I read Maureen Dowd's NYT column weekly for a good laugh and sometimes to get my heart rate going. She is such an arrogant blow-hard who decries sexism and criticizes Hillary Clinton's hair-do in the same breath. Although I sense that she shares a similar liberal idealism to my own, her columns are more focused on those Zing! moments than making any cogent argument. The only intelligent pieces I've seen come out of her colum were written by other people (see: Colbert, Stephen and Sorkin, Aaron). Today is no exception.
The first paragraph of the post today reads:
"I don’t agree with those muttering darkly that the picture of Gov. Sarah Palin with a perky smile and shapely gams posing with a pleased Henry Kissinger, famous for calling power the ultimate aphrodisiac, is a sign of the apocalypse.
The first paragraph of the post today reads:
"I don’t agree with those muttering darkly that the picture of Gov. Sarah Palin with a perky smile and shapely gams posing with a pleased Henry Kissinger, famous for calling power the ultimate aphrodisiac, is a sign of the apocalypse.
It isn’t even a sign of the apocalipstick."
Oh, whoa-ho! How long have you been saving up that apocalipstick line? She continues on, hypothesizing snarkily about Palin's meeting with Kissinger and then somehow winds up doing what she loves to do most: striking down the Clintons.
Thanks for really providing some insight there, Maureen. Your column really furthers the national conversation. Great piece of edititorial work.
No comments:
Post a Comment