The Rise and Fall of Maureen Dowd

[ethics]

A Pulitzer winner, writing Op/Ed pieces for NY Times for years. Love her stand or hate it, she always put forth a good piece. Over the last several months, however, Dowd has been writing some of the most unadultered crap that I have ever seen in any Opinion piece, less NY Times.

Take today's column, for instance, her first since being on vacation. Can anyone decipher this for me please (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/08/opinion/08DOWD.html?ei=5062&en=a28632f0cb2f11c6&ex=1074142800&partner=GOOGLE&pagewanted=print&position=)?

Joe, you are a writing teacher, how would you grade that piece? Others, how would you rate that article ?

I am honestly trying to see if I am not losing my mind.

[Coriolis]

It's hard to figure, but America seems ready to embrace W. and the L word at the same time. The new L word, that is. Ummm, what was the "old" L word?

Let me guess, her vacation was at the Betty Ford Center?

[ethics]

Whew, I am NOT crazy! ;)

[Stiofán]

She's simply saying that America's changing, and Bush to get elected, is pandering to those changes instead of traditional things Republicans have pandered to in the past. Not sure what you don't understand about it. Perhaps you'd care to elaborate what you think it means so I can look at it from your viewpoint.

[Coriolis]

I think that part of it was pretty clear, however poorly written. And I still don't understand what the old L word is!

[SixofNine]

Oh crap, I think I understand the column.

She started out talking about Bush's strong position for reelection, ending that portion of the column with a comment about how the Republicans might use a "Willie Horton" strategy to lambast the Democrats about gay marriage.

This insertion of a cultural issue into a political commentatry served as a segue into a cultural commentary about the apparent ascendancy of lesbianism in our society. The two seemingly divergent topics are brought together at the column's 11th hour by Dowd's conclusion that we seem to be able to handle the cognitive dissonance of liking Bush and bush simultaneously.

Cor, I think the old L word is "liberal. " Whereas (President George) W and L(iberal) will never mix, apparently (George) W and L(esbians) can. :)

Hollywood is catching up with what Howard Stern has been saying for years: Lesbians = ratings.

Brian

[Coriolis]

Cor, I think the old L word is "liberal. " Whereas (President George) W and L(iberal) will never mix, apparently (George) W and L(esbians) can. :)
Ohhh, <i>that</i> L word. :)

[limeygit]

It seems to be the literary equivalent of William Shatner giving a speech on acid.
Random words. Strange clauses. Jumps of logic. I like Puddin'.

You are not mad, Leon. That is crap. I am all for finding new and interesting ways of writing about things, but that is just terrible.

[ethics]

You are not mad, Leon. That is crap. I am all for finding new and interesting ways of writing about things, but that is just terrible.
There is one law that all writers, or potential writers know about and it is this. Know ALL of the rules of writing and then BREAK them. Of course, some writers make a horrendous mistake in thinking they know all of the rules and it ends (many times) their careers. I doubt it will end hers but I afree, it is drivel, non-sequitur mess.

[Neo]

Does this broad ever write anything other than Bush bashing columns? I say that sincerely because I’ve only read about four or five of her columns and they all are that same theme!

Here is an excerpt from journalist and liberal writer (and not a Bush supporter) Bernard Goldberg’s bestseller “Arrogance” which mentions Ms. Dowd in a section of his book critical of the biased and unbalanced coverage of the New York Times:

On May 14, Maureen Dowd, one of the Times star columnists, wrote this about President Bush: “Busy chasing off Saddam, the president and vice president had told us that Al Qaeda was spent. Al Qaeda is on the run, President Bush said last week. That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly but surely being decimated…They’re not a problem anymore.

But those little dots—the ones that indicate that Ms. Dowd edited the Presidents words—are, on closer examination, her way of twisting the facts, almost beyond recognition. Here’s what President Bush really said, without the ellipsis. “Al Qaeda is on the run. That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly but surely being decimated. Right now, about half of all the top Al Qaeda operatives are either jailed or dead. In either case, they’re not a problem anymore.”

The President never said, nor did he remotely mean to suggest, that Al Qaeda is “not a problem anymore.” What he was clearly saying, in his wry fashion, is that those members of Al Qaeda who are either dead or behind bars are “not a problem anymore.” There is no way that Maureen Dowd did not know this; and by no stretch of the imagination (or journalistic ethics) does the fact she’s a columnist and not a reporter give her license to distort what the President of United States is saying about a subject as vitally important as terrorism. It was as the critic Andrew Sullivan bluntly put it, a “willful fabrication.”

By the way in case any may doubt it, the subject here is not Bush or Al Qaeda, but Ms. Dowd and the New York Times reporting.

[Fiona]

I can honestly say that is the most poorly written "piece" I've ever beheld by anyone in the business above janitor. It was written worse than I write here... which is "familiar," as if i'm really talking, (and using poor grammar, funny spelling and the like )

ick....
and yes..... what IS the old "L" word??????????
inquiring minds want to know

Come to think of it, the Inquirer's writers are far superior...... LOL

[ethics]

Oh, I won't go in to her political side, since many liberals even laugh her off these days. She really has hit the bottom as a writer. She won her Pulitzer writing on Clinton but perhaps her anger and her hatred of Bush has clouded her logic and her ability to write?

I realize some of you have deciphered her words and translated them here. I know what theme she was writing but my gripe was more about her writing skills and how it is a poor writer who can not, with so many words as she has used, get his/her point across to an average reader.

[btdude]

My 2 cents. Showtime's new series.
L word (http://search.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=cable+showtime+network&page=1&offset=0&result_url=redir%3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26amp%3BrequestId%3Da3da1 fc398c71a51%26amp%3BclickedItemRank%3D1%26amp%3BuserQuery%3D cable%2Bshowtime%2Bnetwork%26amp%3BclickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253 A%252F%252Fwww.sho.com%252F%26amp%3BinvocationType%3D-%26amp%3BfromPage%3DNSCPIndex&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sho.com%2F)

[ethics]

So "L" was for Lesbians? How utterly stupid.

[btdude]

So "L" was for Lesbians? How utterly stupid.

Well, yes and no. It makes a statement to omit what the true meaning of what it is, while still getting the message out there. Besides, LOL Showtime already has Queer as Folk, Lesbian as Folk would be kinda' silly. LOL

[ethics]

The "stupid" remark was not for Showtime, they can do all they want with gays, my remark was applied to Dowd.

[Fiona]

The "stupid" remark was not for Showtime, they can do all they want with gays, my remark was applied to Dowd.I thought Lesbian was the NEW "L" word.... obviously i coudn't follow what she was trying to say:augh: proving your point

[ethics]

I thought Lesbian was the NEW "L" word.... obviously i coudn't follow what she was trying to say:augh: proving your point
Well, I was honestly alarmed because I thought maybe the column was brilliant and I was too stoopid to understand what she was trying to say. ;)

[Robert Harris]

Well, I was honestly alarmed because I thought maybe the column was brilliant and I was too stoopid to understand what she was trying to say. ;)

Gee -- maybe you are right. I'll let you know after I have a chance o read it. :)

[Stiofán]

The new "L" is for Lesbian, and the old is for Liberal. It was clear to me, but then again, maybe I read as poorly as she writes.

<small>(Doesn't the NY Times have editors anymore? What's an editor's job, anyway? Isn't it to edit?)</small>

[ethics]

Are Op/Eds editted?

[Fiona]

Are Op/Eds editted?they are supposed to be ( :banghead: you KNOW this is one of my top PEEVES, dont you :augh: - use to be in the bizz)

[Fiona]

The new "L" is for Lesbian, and the old is for Liberal. It was clear to me, but then again, maybe I read as poorly as she writes.

<SMALL>(Doesn't the NY Times have editors anymore? What's an editor's job, anyway? Isn't it to edit?)</SMALL>exactly
the newsroom i worked in (small paper) had 4 reporters, 2 proofreaders, at least 2 copy and layout and 1 big honcho editor in the corner who approved the layout and edited the front page and the Op Ed (grrrr)

[Robert Harris]

I think the general rule is no editor touches a word written by a Pulitzer goddess.

[Fiona]

I think the general rule is no editor touches a word written by a Pulitzer goddess.pfffffffffffft. I'm sorry but the pulitzer goddess is most likely a contractor and doesn't own the paper... the EDITOR is responsible for content... if this turns bad... it's his fault. and shit rolls downhill

[Robert Harris]

I still don't think editors mess with Pulitzer winners. The Times had another one writing for the Op-ed page some years ago. He turned in a real clinker from time to time but they didn't fix them. Instead they fired him after a while.

They won't fire Maureen though -- she is too pretty and too popular.

[Steve]

Looks like you weren't the only one who was confused (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3395977/) by that column, Leon.

[ethics]

Wow, nice find, Steve. It started out as an alarm in my head, thinking it was me, but it feels good to be right about a legend and how she has hit rock bottom. I also agree that the entire NY Times Op/Ed needs an overhaul.

[LissaKay]

Glenn Reynolds is a national treasure. Be sure to bookmark both GlennReynolds.com (http://www.glennreynolds.com) and InstaPundit (http://www.instapundit.com/). Make them daily reads.

Oh ... and did I mention he's a neighbor?

[ethics]

Well, he is now on my links. :)