Junior Gets a Spanking (Dowd alert)

The New York Times ^ | 08/18/2002 | Maureen Dowd

[DugwayDuke]

"It's a very strange relationship," a former aide to the father says. "He's so careful about his son's prerogatives that I don't think he would tell him his own views."

So, we are to believe that instead of a quiet personal phone call, Bush 41 would choose to embarass his son by having Scrowcraft publish this article in the WSJ? I guess this makes sense to Ms. Dowd.

"It must be galling for Bush père to hear conservatives braying that the son has to finish the job in Iraq that the father wimped out on."

Well, actually, Bush 41 is probably thinking: "Scrowcroft was wrong in '91 and again in '02. At least he's consistent."

"Junior could also have made the case that Dad's tax increase, which got him into so much trouble, led to 10 years of prosperity. Instead he has philosophically joined the right-wingers who erroneously think that the tax increase caused a recession."

No, "Junior" doesn't tell lies and understands economics.

[isthisnickcool]

Something between someones legs dried up few years back.....

[McGavin999]

Poor old Mo, she doesn't realize this but she just stepped right into the trap. It's going to be such fun to send her a copy of this tripe after it's all over. :o)

[cactusSharp]

the only sex Mo gets is strddlin' the
55 gallon ink barrels....fits too

[Miss Marple]

Mo isn't the only one peddling that tripe. Someone in the Washington Post said this was a "clear signal" from Dad Bush to his son. LOL!

Yes, they communicate by sending third party comments in the Wall Street Journal. Even when they just spent four days together, a week and a half ago.

I can see President Bush and his dad on the golf course, chatting about the weather. Dad Bush says to himself "Gee, I wish I could tell him what I think. Nope, can't do it, wouldn't be prudent. Who can I get to tell him? Bar? No, she could never tell him the truth. Jenna? No, she won't ever say anything mean to him. Laura? No, she doesn't like to hurt his feelings. . I know, I'll get Brent to write an article in the Wall Street Journal!"

Is this the most ridiculous thing you have ever heard the press imply? It sure is for me!

[Darlin']

I second that emotion. FOFLOL.

[Darlin']

Poor ol' Dowdy. I agree, someone needs therapy rehab all right but it isn't the Bush family. It is kinda sad to see that fresh, stinging wit reduced to spewing spite and malice. She has been stuck in a fog for years cranking out hateful columns filled with resentment about a good and decent family that she will never understand. Too much booze and bitterness have dimmed a once bright mind. Now she is little more than a tiresome shrew, unpleasant, brittle and nasty.

[section9]

Dowd's columns are what happen when you mix clever writing with a poor thought process.

Instead of writing a substantive criticism of either Scowcroft's fears or Rice's imperatives, Dowd sends up this pseudointellectual garbage. For some time she's been writing this psychosexual analysis of Bush the Younger as if it has any validity to it.

Add to this fact the probability that she's getting hammered by some media bigwig and you can start putting things together. Her writing is clever but it is also substandard. Someone is getting something for putting her columns in print.

The great thing is that many liberals actually read her column like they read Doonesbury: for what they believe to be deep intellectual analysis hidden by cutting satire.

Which should tell you something about most liberals.

Someone posted on here an assertion that Dowd's paychecks were sure larger than ours. That's true.

But all that proves is that you can be well paid and shovel shit at the same time.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[section9]

Oh yeah, btw! You people think this stuff from Dowd is mean, spiteful, and catty? You just wait until Condi Rice gets that promotion in 2003 or 2004.

You people haven't seen catty yet!

Meow!

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Miss Marple]

Someone posted on here an assertion that Dowd's paychecks were sure larger than ours. That's true.

But all that proves is that you can be well paid and shovel shit at the same time.

LOL! Nomination for Quote of the Day, RJayneJ (although you might have to clean it up a bit). Ha!

[Trident/Delta]

Spanked???? by Scowcroft????....excuse me?!?!...The ONLY thing that Brent could "spank"....is his little monkey...Gawd, I wish the pantywaists would go back to their teacups...their whining is distracting!

semper disgusted!

[Miss Marple]

It is bad enough to have to be patient while the military strategy is worked out (which is no doubt why the President keeps telling us we are a patient people) but it is extremely annoying to have to put up with people like the Dowd, aided and abetted by people like Scocroft who should just be quiet! Grrr.

[IncPen]

Pokey, is it far enough off the reservation to suppose that Scowcroft is part of the disinformation campaign, to make Bush & company look indecisive and struggling while we arrange things for a massive blow to Saddam?

For all the media tries to paint Bush as a moron, don't forget how he used the media in the campaign:

A TV commercial would appear in a backwater outlet with some outrageous accusation or gimmick (remember the 'RATS' spot?)

Locals would be up in arms, and within a day the spot would be airing wall-to-wall on the network news.

Bush would spend about $300 for airtime (on a cable station) and end up with full network airing, and the RATS looked like sniveling idiots for complaining about it.

The Bush 43 organization is reknown for not leaking, pre- and post- 911.

I believe that in recent weeks the 'leaks' have been carefully orchestrated to confuse the enemy while we move our chips around the board.

I don't know when, but I expect a brilliant finish to Saddam, once and for all.

[Miss Marple]

You may be right, in which case we will get to see Maureen Dowd and a host of others with egg on their faces.

That is quite a pleasant thought.

[Pokey78]

From Orrin Judd, the Brothers Judd blog:

MAUREEN BECOMES ELECTRA :
Junior Gets a Spanking (Maureen Dowd, 8/18/02, NY Times)

Oedipus, Shmoedipus.

Why cite a Greek hero when we can cite the president's favorite British hero?

In "Goldmember," Austin Powers has "Earn Daddy's Respect" on his To Do list. So the teary but still groovy spy confronts his prodigal father, played by Michael Caine.

"Got an issue?" Daddy breezily responds. "Here's a tissue."

Tissue issues between the two Bush presidents spilled into public view on Thursday when that most faithful family retainer, Brent Scowcroft, wrote a jaw-dropping op-ed piece in The Wall Street Journal headlined "Don't Attack Saddam."

Mr. Scowcroft gave the back of his hand to conservatives' strenuous attempts to link Saddam to 9/11.

Bellicose Bushies have yet to offer a sustained and persuasive rationale for jumping Saddam, beyond yammering about how "evil" he is, as if he had a monopoly on that.

First of all, let me just say this again--following upon her series of essays on what good shape George W. Bush is in physically--how "buff" he is--Ms Dowd, who characterizes herself as sitting around gorging on junk food and watching George W. workout videos when she writes about the man, here offers an essay in which she imagines him being spanked. It's getting to the point where the psycho-sexual drama that throbs through her head is consuming more and more of Ms Dowd's column inches and makes one wonder if her musings might be better suited to the Village Voice than to the Gray Lady.

Second, in all fairness to the General, one would have thought that Ms Dowd would have found the second paragraph of Mr. Scowcroft's column to be germane :

It is beyond dispute that Saddam Hussein is a menace. He terrorizes and brutalizes his own people. He has launched war on two of his neighbors. He devotes enormous effort to rebuilding his military forces and equipping them with weapons of mass destruction. We will all be better off when he is gone.

That said, we need to think through this issue very carefully.

There he freely concedes the case, which Ms Dowd somehow still maintains has not been offered, for "jumping Saddam". Apparently he doesn't read the Times of he'd know that the nature of the Iraqi menace is not only far from beyond dispute but is actually disputed almost daily by Times editors and op-ed writers, like Ms Dowd. That he goes on to question whether it is wise or worthwhile to attack Saddam right now should not allow her to torture his words (to spank them?) to suit her purposes.

If Ms Dowd does not care that Saddam is a menace and does not think he should be dealt with then let her make her case. She should not be allowed to on the one hand say that the argument in favor of war has not been made and on the other hand try to refute that very argument through the twisted use of an essay that concedes that the argument is in fact valid.

Ms Dowd needs to put down the snacks, banish from her mind the sado-masochistic sexual fantasies starring George W., and put a little work into her columns. She's become an embarrassment to the Times.

[Miss Marple]

Ha! More anti-Dowd reinforcements!

Thanks for the ping, Pokey!

[NeoCaveman]

That's the best thing about these Dowd threads.

[RJayneJ]

Thanks for the nomination! };^D )