On Dowdy days at the new York Times, I feel it essential to read and reflect on her column, before reading Molly Ivors. She nails Ms. Dowd so perfectly so repeatedly, that I could lazily avoid the mental work-out involved in reading Dowd myself, and succumb to my habitual sloth, relying entirely on Ms Ivors.
Today's exercise was a piece of cake. It's like I dragged myself to the gym, only to discover that the boiler had busted and the building was closed. I could pat myself on the back without having to break a sweat. The op-ed "covered" the tight race in Iowa between the Democrats. Although Clinton, Edwards and Obama were mentioned - not a single one of their policies was. No issue was discussed. There was virtually nothing about qualifications either - a passing reference to Clinton vs Obama on the "experience" continuum.
Instead Dowd engaged in fantasy - speculating as to which candidate felt more entitled to the Oval Office.
A nadir for the Times will come when Bill Kristol joins the op-ed page - and is not the greatest fabulist on the beat.
UPDATE: Ivors Does it Again:
"And today, MoDo spews like a teenage girl on a wine-cooler bender."
Comments