lawns and bobby socks."

I miss the bobby socks!

Posted by: Peggy on May 7, 2008 at 2:11 PM | PERMALINK

You were right the first time, Uli. Dowd is exactly like Richard Ramirez, except her groupies are less stable and attractive.

Posted by: Roger Ailes on May 7, 2008 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK

OK I give up, why is Obama the "butterfly"?

Again, it's a literary reference. In Bradbury's "A Sound of Thunder", a man goes back in time, crushes a butterfly, and thereby changes the outcome of a presidential election millions of years in the future. (In the story it's all inadvertent, not deliberate.) Clinton is trying to 'undo' the outcome of a campaign; thus Obama's the butterfly.

Matt Yglesias made a reference to the story the other day. It's probably where Dowd got the image. She doesn't seem like someone who's read SF.

Posted by: Ryan on May 7, 2008 at 2:17 PM | PERMALINK

Needless to say, but Dowd does have, um "issues", doesn't she?

Posted by: Shine on May 7, 2008 at 2:17 PM | PERMALINK

Sorry right back atcha. Some dictionaries define biweekly as [occurring once every two weeks]. Other dictionaries list that as the first definition, but have added [twice a week] as a second definition. This is unhelpful, as it permits a single word to be used in two completely contradictory ways. Much better to stick with the original usage, thanks.

Perhaps more to the point, this is a matter for the style guide, rather than the dictionary. As the Chicago Manual of Style says:

"5.202 Good usage versus common usage
Although this book recommends Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (see bibliog. 3.1), one must use care and judgment in consulting any dictionary. The mere presence of a word in the dictionary’s pages does not mean that the word is in all respects fit for print. The dictionary merely describes how speakers of English use the language; despite occasional usage notes, lexicographers generally disclaim any intent to guide writers and editors on the thorny points of English usage [....]"

In other words, when a dictionary includes "twice a week" as a meaning of "biweekly", or "transporting by bus" as a meaning of "bussing", the dictionary's editors are trying to help a reader to understand words he or she may encounter, NOT trying to help a writer choose what words he or she should use. Writers should endeavor to follow the best possible usage, not the lowest common denominator.

The CMS also has this to say:
"bi; semi. Generally, bi means 'two' (biweekly means 'every two weeks'), while semi means 'half' (semiweekly means 'twice a week'). Because these prefixes are often confounded, writers should be explicit about the meaning."

The American Heritage guide to English usage makes a similar point (http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/048.html).

Posted by: J on May 7, 2008 at 2:20 PM | PERMALINK

Okay, I like the Bradbury reference. But I can also think of another one, probably one Obama would favor as well. He "floats like a butterfly, but stings like a bee".

Posted by: stonevendor on May 7, 2008 at 2:22 PM | PERMALINK

Whoops, that long and pedantic comment was in reply to the upthread comment from "Joe".

Also, Quaker's comment (if Dowd had a blog, she'd be Althouse) is right on the money.

Posted by: J on May 7, 2008 at 2:25 PM | PERMALINK

Shine,

Now now, Hillary got to mix with the hoi polloi down at her Father's printing shop.

Back to Dowd - wasn't "floats like a butterfly, stings like a bee" already used to describe a black man?

Yes, yes it was. Dowd should have said Obama is the non-threatening pretty boy from Teen Beat and Hillary ain't a teen. Except that he isn't.

Wait - Obama is the western 'bulge' of Africa and Hillary is the Gulf of Mexico.

No, Hillary is Hi Rally and Obama is Ma Boa.

No, Obama is the cute puppy that pees on the floor and wiggles and Hillary is the old ... nope, I'm not going to go there.

All these "analogies" are just stupid. As a disclaimer/reminder, I have no favorite and will gladly support whomever gets the Democratic nomination.

Posted by: Tripp on May 7, 2008 at 2:25 PM | PERMALINK

You think the Butterfly piece was bad? Read her previous piece of garbage on Obama not being comfortable drinking a can of bud. Posted by: leo

Why would anyone want to be "comfortable" drinking Buttwiper? It's lousy beer.

Posted by: Jeff II on May 7, 2008 at 2:28 PM | PERMALINK

stonevendor,

Curse you, you beat me by three minutes!

I doubt Dowd read Bradbury. She probably saw the movie "The Butterfly Effect."

Posted by: Tripp on May 7, 2008 at 2:28 PM | PERMALINK

And yet, Dowd's columns consistently top the most-emailed list.

Posted by: matt on May 7, 2008 at 2:28 PM | PERMALINK

Dowd's just the angry liberal counterpoint to Ann Coulter, though I think she's just a bit hotter than Ann (sorry, Ann).

Posted by: CT on May 7, 2008 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINK

And yet, Dowd's columns consistently top the most-emailed list.

Yes, but the personal message that the senders add probably for the most part read along the lines of "I know you stopped reading her ages ago, but you won't believe how far over the top she has gone with this one!"

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State on May 7, 2008 at 2:39 PM | PERMALINK

"Crushing the butterfly". Is that what the kids are calling it these days?

Posted by: Brock on May 7, 2008 at 2:53 PM | PERMALINK

What the heck has happened to THIS blog?

We may finally have seen the end to a seemingly endless Democratic primary season featuring two history-making candidates, and Kevin's contributions are "whatever", "oh, maybe it was something. Talk amongst yourselves" and "let's deride someone who wrote a crap column on an important topic I apparently can't be bothered with".

Talk about phoning it in.

Posted by: Augustus on May 7, 2008 at 3:16 PM | PERMALINK

CT,

Dowd's just the angry liberal counterpoint to Ann Coulter, though I think she's just a bit hotter than Ann (sorry, Ann).

Wow, talk about damning with faint praise. Ouch.

Posted by: Tripp on May 7, 2008 at 3:20 PM | PERMALINK

She needs to go into analysis. Ever since I read that thing (I think you linked to it KD) about how obsessed she is with Bill Clinton.

I honestly feel like she wants Hillary Clinton's life or she would like to be Michelle Obama and these men she evicerates are men she would want to have; hence the constant cry for attention and catty articales.

I read the title and didn't even bother with the piece, lol. She's a trainwreck of epic proportions second solely to Bill Kristol IMHO.

Posted by: Rhoda on May 7, 2008 at 3:27 PM | PERMALINK

If Dowd had a blog it would have a background of repeated jewel patterns, the cursor would trail bubbles and the print would be a pastel color that would make you swear at its unreadability.

Posted by: cowalker on May 7, 2008 at 3:29 PM | PERMALINK

Could not disagree with you more.

Posted by: Paul kammer on May 7, 2008 at 3:29 PM | PERMALINK

Could not disagree with you more.

Posted by: Paul kammer on May 7, 2008 at 3:29 PM | PERMALINK

Obscure blog, nothing.

Shouldn't MoJo be fellating Bill Kristol beneath some NYT table?

Oops. Maybe she has found her "ideal boyfriend" already.

Carry on, the two of you.

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on May 7, 2008 at 3:38 PM | PERMALINK

Speaking of Friedman, he threw Venezuela under the bus today by claiming it's not a democracy.

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on May 7, 2008 at 3:42 PM | PERMALINK

CT... sorry, but Dowd's not a liberal.

J vs. Joe: Having edited a small-town semiweekly in the past, twice a week, J's right.

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on May 7, 2008 at 3:50 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah she's nutty, but her column always tops the "most emailed" list.

Snark rules.

And it would appear that instead of rising above her, her peers try to emulate her.

Posted by: Horatio Parker on May 7, 2008 at 3:57 PM | PERMALINK

I'll bet she has a tattoo butterfly "tramp stamp". G'd up from the feet up.

Posted by: Joshua Norton on May 7, 2008 at 4:02 PM | PERMALINK

The scorpion-butterfly analogy is a badly mangled folk tale about how a scorpion will sting even when it is in its best interest not to. At least that is the way I see it.

And it would apply to Maureen as much as it does to Hillary, if not more so.

Posted by: Mo MoDo on May 7, 2008 at 4:13 PM | PERMALINK

I share the bafflement regarding MoDo's prominence. She used to be interesting, years ago. Now - as far as i can tell, she's a kind of post-everything Alan Colmes, a supposed "liberal" whose presence lends a veneer of openness to a forum dedicated to Brooks, Kristol, and Friedman.

Her columns say nothing, and mean nothing.

Many days, the NYT itself offers little more. Look how they stuffed the Attorney Purge story, for example. They have an important story from time to time, its true. But the trend is towards nothingness.

Posted by: al75 on May 7, 2008 at 4:19 PM | PERMALINK

"Its like eating cotton candy...no real substance remains after consumption"

At least cotton candy tastes good.

Posted by: James G on May 7, 2008 at 4:21 PM | PERMALINK

"The greatest newspaper in the world?"
You are kidding, right Kevin? Right?

Posted by: ppk on May 7, 2008 at 4:27 PM | PERMALINK

To answer your question: yes.

Posted by: Big House on May 7, 2008 at 4:40 PM | PERMALINK

Fuck MoDo, she is just some frigid bitter old frump that couldn't secure a mate and she tries to exercise her personal failings with her pathetic scribblings.

Posted by: Manna on May 7, 2008 at 4:53 PM | PERMALINK

Shouldn't Dowd have an obscure blog, not a biweekly column in the greatest newspaper in the world?

Dowd has a column in Weekly World News?

Posted by: e. nonee moose on May 7, 2008 at 5:02 PM | PERMALINK

And yet, Dowd's columns consistently top the most-emailed list.

Who the hell actually uses the NYT's email program to email articles? My father does, but he's 72. Only my father sends me articles through the NYT or WSJ's email programs. Everyone else cuts and pastes the links into their own email client. Even my mother cuts and pastes.

I'm guessing that the vast majority of people using the NYT's email program to email a Dowd or a Friedman article are non-Net sophisticated, 40+ y.o. chattering class types. So take the "most-emailed" results with a grain of salt.

Posted by: Shine on May 7, 2008 at 5:08 PM | PERMALINK

J, the Chicago Manual of Style is a meant as a guide for the publication of manuscripts. They're obviously going to take a more strict interpretation. Style guides in general are merely an agreed upon convention for specific organizations. I've found several that say biweekly can be used either way, but I think we can all agree that a writer should specifically state whether he means twice a week or every two weeks. Moreover, this is a blog. Most bloggers use a casual conversational style of writing. Common usages are going to be the norm. The point being, you're being a picky about a word usage that appears in most dictionaries. At most you can only say that Kevin is being too casual. Give it up, and take the stick out.

Posted by: Joe on May 7, 2008 at 5:34 PM | PERMALINK

The NYT, "the greatest newspaper in the world." Usta was and Dowd dickering is one of the causes. Who does read her?

Posted by: jim on May 7, 2008 at 5:41 PM | PERMALINK

Butterfly Courage
by David L. Kuzminski

Walking down a path through some woods in Georgia in 1977, I saw a water puddle ahead on the path. I angled my direction to go around it on the part of the path that wasn't covered by water and mud. As I reached the puddle, I was suddenly attacked!

Yet, I did nothing, for the attack was so unpredictable and from a source so totally unexpected. I was startled as well as unhurt, despite having been struck four or five times already. I backed up a foot and my attacker stopped attacking me. Instead of attacking more, he hovered in the air on graceful butterfly wings in front of me. Had I been hurt I wouldn't have found it amusing, but I was unhurt, it was funny, and I was laughing. After all, I was being attacked by a butterfly!

Having stopped laughing, I took a step forward. My attacker rushed me again. He rammed me in the chest with his head and body, striking me over and over again with all his might, still to no avail. For a second time, I retreated a step while my attacker relented in his attack. Yet again, I tried moving forward. My attacker charged me again. I was rammed in the chest over and over again. I wasn't sure what to do, other than to retreat a third time. After all, it's just not everyday that one is attacked by a butterfly.

This time, though, I stepped back several paces to look the situation over. My attacker moved back as well to land on the ground. That's when I discovered why my attacker was charging me only moments earlier. He had a mate and she was dying. She was beside the puddle where he landed. Sitting close beside her, he opened and closed his wings as if to fan her. I could only admire the love and courage of that butterfly in his concern for his mate. He had taken it upon himself to attack me for his mate's sake, even though she was clearly dying and I was so large.

He did so just to give her those extra few precious moments of life, should I have been careless enough to step on her. Now I knew why and what he was fighting for. There was really only one option left for me. I carefully made my way around the puddle to the other side of the path, though it was only inches wide and extremely muddy.

His courage in attacking something thousands of times larger and heavier than himself just for his mate's safety justified it. I couldn't do anything other than reward him by walking on the more difficult side of the puddle. He had truly earned those moments to be with her, undisturbed. I left them in peace for those last few moments, cleaning the mud from my boots when I later reached my car.

Since then, I've always tried to remember the courage of that butterfly whenever I see huge obstacles facing me. I use that butterfly's courage as an inspiration and to remind myself that good things are worth fighting for.

http://home.att.net/~d.l.kuzminski/atsocal.htm

Posted by: EvilPoet on May 7, 2008 at 6:02 PM | PERMALINK

It's weird, it's like she's trying to be Malkin or one of those hacks.

She's bad; she's not usually this bad.

Posted by: Swan on May 7, 2008 at 6:23 PM | PERMALINK

Has she been getting worse recently?

Posted by: Swan on May 7, 2008 at 6:25 PM | PERMALINK

*

Posted by: mhr on May 7, 2008 at 6:43 PM | PERMALINK

Just because Maureen Dowd has spent most of her life mourning the loss of her own girlish innocence doesn't mean you have to lump her in with all us obscure bloggers!

Posted by: dr sardonicus on May 7, 2008 at 7:16 PM | PERMALINK

I've got it! CHAOS THEORY!

Obama is the butterfly that flaps it's wings, causing the world to turn upside down!

Posted by: MNPundit on May 7, 2008 at 7:25 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin, Kevin...

But when you go to NYT online and check the "most emailed" stories, hers are regularly in the top 10. She's way too popular to cut, and let's be honest, in a perverse way it's *fun* watching that train-wreck logic of hers wrap its fingers around... well, not a new topic twice a week, because she tends to become fixated, but at least around different variations of her 2-3 topics du jour.

In all seriousness, though, don't you think her style of non-substantive commentary is uniquely catered to suit American's news consumption preferences?

Posted by: Nathan on May 7, 2008 at 7:57 PM | PERMALINK

I must be the only one that actually liked this MD column! (and I'm not usually a fan)


Posted by: aidan on May 7, 2008 at 8:41 PM | PERMALINK

The only time I read MoDO is when Somerby takes her to the woodshed. If you want criticism from the blogger instead of the do-it-yourself kind here,read Bob or Digby or somebody who knows how.

Posted by: TJM on May 7, 2008 at 9:33 PM | PERMALINK

I've got as much contempt for Maureen Dowd as every other cowardly "liberal" fuehrer-fellating journalist who has ignored my rants over the last 12 years (and that would be all of them, including your preening host Kevin Drum). That reservation aside, Maureen Dowd is to column writing what Anthony Lane is to movie reviewing. You folks, though, with your whiny little mean-spirited "MoDo Sux Dick" text messages, might as well be a pack of 13 year old teenybitch dittoheads oohing and aahing over Rush Limbaugh's latest National-Christianist smackdown of Feminazi Hillary Clinton. The tragedy of Ms. Clinton is that while America yearned for Joan of Arc, she delivered Joan of Pussy. But compared to you circle-jerk losers, she looks like Teddy Roosevelt. What a bunch of pussycrats.

Brett Landgraf, The Pink Nigger

Posted by: on May 7, 2008 at 11:29 PM | PERMALINK

Didn't this kind of drivel get her a Pulitzer?

There have to be people with brains out there who could do what she does. (And do, at various blogs.)

The NYT should hire one of the smarter writers from DailyKos and stop publishing dreck posing as smart commentary and dreck posing as journalism.

I'd really like a great newspaper to be out there fighting the good fight, and there for people to page through as they sit at their desks and start the business day. But pea-brained morons like Sulzberger truly deserve to fail.

The newspapers of tomorrow should only exist as endowed, charitable organizations with status as educational institutions.

Posted by: Anon on May 8, 2008 at 12:19 AM | PERMALINK

Didn't this kind of drivel get her a Pulitzer? I knew there was a reason my girlfriend (who majored in journalism) always aid that Joseph Pulitzer ruined journalism.

Posted by: MNPundit on May 8, 2008 at 1:33 AM | PERMALINK

Joe, sorry again. AP agrees with Chicago on "semiweekly." Maybe you should "pull the stick out."

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on May 8, 2008 at 1:45 AM | PERMALINK

no shit. i have the utmost contempt, in the harshest terms for that bitch. My hate for her surpasses that of anybody else. She deserves the WORST of everything. If I saw her in person I'd have a hard time restraining myself...

Posted by: Captian Obvious on May 8, 2008 at 3:46 AM | PERMALINK

Catching The Butterfly

Posted by: Jimm on May 8, 2008 at 4:20 AM | PERMALINK

What the f--- is she talking about?

Posted by: Evan on May 8, 2008 at 5:29 AM | PERMALINK

why are people so worked up about Maureen Dowd? I find her certainly not as annoying as cruise-missile liberals like Thomas Friedman. (Not to speak of Kristol, etc., beyond the pale.) I think of her as a sports columnist who just does politics instead. She is very similar, in fact, in many ways to the sportswriters around here, a kind of psycho-trash talk. Very relaxing, maybe even insightful once in a while.

Posted by: shoebeacon on May 8, 2008 at 9:19 AM | PERMALINK

EvilPoet,

I'm sorry but barf.

"Watching a rainstorm recently I was struck by the courage and love of the raindrops. Each one knows they face certain annihilation upon striking the ground and yet they do not flee. They do not stop and retreat. Without hesitation they proceed downward with nary a hint of hesitation. Their love for their fellow following raindrops gives them the courage to continue in their vain effort to somehow destroy the earth and spare their compatriots the same fate."

Posted by: Tripp on May 8, 2008 at 11:38 AM | PERMALINK

Tripp,

Blind faith can justify anything.

"Turkish shepherds watched in horror as hundreds of their sheep followed each other over a cliff, say Turkish newspaper reports. First one sheep went over the cliff edge, only to be followed by the whole flock, according to the reports. More than 400 sheep died in the 15-metre fall - their bodies cushioning the fall of 1,100 others who followed." -BBC News, 8 July 2005

Posted by: EvilPoet on May 8, 2008 at 4:39 PM | PERMALINK

Dowd has a column. They hired Kristol. Charles Krauthammer writes for the Washington Post. Victor Davis Hanson is allowed near a computer. The world of punditry is like the world of sports management; once you've gotten in, it requires an act of god to be expelled. All a history of poor performance means is that you are 'experienced'.

Posted by: Matt on May 8, 2008 at 11:17 PM | PERMALINK

eKfLS4 hi! http://msn.com my site

Posted by: gosha03 on February 13, 2009 at 8:05 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly