Maureen Dowd confounds expectations by following up the hilarious Stephen Colbert guest column with a trenchant and insightful column about what passes for Rudy Giuliani's foreign policy views. Dare I suppose that the demise of TimesSelect is pressing the NYT columnists to dig deeper and find solid, link-worthy column topics?
« Dog Bites Man | Main | New Bloggingheads »
More Like This Please
17 Oct 2007 11:08 am
Comments (9)
Dowd is good for roughly two good columns per quarter.
Are we counting Colbert's as her other one?
Yeah, but Matt, what does the column actually say? The negative here is all a matter of tone--Rudy "preening," a "rant," etc. Most of the rest lets him explain his position in full paragraphs. Substantively, she even says that he's the only R even to give lip service to Palestinian concerns. So there's no developed sense of how dangerous the guy is.
So I have to disagree. I read it as just another Dowd effort--vivid and snarky description, not much analysis. And not "trenchant" at all.
It's like the Prague Spring!
find solid, link-worthy column topics?
Well, Friedman is still a space cadet and Dowd has always done this, so you may be suffering from the bigotry of low expectations.
max
['It would be helpful if someone ever hit on why Rudy's um, plan, is lunatic.']
The reason you are wrong about this column is because it is in no way a departure from Dowd's stock and trade, which is to trivialize our discourse. (Which Jim M. already said.)
You have not read enough Daily Howler. Somerby is pointing at the moon (how our media trivializes our discourse) and you keep looking at his finger (Gore was pummeled).
'Trenchant and insightful'? My word!
wow, i thought that column was actually exceedingly lame. in fact, dowd / krug / herbert / rich is why i read Yg et al - 'know *why* you hate'.
I find the rhetorical tack of selectively quoting loonies, sans comment, to be a generally effective one.
What was trenchant about that Dowd column. She stitched together about a dozen examples of Giuliani dumping on Arabs and embracing Israel. That's trenchant? No analysis. No judgment.
I'd say lazy is a better word.
In my view, I think a retraction, clarification, or correction or something is in order here.
Comments closed October 31, 2007.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Dare I suppose that the demise of TimesSelect is pressing the NYT columnists to dig deeper and find solid, link-worthy column topics?
One can only hope, but then a stopped clock is right twice a day. I am not holding my breath that MoDo turned a corner. As anyone can see, "Bobo" Brooks hasn't turned any corner. He's getting more obtuse, actually.
Posted by Joe Klein's conscience | October 17, 2007 11:46 AM