Teresa Kerry is Mo Dowd's new Al Gore.

[trumad]

Hey Mo, you gotta stay relevant and you are the master of pimping bullshit irrelevant shit. Mo...Sometimes you write masterful pieces that hit to the very core of the political world. (I mean that, you really do)...

BUT... Do you sit at night with smeared eye shadow from tears of pain, downing a bottle of Chardonnay, while clutching a picture of Michael Douglas, is that when you pin this kind of National Enquirer crap!

Mo you're a Joke amoung those who follow you closely...

To bad cause you coulda been a contender!

Mo's newest Heinz/Kerry bash...
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/18/opinion/18DOWD.html?hp

[checks-n-balances]

1. Yeah - what IS this woman's problem? Seems to be Queen of the put-down

I agree with you! She can nail the rethug crap (e.g."Bushworld"), but seems to go out of her way to offset it & reinforce rethug talking points.

Just what IS her problem anyway??

[trumad]

2. I have no doubt

that Pundits like Mo think they have to reach out to the other side to increase or maintain readership. She basically throws a bone to the Righties so that Righties click on her Op-Eds...

[July]

6. I think it's even simpler than that.

IMO, Mo's a lazy ass. Why do real research or sound like a journalist when you can throw off a gossipy hatchet piece in five minutes? I want her job. I had lots of experience at the lunch table in junior high with Mo's "style."

[Catfight]

3. She's dating a drunk and known drug addict. Probably snorting along

with him and now she understands how dumbya could get hooked. She's digressing fast into that bushworld of dellusion and spin. Bye bye Maureen, enjoy your cocaine lines with your new loser boyfriend Sorkin, cause your piece today was a big ZERO!

[checks-n-balances]

4. For the unenlightened, who exactly is her boyfriend? n/t

[Spinzonner]

10. Aaron Sorkin of the West Wing

[bushwakker]

5. Boston Herald columnist Margery Eagan has the same fixation

her venom toward Ta-rayyy-sa is vicious. Issues don't matter to these people. Apparently they weren't shown the proper respect or deference at some cocktail party long ago and still haven't forgotten.

[fujiyama]

7. She writes trivial and worthless fluff.

She is vapid, pretentious, and condescending (hmmm a bit like Christopher Hitchens....then again not quite that bad).

The NYTimes editorials are pretty much worthless.

[NNadir]

8. Let's face it; the New York Times has degenerated into a right wing rag.

Not among Mo Dowd, Barbara Ehrenreich, Tom Friedman William Saffire, David Brooks, is there one who can think clearly or comment truthfully. More and more and more the nation's former paper of record has degenerated into a trivializing Republican spin pushing rag with undectable integrity.

Mo Dowd is particularly pathetic. She thinks that the most serious
issues our nation faces can be addressed by carefully watching episodes of "Queer eye for the Straight Guy." That she appears over and over and over and over in the New York Times shows exactly how poor the judgement of Jason Blair's former bosses.

Even worse than Dowd's blatherings is the confused and nearly incoherent "Mea culpa" editorials in which the Times acknowleges buying into, without even the meagerest attempt at critical thinking or actual reporting, the press releases issued by Goebells wannabes Fleicher and McClellan. After each acknowlegement, they simply proceed in continuing that for which they have apologized.

I cancelled my subscription to this now useless newspaper after over 30 years. It's pretty much all worthless tripe now, though there was a time that the New York Times defined journalism. Journalism, however, no longer exists, at least in the United States. Mo Dowd is the epitome of why that is true.

Of course, one needs to exclude Paul Krugman from inclusion in this sorry bunch, but Krugman now fills the "token" role once occupied by Saffire.

[Raster]

11. great minds think alike...

[jayavarman]

9. Her condescending, snarky shit is just so tired

It's like she wrote one wise-assedly arrogant column some time in her past & got alot of praise for it & now she just rewrites the same shit, week in, week out.

She NEVER evidences any research or any individual thought, just the same shit.

In my mind, she's the absolute worst columnist at the times. Even when I agree with her targets, her columns are still tired & formulaic.