66 Comments

Oh look, here’s Maureen Dowd, who says we don’t know what a reporter is, assuring an interview subject that she’s gonna make her look great and showing the column to her husband before it’s published: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2014/12/dowd-showed-interviewee-column-before-publishing.html

Oh look, here’s Maureen Dowd, who says we don’t know what a reporter is, plagiarizing Josh Marshall: https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2009/05/18/the-maureen-dowd-plagiarism-scandal/amp/

Oh look here’s Maureen Dowd, who says we don’t know what a reporter is, saying last year that the Biden-Harris ticket is the first Dem ticket with a woman on it in 36 years: https://www.thewrap.com/hillary-clinton-scolds-ny-times-maureen-dowd-for-forgetting-her-2016-run-too-much-pot-brownie/amp/

And I can’t find a link just yet, but when I do I’ll show you Maureen Dowd, who says we don’t know what a reporter is, getting caught “covering” two campaign rallies hundreds of miles away at the same time.

Expand full comment
author

great links!

Expand full comment

Fantastic take-down. This needs to be a published article in and of it.

Expand full comment

Ashley Parker would know.

Expand full comment
founding

I was afraid to take my blood pressure after reading this jaw-dropping WaPo article yesterday:

“Once Trump’s ‘enemy,’ Fed emerges as White House ally in rejecting concerns about overdoing stimulus”

The article implies that Janet Yellen and Jerome Powell are biased and colluding to support Biden which it says “can be a risky place for the central bank”. The article proclaims this “.....is tricky ground for the Fed, which has spent decades professing its independence from politics and as a guardian against inflation”. How in the world is the fact that two of our most experienced experts at managing the economy agreeing on the need for a big stimulus a risky thing just because it is also what our evidence-based adminstration also thinks? Clearly the implication is that this is an optics problem because they just happen to agree on the facts.

The article starts out saying “prominent economists” are concerned that the bill will overstimulate the economy, ignoring the fact that 120 prominent economists signed on to a letter urging Congress to pass the bill. Halfway through the article the author gets around to presenting the other side of the issue but the article is clearly framed as evidence of Yellen and Powell acting for political reasons, to help Biden.

Also the article is more as a he says/she says debate because it doesn’t do enough to present the evidence that shows inflation is not the problem it was in the 70s and 80s, or point out that if it were such a threat inflation would have happened under Trump when the economy was a full employment and he had pumped unneeded money into it with his tax cuts. Of course the article does mention the problem of too much debt without mentioning Trump blowing it up.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/02/28/fed-biden-inflation-19-trillion-stimulus/

This article is an example of how the media skews reporting in a way that aids Republican obstruction and weakens Democrats attempts to fix the serious problems our country faces.

Expand full comment

Conflict for conflict’s sake...again!

Expand full comment

Conflict for the sake of conflict. That is all mainstream journalism is these days. And anybody who thinks there is a liberal media bias has been living under a rock. I blame Fox “News” for starting that BS.

Expand full comment

Their spin is dizzyingly dangerous.

And that's part of the game...to wear down the public's perception so as to make everything seem questionable and probable...facts be damned!

Expand full comment

The Washington Post isn't communist enough for you? LOL

Expand full comment

Maureen Dowd’s singular obsession with all things Clinton was a contributing factor in my cancellation of a decades long subscription. There was no journalist integrity in her so called reporting. Only what I can only assume was jealousy

Expand full comment
author

btw her singular obsession with all things Clinton was also a key to her rise inside the NYT

Expand full comment
founding

I am still waiting for an explanation for why the Times was so viciously anti-Clinton and willing to let the Times reporter Jeff Gerth be used as a mouthpiece for right wing operatives to slander both the Clintons with false accusations. You would think that when Gerth blamed his editors at the Times for mistakes in his Whitewater reporting that would have gotten a lot more attention.

Expand full comment

Add in how the Screw York Times joined forces with BreitFART to push the libelous "Clinton Cash" trash!

Expand full comment

If it was "libelous," why didn't the corrupt ol' Hildebeast sue?

Expand full comment
founding

Her treatment of Al Gore was also reprehensible. I still can’t believe that she didn’t get drummed out of town for writing this about Gore’s focus on the environment: "Al Gore is so feminized and diversified and ecologically correct, he's practically lactating." Not only is that statement dripping with sexism, it shows just how ignorant Dowd was about the critical threats to our environment.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2007/10/gore200710

Expand full comment

I hold her partially responsible for the fact that we ended up with GW Bush as president.

Expand full comment
founding

Frank Bruni was another one but most of the campaign press was as bad as either Dowd or Bruni.

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/general/news/2011/05/26/9654/think-again-the-times-frank-bruni-or-how-to-succeed-in-journalism-without-really-caring-about-issues/

Both Dowd and Bruni later turned on Bush and became harsh critics which earned them the admiration of Democrats. Bruni even wrote a book trashing Bush as a way to erase his early sycophancy.

Expand full comment

Yes but I never will forgive either one of those liars.

Expand full comment

I forgot that revolting bit Dowd journalism

Expand full comment

Hillary Clinton was and is an arrogant, corrupt, screeching harridan who deserves every bit of ridicule she ever got.

Expand full comment

Sell your BS elsewhere.

Compared to Trump, Hillary is Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm!

Expand full comment

The Hildebeast got crushed for a reason: America knew what a nag she was. Who wanted that ugly old lady on TV? LOL

Expand full comment

^^^mr. teenie weenie speaks like a good little incel. LOL^^^

Expand full comment

So a WaPo reporter does oppo research, gets criticized for it, and Maureen Dowd takes umbrage and tells us WE don't know what a reporter is? <insert laugh track> And Dean Baquet decides that his "reporters," whom Dowd believes have a sacred obligation to tell it like it is, cannot explore the distinct possibility that Trump's endless dishonesty is a symptom of mental illness. But it is we, the libs, who don't understand journalism. Pass the tequila.

Expand full comment

You, the libs, hate this country's guts.

Expand full comment

Phuck off, cretinous troll.

Expand full comment

This is why I subscribe to Press Run. Well done!

Expand full comment
author

thanks, appreciate it

Expand full comment

Lay the blame where it belongs on Howell Raines whose obsessive hatred of the Clintons seeped into every facet of the paper that gladly let Judith Miller post lie after lie on the front page whipping up the war fever that killed my son.

There is nothing that corporate propaganda rag can ever do to atone for killing him and thousands of others because Dumbya wanted to even the score for Daddy.

Expand full comment
author

bingo re: Raines. he laid the groundwork so much of this

Expand full comment

He did, but we also saw with Whitewater that the news department had an issue. I've often wondered if it was part of the Sally Quinn thesis that no one with a drawl could be an acceptable presence at one of her parties ... or if they didn't go to the parties.

Expand full comment

Maureen, dost thou protest too much? When I read the quote in her column y’day about the Vanity Fair Oscar party with date Sulzberger I rolled my eyes as that is typical Dowd who drops names and French bon mots every chance she gets, a snob in her own right I dare say. Seems she was trying to make immunize herself from her own critique. Imo it’s way too soon to start bashing Biden with overblown and overly bloated criticism of stuff he hasn’t done yet. Conflict for conflict’s sake. So tiresome. Really.

Expand full comment
author

agreed. both thin-skinned and trying to Both Sides criticism

Expand full comment
founding

So destructive to democracy, too.

Expand full comment

It's just rich. Enough said on my end. She's always pandered to the news of the day. She was horrible to Clinton. I no longer pay any attention to her. But I know people do. Thanks for writing this.

Expand full comment

Until I dropped my decades-long subscription to the Times more than a year ago, I hadn't read Dowd in years, ever since she kept dunking on Al Gore. Despite her age, she behaves like she never left high school. As someone who is a high school teacher, behavior like that is forgivable in teenagers, not so much in adults her age.

Expand full comment
author

she was awful to Gore, indeed

Expand full comment

Speaking of jr. high, she always referred to President Obama as Barry. What was that all about?

Expand full comment
founding

Tim Russert kept calling Clinton Bubba. Guess they thought they were being cool.

Expand full comment

Oops. High school.

Expand full comment
founding

The mention of high school mentality reminded me of this column by Howard Fineman:

https://www.newsweek.com/potomac-high-98601

It doesn’t occur to him that it’s journalists like him that are stuck in adolescence, not the politicians.

Expand full comment

Bob Somerby's Daily Howler documented every instance when Dowd and the rest of the Screw York Times GOP Stenographers lied about Gore in 2000.

Expand full comment

Dowd was regularly featured in the Daily Howler, to the point that Bob appeared to be literally sick of her BS but feel obligated to report her weekly transgressions anyway.

Expand full comment

Why not be horrible to Clinton, who was horrible herself?

Expand full comment

And the complimentary tweet that Neera Tanden wrote about Lisa Murkowski? Was that shown to her by the reporter as well? Highly doubt it because why? The story wouldn't have been as good!

Expand full comment

Grand Wizard MoDodo--and I call her that because of her decade of racist infantilization attempts against "Barry Obama"--look it up--actually used to be able to write well at times. Now she's joined Peggy Noonan in the department of pathetic self-parody.

But I must point out when I caught on to her, and it was before she became a columnist. She and Tom Friedman did a big Times profile of George Bush and James Baker, and the gist was that Poppy was the nice guy who was kind of naive and Baker was the tough one. I thought, you two cover those beats and think someone who was CIA director, RNC chair, and an ambassador isn't a nasty so-and-so? Either you are totally stupid and naive, or you are so dependent on keeping them as sources that you think the readers are totally stupid and naive.

Expand full comment

Maureen Dowd, a New Yorker, said Trump would be better than Hillary before 2016 election. After election, no mea culpa on picking Trump. Attacked Trump as if she was always against him. There is a whole slew of reporters and opinion writers that fall into this category.

Expand full comment

Don't forget to add Joe Scarborough and Mika to that list. In 2015 and 16 they couldn't give Trump enough FREE airtime. Now they pose as Never-Trumpers.

Expand full comment

Don't even get me started on them. Best line about them is "They are so far up Trump's ass, they bump into Chris Christie."

Expand full comment

I think they were in cahoots with the Hildebeast, who thought she'd win if Trump were the R nominee. Must have been quite the shock for her to realize how many millions of people puked at her sight. LOL

Expand full comment

Who else remembers "Donald The Dove, Hillary The Hawk" from that hysterical harpy?

Expand full comment

Down lambasted Hillary Clinton for twenty years and the day after Trump won, she wrote a column that said "How could people be so stupid, voting for Trump?" Dowd is the most self-unaware person on the planet.

Expand full comment

Hillary Clinton deserved every negative mention. She was, and still is, arrogant, corrupt, and hypocritical. Maybe that's why the left loves her so much?

Expand full comment

No she does not. I remember watching the 2016 DNC convention, when a video was shown with Hillary boots on the ground after 9-11 with Rudy. I thought what kind of pretzel logic will "Fair and Balanced Foxnews" say in response. Imagine my surprise when I turn to Foxnews, only to see hiding this from viewers. Fox was selectively showing the DNC convention. Same wasnt true during RNC convention. Pretty sick considering we live in a free country. Sad so many folks are fine with that, a station owned by Aussies.

Expand full comment

She was, and is, a pus-filled wound. LOL

Expand full comment

Awww, you're just jealous...of Bill.

Expand full comment

Dowd hasn’t been relevant or important for decades. She gets, however, to one of my pet rants: the more important the story, the likelier the Times’ reporting is rap. Or worse.

And the Kim affair, specially her response to Eric, elides the real problem with showing the tweet to Murkowski: Tanden’s nasty tweets are a problem in a way Trump’s never were. Every reporter covering Tanden and her tweets should ask every senator who are against her confirmation why they’re a problem when Trump’s tweets never were a problem — even the tweets with which he promoted his literally murderous response to the pandemic. For that matter, another question is how many of her tweets were nasty and how many were characterized as nasty because they referenced facts which only rarely supports the GOP and hence might appear nasty.

Expand full comment

Maureen Dowd is a person with an opinion. I'm getting more than a little tired of mere opinionists being treated like their every utterance is gold.

Expand full comment

I’ve long been convinced that the fabulists, er, columnists for the NYT write for their friends and neighbors on the Upper West Side and that they sometime venture to the Upper East Side when they must. The NYTimes is essentially Patch for one neighborhood, with society pages.

Expand full comment

I don't care what Seung Min Kim says, what she did was something they do over at Project Veritas or Sasha Baron Cohen.

Her goal was to move the needle on which way Lisa Murkowski would vote and then proudly claim she was the first to do in Neera Tanden.

Clearly, Lisa was unaware of the tweet so I call into question Miss Kim's characterization that it had already been reported on. If it did, then Lisa needs to hire some new aids.

Expand full comment