Once Again, Maureen Dowd Talks out of her… Ear about Hillary
By Deb Cupples on August 14, 2008 at 8:24 PM in Hillary Clinton, Media Bias
Sometimes, I just don’t understand New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd. She’s a successful, intelligent, gifted word smith — and gorgeous to boot. Talk about having it all. When she writes about actual issues, she often makes sense, and millions of readers praise her.
When she talks about certain politicians, however, Ms. Dowd’s logic leaves the building for a coffee break and belligerently cuts off cell phone contact.
In her recent column ("Yes, She can"), for example, Ms. Dowd speculates that Sen. Hillary Clinton is plotting to hijack the Democratic Convention and steal the nomination from Sen. Barack Obama. Apparently attempting to add weight to her speculations, Ms. Dowd does some 17th century name dropping by bringing up Hamlet (albeit a tad awkwardly).
If the ghost of Shakespeare is willing to lend his name, then Ms. Dowd’s speculations must be worth serious consideration, right?
For the moment, let’s adopt Ms. Dowd’s assumption that Sen. Clinton is nothing more than a massive id, driven only to gratify herself right now — devoid of the ability to anticipate consequences that she’d likely suffer days or weeks or months down the road.
Let’s further assume, for the sake of argument, that Sen. Clinton has no political savvy whatsoever, has no self control, doesn’t care about anyone but herself, and does not understand how divided the Democratic party is (because she cannot read polls and cannot grasp simple percentages).
Even if that were Hillary Clinton, what on earth could she gain by thwarting Obama’s nomination? Seriously.
First, Hillary likely wouldn’t win in the general election, because more than half of the Democratic party now supports Obama (if those polls that Hillary is too stupid to read are accurate). If Hillary hijacked the convention, Obama’s supporters would be pissed off in a volcanic way — thus, very resistant to voting for Hillary.
Then there’s the notion that Hillary might secretly want to help Obama lose in 2008, so she can run against McCain in 2012. It would have to be 2012, according to "conventional wisdom," because she’d be 68 in 2016 — far too old to run for office. John McCain is a man, and he’s already getting crap for being 71: chances are they’d give a 68-year-old woman some crap too.
Fast forward to 2012. If Hillary had managed to get enough delegates to knock Obama out of the 2008 race, do you really think Obama’s millions of devoted supporters would forgive Hillary and happily vote for her in 2012?
Then there’s the the Democratic Party leaders who tried to push Hillary to drop out of the primaries even after she won Ohio and Texas. Do you really think they’d forgive Hillary and support her in 2012 if she’d ruined Obama’s chances back in 2008?
Now consider Hillary’s Democratic colleagues in the Senate, some of whom were on the push-Hillary-out-of-the-primaries-early bandwagon. Some of them are mighty influential in the Senate (e.g., Leahy and Dodd). If Hillary ruined Obama’s chances in 2008, do you really think they’d ever make it easy for Hillary to pursue her legislative agenda?
Let’s not forget Hillary’s place in History. If she single-handedly ruined Obama’s chance to become the first black president — whether out of spite or inability to delay gratification — how would historians portray her: like an admirable woman or a vile bitch?
And if Hillary succeeded in foiling Obama’s plan to be the first black president — if her name were mud to voters, senators, party leaders, and the media — how would that affect Hillary’s only daughter (should Chelsae want to run for office some day)?
Back here on earth, most of us know that Hilary Clinton has impressive intelligence and analytical abilities.
Not even on her most envy-clouded day could Ms. Dowd honestly deny that. I suspect that Ms. Dowd has, at some point, acknowledged Hillary’s acumen if only because doing so would bolster comparisons of Hillary to evil geniuses like Lex Luthor.
In short, Hillary is intelligent and analytical and savvy enough to know that she would gain nothing and lose everything if she tried to thwart Obama’s nomination.
That said, I’m still trying to figure out why Ms. Dowd devoted several hundred words to arguing that Hillary is plotting to destroy Obama during the convention.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
Kwame Kilpatrick under the bus.
Obama camp: Detroit mayor would be a ‘distraction’
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gMmCL2ZE66E0ZnDDmXkjF5E4b9NgD92IAR002
That is not the Kwame Kilpatrick that Obama knew.
On CNN this morning they read a press release from the DNC which defended Kwame’s “right” to vote at the convention as a superdelegate. Strange that they would be more concerned about a guy who assaulted police officers and accused with corruption, than the right of free speech for Hillary Clinton’s pledged delegates. Can’t find the press release, but Kwame’s attorney has said in print that high-ranking Democrats have told him they want the mayor at the convention.
As for Dowd and others of her stripe – remember, it’s not just her talking about Clinton like this – please check out the Election ‘08 Rogues Gallery of American Journalism. When you look at all of what these folks have been saying in one place, it paints a little clearer picture of this year’s stolen primaries, hideous though it may be.
http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Summer08/RoguesGallery.html
Instead of all this vehicular man slaughter, to solve his flea problem, obama should stop lying down with dogs.
Obama is a wuss!!!
Welcome the Clinton Convention!!!
A very, very odd person.
On Bill Maher she is silent but coquettish. But always with terrific hair.
In the spread touting her new book she was arrayed to show a leggy bombshell in spike heels lounging at the bar with one heel hooked on the brass rain. Terrific hair, too.
In anything except the Clintons she is almost as good as the other columnists at the Times but with the best photo on the byline. Terrific hair there too.
When dealing with the Clintons she channels the Arkansas Project with invective nearly absurd in it’s bitterness. She hit her nadir, possibly, with a column a couple of months ago in which she urged Obama to put Hillary “in her place”
Some feminist.
Terrific hair, though.
I haven’t seen the photo you refer to, but come on!. . . great hair?. . .Maureen Dowd?
MD’s hair style has always been so outdated, and the color makes her look so very pale.
Terrific Hair, Gorgeous you say, she is an old woman trying to look young.
She is ugly as sin and an old hag/bag.
Stupid too, what with her red boots and playing up to Obama on his press plane.
Give me a break, What a joke this female, I guess,
IS. Personally I hate her articles and never read them unless there is a quote on some other web site.
She also trashed Gore and Kerry for not being manly men. This woman is not a friend of Democrats and we need to stop thinking she is. STOP READING HER COLUMN. Again today she is at the top of the Times’ “Most emailed” columns list. She won’t stop if she stays popular. Boycott this sorry excuse of a pundit.
Remarkable, a mature comment on the site.
Boycott Dowd yes, but she is encouraged by our inaction. Let the editors know how offensive and biased her articles are. The Times should know that the bias shown by Dowd at the mention of Hillary’s name is not journalism.
Dowd’s sick compulsion regarding Hillary Clinton will go unchecked
unless we confront the editors and ask them why this continual unbridled hate is allowed to go on. This is Coulter stuff.
Dowd should be made to restrain her psychiatric issues and stick to journalism if she is still capable of this.
Chris “Countrywide VIP Loan” Dodd should get the boot!
Scumbag!
Dowd is pathetic.
She has gone on probably a bit too long and is beginning to exhaust people with her tirades. We are becoming “Dowdcencitized”. Maybe she and Edwards can enjoy some fabulous hair time together.
Katmoon,
Kudos on the Dowd/Edwards hair but somehow his looks better than hers. Hers usually hangs down in stips over her eyes.
Ugly old bag!!!
If Hillary manages to take the nomination at the convention, Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Obama, will be a forgotten memory within 48 hours of the convention because normal people tend to forget thugs and crooks as fast as they know them.
What are you smoking Deb? Dowdy is cousin It trying to hide behind her hair like a tween.
Only Frank Rich is creepier.
Dowdy couldn’t land ANY guy after giving it away like a perfume spritzer at Saks
for years and years and years.
She’s a bitter backbiter.
Why read her you can just color her green?
Often, I don’t skip reading Dowd.
After Obama arrives in Denver, his plane is having a make over and will be renamed “ConAir” and will be dispatched across America to bring all of Obama’s close friends to the convention.
Oh Mel,
Surely you jest but perhaps not!! Is this for real????
I love the way he spends the Obamabots money, woooooohoooooooooooooooo
OBAMA is a Thug. It will come out. I have faith
that God would not let this so called man take over the United States of America.
http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/
I hope it comes out soon, I want him to not only lose at the convention, but to be devastated. I want all of his dirty little secrets put out there for America to see before the convention gets here. I want his own elected delegates to turn on him and for Hillary to get a unanimous vote on the first ballot. I want that racist, sexist, corrupt, filthy chicago politician to get what’s coming to him and for Hillary to lead us into November, finally unified as one party.
There is a prayer by John Adams (POTUS 2) that has achieved everlasting fame that President Franklin Roosevelt had carved on the mantel in the State Dining Room – “I pray Heaven to bestow the best of Blessings on this House and all that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise Men ever rule under this roof.”
Hopefully that prayer and ours will be answered and Obama will not win.
“For the moment, let’s adopt Ms. Dowd’s assumption that Sen. Clinton is nothing more than a massive id, driven only to gratify herself right now — devoid of the ability to anticipate consequences that she’d likely suffer days or weeks or months down the road.
Let’s further assume, for the sake of argument, that Sen. Clinton has no political savvy whatsoever, has no self control, doesn’t care about anyone but herself, and does not understand how divided the Democratic party is (because she cannot read polls and cannot grasp simple percentages).
”
So we’re going to pretend she’s obama??
A very interesting point!
Is just anyone allowed to post blogs here?
I also meant to say, or does the moderator know the bloggers beforehand. i.e. It gives the posters here some kind of context of who bloggers are.
Speaking of disreputable opinion sources, the LA Times blog criticized Daily Kos and its chief sheep herder for the banning of Lee Stranahan, who dared write negative things about John Edwards. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/08/why-a-liberal-b.html And that blog article was linked to on Politico. http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0808/Remainders_All_apologies.html?showall
So there you have two legitimate news sources dumping on the herder and the sheep.
Yeah let’s do Chiten,pretend she’s obama?? Well if she thinks for one minute this will get her anything,it won’t but many think they will get something maybe..Sure something.The bus is ready and parked and ready to put them under as well.Well let them cry for their mistake.We don’t hear them.We knon who will be wanting our votes come soon again.I know who will not get my vote in my state and country.Alot of people now have names down ready to booooooooooo,them out.
FEC Investigation of Obama Eligibility
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/Federal-Elections-Commssion/index.html
We don’t want “something” we want it ALL and we want Obama GONE GONE GONE GONE…and humiliated in the process would be nice
Of course if obi-omba implodes and Hillary steps in to courageously pick up the pieces, she will have all of the Democratic Party behind her (as it should have been in the beginning) and will easily win the General Election.
Soetoro…. errr Obama seems to be well on his way of doing just that. The closet door is starting to give the more than we pry, a few bones have started trickling out and it seems about to burst. When the closet door finally gives way, skeletons will start pouring out like rain. Knee deep in bones, they’ll continue to clatter to the floor in parts and in whole exposing the crawl space above where even more skeletons reside, falling down upon us as we try to see our way through the cobwebs.
One cliche’ is just not enough here..
The tip of the iceberg is dead ahead, we can almost reach out and touch it. …but before we get to the tip, the boat will bottom out on the hidden iceberg beneath. The 95% of the Iceberg that’s under water. When it breeches the hull and the Titanic starts going down, Obi-wan-Soetoro will be running over little old ladies and children trying to get to a lifeboat to save his own worthless skin. Hillary will jump in the water in a scuba suit, patch the hull with a chewing gum wrapper, put the ship in the right direction by building a rudder out of toothpics and superglue (ala’ MacGyver)and it’ll be full steam ahead into November with Obi-wan-Soetoro floating with the ice all by himself as Hillary administers first aid to the women and children he trampled on his way to his little boat.
Hey, I can dream can’t I?
You give me great Halloween decorating ideas!
1. Oblowme’s huge overflowing skeleton closet
2. Oblowme’s thrown under the bus graveyard
3. Costumes from the many terrorist places Oblowme lived and visited
4. Oblowme’s terrorist and convicted felon friends – Ayers, Dohrn, Auchi, Rezko, Alsamare costumes and props – really scary!
5. Maureen Dowdy – really creepy!
I couldn’t stand watching the video. Had to turn it off.
ConAir!!! Perfect!!! LMAO
Obama is a cry baby.
Welcome the Clinton Convention!!!
Senator Hillary Clinton for president 08-(nothing less!)
or
John McCain for president 08
There is noway I will even think about voteing for this who or what ever he is..for what to save the democratic party fro their own wrong doings as well as Donna Brazile and Obama himself.No I am voteing McCain if it’s not Hillary no less then nonimmee for president.I will take my vote to put it to two good causes-Hillary as president nominnee 08 orit will be John McCain 08 for me.I am not voteing to think that the ones who stepeed over Hillary and her supporters just to crawl back to their demands.NO-It’s Obama’s bad judgements-His lies-His fooling the people as MSNBC wants us to think that he at that concern is who the people went to see.BULL CRAP…IT WAS 5 FREE CONCERNS THAT’S WHY OBAMA WENT TRAVING THERE AS WELL.Just as he did in portland Oregon.My sister laugh..Obama new the concern was going to go there so what did he do.He gave out free concern tickets for people to go.So he can lead people to belive it was all for him..How many did he give out.Not a bit of the 75,000.What a loser Obama is.Trying to look as something he is not.He is a loser.
I was just thinking..
There’s no chance the SOB would be dumb enough to have pelosi as his vp is there?
With a 9% approval rating, I hope he does pick Pelosi.
“She’s a successful, intelligent, gifted word smith — and gorgeous to boot.”
puppy cock. her hair is too stiff, her mouth makes a sound but doesn’t move, her face is too moon shaped (puffy?)and she sits there stiffly anally retentive. And then when she utters words she becomes insufferably annoying.
And why does she argue that Hillary is plotting, ’cause Dowd needs to be forever more creative in her machinations-put-on-paper in order to keep her job. Her grey matter is sauced to the point of irrationality.
Yes, Maureen does lose her rationality when she writes about Hillary. That was my point.
This thin lipped over the hill so called journalist has clearly lost it.
Her stilted speech and “poppcock” rants are dated old maid. Dowd really has a great opinion of herelf, but clearly doesn’t understand where all of her hatred is coming from.
How does the Times tolerate this dated and predictable bullshit?
It has been my experience that people who accuse someone else of doing something, without any proof, are actually talking abut what they would do.
It is like the minister from Denver who was vehemently anti-gay but who turned out to be gay himself. Maybe she is saying she’d like to get rid of the selected one.
In any event , it is sad that the once respected New York Times publishes Dowd’s rantings but never counter balances them with someone who actually thinks.
oh, the ones who speak out against homosexuality the most are the closet homosexuals. It’s always been that way.
When you see somebody cracking the jokes and talking about them burning in hell, you can pretty well bet you’re talking to a closeted gay/lesbian.
James Wolcott calls Maureen Dowd “Rona Barrett of the Beltway”.
She is a gossip columnist and belongs in the Style section.
She thinks she’s Bonnie Raitt.
well, she’s DEFINITELY not the Bonnie Raitt I know!!!
Dowd is repulsive on every level. Whatever credibility she ever had is long gone. I’m amazed that the New York Times keeps her on, even people that agree with her politics think she is awful and is hurting the papers reputation with her childish diatribes.
Beyond that she is really creepy-if you watch her on the talk shows you can see right away something is really wrong there-the crazy eyes, the laughable attempt to appear young and pretty, the slow creepy way she talks-I won’t say what kind of person she reminds me of-but I almost pity her. Almost.
SO true. She is certainly creepy with her out-dated hair do and peculiar affectations, especially how she angles her face to the camera and talks sometimes with a closed mouth or from the side of her mouth.
I’ve noticed that too! As if her jaw is so tight she can’t open her mouth. She’s self conscious and looks uncomfortable when she’s trying to show everyone just how witty and sophisticated she is (not). Sometimes I feel sorry for her but then I recover and read something more interesting…like the Obits.
SO true. She is certainly creepy with her out-dated hair do and peculiar affectations, especially how she angles her face to the camera and talks sometimes with a closed mouth or from the side of her mouth.
It is called Botox. can one overdose on Botox?
I disagree. If Hillary were a man, people would be expecting her to fight for the nomination.
I think you are correct. It’s just more of the sexism. She’s a woman, she can sacrifice and let him have this, it’s ok because women aren’t as important….
I want her to fight it out and win it. She won the popular vote and if the superdelegates have any sense at all, she’ll win the final delegate count too.
Hey, we can always just tell the obama followers “She won, get over it” or tell them to “get in line like good democrats” or force obambi-soetoro to tell his followers to embrace her to ensure a democratic win in November. If they don’t, we can call them racists.
You said it.
And they can always stay home in November or vote for McCain or a 3rd party candidate.
oh, Hillary would never ask voters to stay home. Only Obama does.
In fact, I’ll go one step further. The public would think a man was crazy if he didn’t fight for the nomination.
I see that there are many new trolls here posting sexist remarks, so that they can then discredit NQ.
I’ve seen many new and unfamiliar names in the last few days.
They can’t discredit NQ. They’re nothing more than we are, just commenters on a blog. The credibility comes from those who write the stories and do it with honesty and integrity.
The trolls have no power, they’re just trying to collect their cash from the
ObamaSoetoro campaign for doing their jobs as paid trolls.Shake their dust from our feet….or better yet, just brush it from our shoulders. They’re nothing to worry about.
we COULD shout “SEXIST RACIST” at everything they post LOL
Yeah the bots are out in force. Trying to discredit the PUMA movement any way they can before Denver.
But really anybody who has been on this site before will see that the Obama people are doing this.
Actually it shows the lurkers just how scared and desperate the Obama supporters are.
They do have that look to them don’t they?
Here they are in the middle of a crisis and their messiah is on vacation.
Must be how all the bushies felt everytime something came up.
They KNOW their candidate is so full of holes he could be used as a collander and they’re scared to death that they’ll go down with him.
The rats will start jumping ship very, very soon.
If not, they’ll get thrown under the bus to save “The One”.
Now that we know the big O doesn’t stand for “Obama”, I guess it’s just a big ZERO huh?
I put some “Bush the Sequel” pics up on my blog if anyone is in need of a nice chuckle.
Have a good night!
http://purplechiten.wordpress.com
This is subjective, at best and the gifted portion is highly overrated, but I’ll grant the successful and intelligent adjectives to Maureen.
On the other hand, her voice nauseats the living hell out of me and makes the “gorgeous” description go right into the crapper. All sexual lust appeal becomes flacid when she opens her mouth. It harkens back to images of a far more attractive Fran Drescher who could talk all damn day like she does and I’d still find her attractive. When it comes out of Maureen’s vocal box it resonates visions of a whiny dried up prune whose goal in life is to castrate the male species for not bowing down to her vision of Amazonia.
Yeah, she talks through her nose.
The question that will be asked 15 years from November 2008: “Daddy, whats a Democrat?”
I tend to disagree with that. I think it’ll be more like “When did the democrats and republicans switch platforms this last time?”
They’ve flipped and flopped back and forth over and over through the years.
Today, Lincoln would be a Democrat…well, four years ago, Lincoln would have been a democrat anyway.
Remember, the Republicans were the party of compassion and freedom, they freed the slaves and fought for equal rights for blacks. Now it’s the opposite. I guess it’s time for the flip to flop back. Will we now have “Southern Republicans” instead of “Southern Democrats”? or will it be “Northern Republicans” since we’re flipping around and all?
I read this post earlier and let it negatively effect me. Who are you? You got your nasty message out didn’t you? And all the time seeming like a Hillary supporter.
I had to come back to tell you “PU”. And remind you that Obama and the DNC are telling everyone “they will get over it and besides who else they gonna vote for” when discussing us. Well that is my reply to you, “they’ll get over it and besides who else they gonna vote for, unity is unity after all.”
Oh, there might be some who will try to ferment violence in Denver. By the way, do you think Obama will go out into the streets of Denver to calm the people if he loses the nomination? Do you think he has the courage of a JFK? Do you think he would really want to calm them, or do you think he might want them to tear the ….ing place apart?
There are third parties in this Country that more than qualify to offer a different approach to US Policies, both Domestic and Foreign.
Betty,
I blogged about Hillary almost daily during the primaries. In July, I went to Hillary’s Senate office on the day she voted against FISA, chatted with her staff, and left a thank you note for her having put herself out there for us (and suffered all that abuse).
I’m not saying that Obama should win the general election. I’m still undecided as to how he compares to McCain, because I’ve looked into the substance behind Obama’s words and found that there isn’t much.
The point of my post is that Dowd is off base (and trying to stir up trouble) by suggesting that Hillary is trying to become the Dem nominee. Nothing more.
The point of my post is that Dowd is off base (and trying to stir up trouble) by suggesting that Hillary is trying to become the Dem nominee. Nothing more.
Thanks for responding Deb.
Hillary supporters want Hillary to be nominated. That’s the point of many wanting her name being on rollcall.
-Hillary supporters want Hillary to be nominated. That’s the point of many wanting her name being on rollcall.-
And what is undemocratic about that?
I know that supporters want her to be nominated in 2008.
I speculate, however, that Hillary doesn’t want to be nominated, because a large segment of the Dems would turn on her (the same way that a large segment has turned on Obama) — which would make a November victory for Hillary very unlikely and would make things difficult for her in the future.
I could be wrong, of course.
No, that is not the point you’re trying to make.
Then what is my point, Betty?
Dowd, well, sounded like she was a little jealous of the valiant effort and successful 21 debates Hillary overwhelming won, and Hillary has been at a disadvantage of all the untruthful things spewed about her for years from Republicans as well as jealous democrats. I was a believer of those lies until I witnessed for myself her campaign and listening to all of her debates and soon learned that her critics were liars.
As Far as I am concerned,
Dowd can go doodle. Hillary is a Champion and was cheated out of her rightful place as President of the United States by liars.
We the people will see to it that McCain beats Obama and his loss has nothing to do with Hillary. The manner in which Obama gained his nomination (and yes we know it is a done deal) should not be applauded
by uniting behind the party. The DNC goofed up and McCain will be the protest vote. It is not about issues or Supreme Court Justices, it is about fairness, and democratic principles and not about Hillary anymore. She didn’t lose, they hijacked her nomination and you can’t have party unity when that occurs.
Had Obama been subject to what Hillary has been subject to I would be fighting for him as I am a true believer in fairness whether I agree with a person or not, things have to be honest and above board.
I am an optimist however there are so many cards stacked against her I think my focus now shall be about seeing to it that Obama doesn’t win and reforming the DNC back to the way it was once, HONEST.
So true, Maureen Dowd’s Shakespearean references are always so thin and based clumsily on one personality trait or characteristic, painting her target of comparison unfairly with a very broad stroke. According to Dowd, Hillary is supposed to be as indecisive as Hamlet. Prince Hamlet is indecisive, as you may recall, because he suspects –and cannot prove– that his uncle murdered his father (the King). When his suspicions are finally confirmed he avenges his father’s death, but only after much anguish and consideration. King Lear–whom Dowd compares to Bill Clinton–goes mad after his two greedy daughters rob him of his kingdom and throw him out literally into the elements. Homeless and abandoned, this aged king curses and cries out in the night as an expression of his utter despair.
But what such myopic comparisons omit in Dowd’s snarky piece is that both Hamlet and King Lear were wrongly aggrieved by vile actors–that is, by a murderous uncle in one play, and by two [of three] vindictive daughters in the other. While both protagonists made mistakes in confronting such evil, they were, in the end, very sympathetic characters and morally vindicated. (I’ve taught both texts in my courses and students have always been sympathetic to Hamlet and King Lear. And so has all the scholarly criticism I’ve read on both texts!)
Thus, Dowd’s bad faith interpretations ignore the moral significance and dimensions of both plays to reach very narrow conclusions. Had she been a student of mine and turned in such narrowly interpreted comparisons — which conveniently fails to link her conclusions to the overall thematic significance of the plays – she would have received a low grade. When considering the full context and significance of both plays, then, Hillary/Hamlet and Bill/Lear are the aggrieved parties who suffer terribly at the hands of evil parties. Indeed, only when such evil is extinguished from the earth is harmony restored to the universe in accordance to the Elizabethan world view.
But the funniest UNINTENDED IRONY in Dowd’s piece is the failure to recognize that such myopic comparisons of both Clintons (she as Hamlet, he as King Lear) also lead to the conclusion that Obama – the Clinton’s arch nemesis — represents the evil actors/elements in both plays. Perhaps Dowd thought cynically we wouldn’t notice this ironic twist in her mean-spirited op ed piece. I guess she should go back and re-read her Shakespeare.
Or better yet, stop citing works she doesn’t grasp in their proper context and overall depth.
I don’t read her any more.
Who tf is Maureen Dowd? Never heard of her.
a has been.
You’ve got it wrong. Dowd isn’t saying that Hillary is making a last ditch attempt to steal the 2008 nomination. It’s Hillary’s kick-off speech for her 2012 campaign. Clinton will subtly sabotage the Obama campaign so that she is the frontrunner next time.
I sure hope so!
You could be right about what Maureen is saying. That’s why I covered the 2012 speculation by writing the following:
“Fast forward to 2012. If Hillary had managed to get enough delegates to knock Obama out of the 2008 race, do you really think Obama’s millions of devoted supporters would forgive Hillary and happily vote for her in 2012?
“Then there’s the the Democratic Party leaders who tried to push Hillary to drop out of the primaries even after she won Ohio and Texas. Do you really think they’d forgive Hillary and support her in 2012 if she’d ruined Obama’s chances back in 2008?”
Of course, my speculations could be wrong, but I just don’t see Hillary trying to mess things up for Obama in 2008. It wouldn’t serve her political interests in the long run.
any obssesion is pathatic and mureen is obssesed with the clintons, my guess is bill mostly. she needs to see someone about it.
Gorgeous!?! Dowd!?! She comes off like a feeble old crone! She’s starting to morph her outside to match her vile inner self.
I just recieved an email from mafresources@aol.com that said that in order for Hillary’s name to be put in nomination she had to give up her delegates. Has anyone else read this? What’s the point if these delegates are going to swing to Obama? I knew HE, the ONE, would require something and didn’t just add Hillary’s name because he thinks so highly of her. What a pig! I’m voting McCain and for any other republicans on the ballot.
I disgree with her comments. What happen to roll calls? And what if – what if- the superdelegates that NOW know the dirt on Obama don’t change their minds?. Don’t give up that easily on the golden girl. As for the riots, let them riot and destroy their neighborhoods. Who cares. Should all the whites destroy their neighborhood because Hillary was cheated, no. They use blogs such as this one and others to express their dislikes. If the delegates are stupid enough to give Obama this nomination- the conversatives are very powerful in numbers and adding a percentage of Hillary’s folks- yes…the bitter, clinging to religion and guns…will put Mccain over. On the other hand, if HIllary does by the grace of G-d pulls this off—-I really don’t think the liberals will stay home—-they want to win the white house- and if african americans don’t like it….oh well…..stay home and don’t vote…I say.
Why is Marueen Dowd arguing that Hillary is plotting to destroy Obama during the convention? Because she is already makiing excuses for when Barack Obama blows the election.