Author Topic: low post count dummie throws Maureen Dowd under the hillary bus, dump piles on  (Read 1661 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline I_B_Perky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7532
  • Reputation: +721/-329
Seems all the dump hasn't got the message that hillary is yesterday's news.

The link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016117089

The OP:
Quote
Spider_Mann (31 posts)

The Numbers Behind Maureen Dowd's 21-Year Long Campaign Against Hillary Clinton
F"or more than twenty years, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd has been attacking Hillary Clinton from a shallow well of insults, routinely portraying the former secretary of state and first lady as an unlikeable, power-hungry phony.

Media Matters analyzed 195 columns by Dowd since November 1993 containing significant mentions of Clinton for whether they included any of 16 negative tropes in five categories (listed in the below methodology). 72 percent (141 columns) were negative towards Clinton -- only 8 percent (15 columns) were positive. The remaining 20 percent (39 columns) were neutral.

For example, Dowd has repeatedly accused Clinton of being an enemy to or betraying feminism (35 columns, 18 percent of those studied), power-hungry (51 columns, 26 percent), unlikeable (9 columns, 5 percent), or phony (34 columns, 17 percent). She's also attacked the Clintons as a couple in 43 columns (22 percent), many of which included Dowd's ham-handed attempts at psychoanalysis."

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/06/18/the-numbers-behind-maureen-dowds-21-year-long-c/199752

Away we go....

Quote
MADem (109,105 posts)
1. Dowd is a vicious, mendacious tool.

When she over-ate her pot cookies, all I could think was "Serves ya right."

I always got the impression that she envied HRC, and that's what drove her nasty columns about her.

Same dummie that loved Dowd when she criticized Bush.

Quote
freshwest (49,648 posts)
3. Or else paid like Rush was. Same time frame she began attacking. Part of the huge RW con job.

Those percentages by Media Matters' quantifying her scribbles is damning. Think of the impact of 22 year of forming public perception based on that and the cottage industry of other anti-Democratic writers.

Which is exactly what's turned a big portion of this nation's mindscape into a hateful, benighted wasteland. And a portion of the electorate who truly are not fit to govern anything.

But I never knew much about Dowd, other than she's deemed unpleasant. She's no Helen Thomas.

Dowd a card carrying member of the VRWC? Who knew!!!

Quote
MADem (109,105 posts)
4. She has this bad habit of trying to portray herself as some kind of "sex goddess hottie."

Veronica Lake with a typewriter. I get the impression she thinks she's the star of some 1940s "Gal Reporter" film in her mind, where all the guys say "See? See?" and call other fellows "mokes" and women "dames."

It is a very retro, rather unseemly, characterization. Sexist, dare I say. And after a certain age, that kind of mindset is just weird and immature.

She certainly doesn't advance the cause of women as serious commentators with that kind of approach, IMO. And I can't help but notice that she saves her most vicious criticism for women. Very strange.

Hmmm... OK. Whatever.

Quote
pnwmom (58,993 posts)
6. She's stuck in the high-school "mean girl" mode. Very nasty and full of herself. n/t

Off with her head!!!!

Quote
MADem (109,105 posts)
9. Yes, that's it exactly--she reserves most of her bile for women.

She doesn't engage in the same quality of cruel invective when she's talking about men.

Maybe she likes men?   :whistling:

Quote
DFW (17,261 posts)
8. She's no Helen Thomas? ha ha!Very true, but very unfair

As you know, Helen and I were close, and I've never met Dowd that I know of (may have brushed up against her at a Gridiron or something, but never consciously had any contact with her).

Trying to compare Maureen Down with Helen is like comparing a sullen kid on a beach building a sand castle too close to the water with Gaudí. Not only do the kid's efforts get washed away into oblivion immediately (pissing him off, but with no other consequence) while Gaudí's work was unique and endures. Not only is Maureen Dowd not Helen Thomas, she never will be, and I think it is unlikely there will EVER be another Helen Thomas, just like there will probably never be another Rachel Maddow. Certain people are just unique, and that's that.

Helen was "after" no one except liars and warmongers. She had her share during her long stint at the White House, and gave them no quarter. Helen was driven by her convictions. Whether you agreed with them or not was another matter--Republicans considered her the devil incarnate. If Dowd has any true convictions, they are having a difficult time shining through her dislike of Hillary.

We get it, OK?. Maureen doesn't like Hillary. She doesn't have to hit us over the head with it every time she comes out with a column. The editorial page of the New York Times should not be a personal slam page from some rural high school rag.

Helen was after no one but the GOP. Dems got a pass.  And you and Helen were "close"?  How close?  Real close? So was Helen the man in your close relationship?

Quote
freshwest (49,648 posts)
10. I posted that in tribute to Helen, DFW, not to compare her in any way. Thomas went after criminals.

Sorry to have brought her into the thread.

Helen went after the GOP. That is why you dummies liked her. If she would have gone after a dem president you dummies would have thrown her under the bus like everyone else that you disagree with.

Quote
the_sly_pig (266 posts)
5. A journalist critical of an elected official.. .. hmmm

I'd like to see more of it. But I suppose Maureen is just being catty.

And as soon as a journalist is critical of obumbles, you would attack said journalist with the same zeal that ISIS does to non believers.  For that matter dummie, a journalist just WAS critical of someone aspiring to elected office and guess what? You dismissed her as being catty.

Exhibit B: How about this thread, dummie?  http://www.democraticunderground.com/10247666  (Trying to get some dummie, any dummie, to read an Omaha Steve post)

Quote
MADem (109,105 posts)
20. She's not a journalist. She's a columnist, a pundit.

...and wisdom to those who know the difference....

Wisdom?  Dummie wisdom: If anyone says the least little thing about a dem, they are a Koch paid, child raping, grandma killing pundit. If they say anything bad about the GOP, they are a journalist just reporting the God's honest truth. 

Quote
MannyGoldstein (31,079 posts)
15. If this was a legitimate analysis,

they'd compare Dowd's numbers on Hillary vs. her numbers on everyone else.

This reeks of a Clinton-friendly hit piece against Dowd.

TROLL!!!!!

Quote
Man from Pickens (1,111 posts)
16. sore-butt syndrome

Dowd's latest column was a masterpiece

TROLL!!!!!

Quote
KoKo (79,337 posts)
18. "Media Matters" pushes hard for Hillary 2016, putting its nonprofit status in question...


Media Matters pushes hard for Hillary 2016, putting its nonprofit status in question

By retaining longtime Clinton loyalist James Carville as a regular columnist, the liberal watchdog Media Matters for America has increased its influence as a player in the 2016 presidential election. But Media Matters may be edging toward violating the tax rules that govern nonprofit organizations.

Carville's new role at Media Matters was announced Thursday, following two weeks of controversy surrounding Hillary Clinton, a likely Democratic presidential candidate and former secretary of state.

Media Matters was founded by another Clinton friend, David Brock, one of the rare Clinton acolytes willing to defend her amid reports that she violated federal law by exclusively using a personal email address during her tenure as secretary of state.

Media Matters has published more than 40 blog posts and videos rebutting widespread and bipartisan criticisms of Clinton.

Just one problem: Brock's organization is not allowed to campaign for political candidates.

Media Matters is classified by the IRS as a 501(c)(3), exempting the organization from having to pay federal taxes. "Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office," read the IRS's rules governing such organizations.

Clinton has yet to begin her formal campaign for president. But she is expected to announce her candidacy within weeks, and there does not appear to be a clear line — or in fact, any line — between her interests and the advocacy work of Media Matters.

"There are two issues here," said Alan Dye, a lawyer specializing in representing nonprofit organizations and political committees, in an interview with the Washington Examiner media desk. "One is campaign intervention. That is, activity that affects an election."

Dye has not studied Media Matters' published content closely, but he said that the more consistently a nonprofit offers criticism that benefits a specific candidate for office, "the more likely the IRS is to consider it campaign intervention."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/media-matters-pushes-hard-for-hillary-2016-putting-its-nonprofit-status-in-question/article/2561517?custom_click=rss

Wait for it...

Quote
DemocratSinceBirth (50,006 posts)
27. The Washington Examiner is a right wing rag. Now that I read it i Must take a shower.

When Anschutz started the Examiner in its daily newspaper format, he envisioned creating a conservative competitor to The Washington Post. According to Politico, "When it came to the editorial page, Anschutz’s instructions were explicit — he 'wanted nothing but conservative columns and conservative op-ed writers,' said one former employee." The Examiner's conservative writers include Byron York (National Review), Michael Barone (American Enterprise Institute, Fox News Channel), and David Freddoso (National Review, author of The Case Against Barack Obama).

The daily newspaper endorsed John McCain in the 2008 presidential election and Adrian Fenty in the Democratic primary for mayor in 2010. On December 14, 2011, it endorsed Mitt Romney for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, saying he was the only Republican who could beat Barack Obama in the general election, releasing a series of articles critical of Obama.

Knew that was coming. Anything that does not agree with their view is to be dismissed. Typical.


Then we have a little cat fight break out between manny and geek tragedy:

Quote
geek tragedy (43,831 posts)
23. Lol, irony. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to geek tragedy (Reply #23)

Sun Mar 15, 2015, 07:38 PM

Star Member MannyGoldstein (31,079 posts)
24. Your attention is flattering!

Following me from post to post.

A bit creepy, but mostly flattering.

Your nonsense is slightly entertaining, too, in a local context.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #24)

Sun Mar 15, 2015, 07:41 PM

Star Member geek tragedy (43,831 posts)
25. What is nonsense is that those who produce

a steady stream of hit pieces, in defense of someone who writes hit pieces for a living, while professing to object to a "hit piece" is pretty darn rich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to geek tragedy (Reply #25)

Sun Mar 15, 2015, 07:48 PM

Star Member MannyGoldstein (31,079 posts)
26. Exactly. She produces 'hit pieces' for a living.

So why should she make an exception for Our Next Presidentâ„¢?

Unless Our Next Presidentâ„¢ is too fragile, of course - I guess that must be your concern.


 :lmao:

Quote
BigDemVoter (848 posts)
22. Dowd is a tiresome BORE.

AND she cannot write worth a shit.

She's not funny. She's not witty. She's not interesting.

She would take Smirky GWB over Hillary. I may not be a huge Hillary fan, but Dowd's constant, unrelenting attacks on Clinton make me sick.

So Dowd likes Bush now?   :lmao:  Dummies.  Gotta love them.

That is it for now.


« Last Edit: March 15, 2015, 09:37:24 PM by I_B_Perky »
Living in the Dummies minds rent free since 2009!

Montani Semper Liberi

Offline Delmar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5295
  • Reputation: +592/-41
Quote
Response to freshwest (Reply #3)Sun Mar 15, 2015, 06:00 AM
DFW (17,261 posts)
8. She's no Helen Thomas? ha ha!Very true, but very unfair

As you know, Helen and I were close, and I've never met Dowd that I know of (may have brushed up against her at a Gridiron or something, but never consciously had any contact with her).

Trying to compare Maureen Down with Helen is like comparing a sullen kid on a beach building a sand castle too close to the water with Gaudí. Not only do the kid's efforts get washed away into oblivion immediately (pissing him off, but with no other consequence) while Gaudí's work was unique and endures. Not only is Maureen Dowd not Helen Thomas, she never will be, and I think it is unlikely there will EVER be another Helen Thomas, just like there will probably never be another Rachel Maddow. Certain people are just unique, and that's that.

Helen was "after" no one except liars and warmongers. She had her share during her long stint at the White House, and gave them no quarter. Helen was driven by her convictions. Whether you agreed with them or not was another matter--Republicans considered her the devil incarnate. If Dowd has any true convictions, they are having a difficult time shining through her dislike of Hillary.

We get it, OK?. Maureen doesn't like Hillary. She doesn't have to hit us over the head with it every time she comes out with a column. The editorial page of the New York Times should not be a personal slam page from some rural high school rag.

As everybody knows, DFW and "Helen" were close.  But the high and mighty DFW can't recall ever meeting the plebeian Dowd.

This DFW must be a big shot to have been pals with Thomas and dismissive of Dowd.
We will make America strong again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And we will make America great again.

Donald Trump

Offline obumazombie

  • Siege engine to lib fortresses
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21814
  • Reputation: +1661/-578
  • Last of the great minorities
Quote
MADem (109,105 posts)
9. Yes, that's it exactly--she reserves most of her bile for women.

She doesn't engage in the same quality of cruel invective when she's talking about men.

War on women, and typewriter ink rape.
There were only two options for gender. At last count there are at least 12, according to libs. By that standard, I'm a male lesbian.

Offline 98ZJUSMC

  • The Most Deplorable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Reputation: +436/-76
  • Now, with 99% less yellow!
Quote
ADem (109,105 posts)
1. Dowd is a vicious, mendacious tool.

When she over-ate her pot cookies, all I could think was "Serves ya right."

I always got the impression that she envied HRC, and that's what drove her nasty columns about her.


Quote
Same dummie that loved Dowd when she criticized Bush.

My first thought when I read the thread title   :hi5:


Quote
DFW (17,261 posts)
8. She's no Helen Thomas? ha ha!Very true, but very unfair

As you know, Helen and I were close,
::) ::) ::) ::)   :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy:

Quote
just like there will probably never be another Rachel Maddow.

God, is not that cruel.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2015, 04:48:49 AM by 98ZJUSMC »
              

Liberal thinking is a two-legged stool and magical thinking is one of the legs, the other is a combination of self-loating and misanthropy.  To understand it, you would have to be able to sit on that stool while juggling two elephants, an anvil and a fragmentation grenade, sans pin.

"Accuse others of what you do." - Karl Marx

Offline FiddyBeowulf

  • "Its on, its off, its on, its off." "That is called blinking, boys."
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5271
  • Reputation: +523/-34
Quote
DFW (17,261 posts)
8. She's no Helen Thomas? ha ha!Very true, but very unfair...
... Helen was driven by her convictions.
...driven by her convictions and rampant antisemitism but mostly the antisemitism.
Fire...BAD!!! - John Fetterman


The policies that are indorsed by this party, that they backer of which are much of the 1 percent, causes a social structure much like the one back before the Revolution.

-Words of wisdom from Lady Freedom Returns

"Arguing with liberals...it's like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock over the pieces, crap on the board and strut around like it's victorious." -- Anonymous

"A hat should be taken off when you greet a lady and left off for the rest of your life. Nothing looks more stupid than a hat." - P. J. O'Rourke

Offline GOBUCKS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24186
  • Reputation: +1812/-339
  • All in all, not bad, not bad at all
...driven by her convictions and rampant antisemitism but mostly the antisemitism.

Remember DUmmy DFW is an ardent Germanophile.

Has lived there many years, speaks the language, admires the culture, describes every aspect of German life as superior to America.

I wonder why he'd be an admirer of a Jew-hating nut like Helen Thomas?

Offline wasp69

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7567
  • Reputation: +907/-520
  • Hillbilly Yeti
Remember DUmmy DFW is an ardent Germanophile.

Has lived there many years, speaks the language, admires the culture, describes every aspect of German life as superior to America.

I wonder why he'd be an admirer of a Jew-hating nut like Helen Thomas?

Because he's a liberal?
"We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and then bid the geldings to be fruitful."

C.S. Lewis

A community may possess all the necessary moral qualifications, in so high a degree, as to be capable of self-government under the most adverse circumstances; while, on the other hand, another may be so sunk in ignorance and vice, as to be incapable of forming a conception of liberty, or of living, even when most favored by circumstances, under any other than an absolute and despotic government.

John C Calhoun, "Disquisition on Government", 1840

Offline franksolich

  • Scourge of the Primitives
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58722
  • Reputation: +3102/-173
apres moi, le deluge

Milo Yiannopoulos "It has been obvious since 2016 that Trump carries an anointing of some kind. My American friends, are you so blind to reason, and deaf to Heaven? Can he do all this, and cannot get a crown? This man is your King. Coronate him, and watch every devil shriek, and every demon howl."

Offline franksolich

  • Scourge of the Primitives
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58722
  • Reputation: +3102/-173
"the expatriate primitive"
http://conservativecave.com/index.php?topic=95782.0

Ooops; sorry.

I forgot; the files were changed since that had been posted.

But there's still enough there to give one an idea; from living the too-soft, too-easy, too-comfortable, too-decadent life, the guy's afflicted with gout.

Too bad.
apres moi, le deluge

Milo Yiannopoulos "It has been obvious since 2016 that Trump carries an anointing of some kind. My American friends, are you so blind to reason, and deaf to Heaven? Can he do all this, and cannot get a crown? This man is your King. Coronate him, and watch every devil shriek, and every demon howl."