Comments on: Maureen Dowd’s Mind Is Made Up: Don’t Confuse Her with Facts

By: Roy M

Roy M — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:08:19 +0000

whom

By: jose

jose — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:53:40 +0000

Can someone tell her to Move On?

By: Javelin

Javelin — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 03:16:39 +0000

What petty dreck, and this is the junk that is sending who down the river?

By: Benson

Benson — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 02:52:55 +0000

Interesting political chatter, engaging speculation, and so on…with some trepidation I confess to an interest in Marsh’s prose, however. I think her string of madcap metaphors in, “…a dish-rich environment, only this time she could enjoy a bank shot to strafe “Beanpole Guy”….” will go into my archive. Wretched excess! Great stuff, because it’s not an example crafted by a creative writing instructor to demonstrate the horror of hypermetaphorosis. Too too trendy, barely comprehensible, but…. It’s genuine! It’s deliberate! It’s an instant classic!

By: CFM

CFM — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 02:47:48 +0000

“. . . facts have nothing to do with it when it comes to the Democrats.” Well, now. There’s a surprise.

By: Carol 17

Carol 17 — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 23:46:19 +0000

I think MoDo and Dickless Morris would make a hell of a team.

By: Barbara

Barbara — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:28:00 +0000

Good column. Dowd is a joke, she constantly attacks the Clintons so she doesn’t have to think up other subjects to write about. She is someone who has run out of ideas.

By: huxley

huxley — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:49:29 +0000

Morning, all. “Ann Coulter is not a synonym for sloppy, unsupported polemics.” Ha! huxley, thanks for the chuckle.

Taylor — When it comes to Coulter, your article and comment are exactly the unsupported swipes that you decry in Dowd.

I don’t agree with everything Coulter says, not by a long shot, but she supports what she says.

By: James Hudnall

James Hudnall — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:14:11 +0000

The author of this piece wheres her bias on her sleeve, which blinds her to the simple facts of Dowd’s article.

Hillary has positioned herself in such a way as to cast doubt on Obama, and make the convention all about her. While it’s unlikely she will try to wrest the nomination from Obama, the very fact that she and Bill have critical speaking slots in the convention, and that roll call, will remind Democrats that Hillary barely lost. That Obama won mostly by caucuses and not so much in states where the popular vote mattered more. There are no caucuses in the real election. Obama won mostly through backroom deal making.

Whenever a Clinton gets in front of a microphone, they make it all about them. Count the mes and Is when they talk. They will try to steal the spotlight from Obama. He will come off looking weak after this convention. Making it easier for Hillary to run again in 4 years.

The Clintons are cut throat. And they will do their best to see Obama fail while making it look like they support him.

By: Rubicon

Rubicon — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:26:08 +0000

Gosh…. liberals are just as vicious with each other as they are when speaking of conservatives! Who knew!?
But, whether Dowd is right or wrong is not the issue as most see it. That Clinton was thrown under the bus early on by the media, was obvious to even us bitter, frustrated, ignorant, conservatives.
Someone wanted a “black” as the Dem candidate, as though being black automatically qualified that person to be president. That this candidate attacks the abilities of one like Clarence Thomas, as though “he” is better qualified for the job of president than Thomas is for the court, displays an incredible lack of respect for the accomplishments of a learned man, whose character is light years ahead of him.
That the policy issues he addresses vacillate more in one sentence than the typical on/off light switch, exposes the candidates inability to make good choices when the rubber meets the road.
Hillary is no saint. But, Dem’s did themselves no favor when they threw her under the wheels of the bus, so they could “look diverse,” even though the selection was pandering.
The differences between Hillary & McCain are not all that dramatic. The differences between Obama & Hillary or McCain, are glaring.
Obama is a classic socialist. He & his desperately think they can regulate & tax America into a utopian state they think exists or could exist.
Hillary will run in 2012, whether McCain wins or Obama wins. By then, Democrats will be enthusiastic supporters of a Hillary presidential run! By them Obama’s flawed character & inability to lead or think through critical issues, will have exposed him for the novice idealist whose idea’s are more wishful thinking than attainable realities in any universe. His economic mess will require someone who truly knows how to deal with taxes & capitalism, while not destroying America’s economic productivity in the process!
And, in 2012, free speech will once again return to America when even Hillary realizes imposition of the so-called Fairness Doctrine was as stupid an idea as any socialist ever had!