Maureen Dowd Is Not A Liberal
Mar 9th, 2008 at 9:03 am by Susie
I don’t know why I read anything this woman writes, but she’s really disgusting. Really. I’m so sick of her cutesy attack columns on anyone who’s trying to change this enormous mess left by Bush.
You know, the man she helped install.
Once again, I’ll note that she’s the perfect example of the ultimate Beltway insider. It’s more important to her to dominate and dismiss the subject of her attention than to see their place in any kind of larger political perspective. She’s the Queen of Meta.
Her legacy is, without exaggeration, an unthinkable war and an economic mudslide of massive proportions. She seems completely disconnected from the results of her writing, and incapable of connecting the dots. She’s highly useful to those readers of the “pox on both their houses” school of thought, and conservatives love her because “even the liberal Maureen Dowd” says so.
Maureen Dowd is not a liberal. We know it, and she knows it, too.
Is she supposed to be? She’s a reporter and columnist, not a paid employee of the Democratic Party. I like that she is independent. I also think she sincerely wants Obama to win. As I say in my blog, Dowd is like a horror movie fan that has seen the left for dead Clinton campaign spring back to life to attack poor naive Obambi. She’s just throwing popcorn at the screen trying to get him to drive a stake through her heart. Only she doesn’t have one.
Is she supposed to be? She’s a reporter and columnist, not a paid employee of the Democratic Party. I like that she is independent. I also think she sincerely wants Obama to win. As I say in my blog, Dowd is like a horror movie fan that has seen the left for dead Clinton campaign spring back to life to attack poor naive Obambi. She’s just throwing popcorn at the screen trying to get him to drive a stake through her heart. Only she doesn’t have one.
Yes, actually, she IS “supposed” to be. The New York Times management uses her as an example every time liberals complain about all the conservative voices on the op-ed pages. So if she’s what we can count on as a liberal (that is, not very liberal at all), then we are shut out of the discussion on the opinion pages of our most influential newspaper.
Like the rest of the whore press,
Semen stains all down the front of her dress.
It, is not a part of the solution.
Yes, MoDo is “supposed to be” a liberal, for exactly the reason Susie states. She’s held up as an example of such by her employers at the Times.
Beyond that, she’s not a good “independent” voice on anything, for the basic reason that she plays fast and loose with the facts, perpetuating mythology about things like John Edwards’ hair or “Al Gore claimed he invented the internet”, and generally presenting inaccuracies repeatedly. That is, of course, until those talking points become no longer fashionable … at which point she makes fun of them.
MoDo is a quintessential purveyor of journalism/commentary as high school popularity contest. (Or inside-the-beltway popularity contest.) She’s ALL about that, and not about actual facts or meaning. She sucks real bad, and it’s not really to do with whether she’s liberal or conservative.
Susie, you have nailed it.
She’s a reporter and columnist…
A reporter?
Please show me the most recent piece of reporting she’s done.
What she really is is an unprincipled narcissist.
Sort of like a softer spoken Ann Coulter.
“She’s a reporter”.
No she’s not. She writes an opinion column.
Two different things.