Dowdy

Here is Digby's take on Clinton vs. Obama and especially Maureen "Queen of Mean" Dowd's involvement.

I just love it when billionaires say things like this, don't you?

I think that America was better served when the candidates were chosen in smoke-filled rooms.

That's the back-biting David Geffen in the Queen of Mean's [Maureen Dowd] op-ed column today talking about the calculating Clinton while defending his chosen candidate, the man the QueenBee calls Obambi. What a Freudian field day we have at work on this one.

[...]

Jesus. Sometimes I don't think we deserve to win. We can't seem to stop helping the other side, even when they are down and out.

[...]

Here's a freebie link to the Modo column so that you can all assess whether I'm being "truthy" about Geffen. I chose that quote because it stuck out to me as being quintessential, big donor, privileged elitism, which is basically what the whole stupid column reeked of. I frankly do not give a damn what Geffen thinks of either Hillary or Obama.

I thought my post was quite clear that the whole shrieking lot of them were acting like a bunch of asshats, but if it wasn't: the whole shrieking lot of them, including the press, are acting like a bunch of asshats. [emphasis mine -- bill]

Digby is alluding to a point that Bob Somerby at The Daily Howler has been making forever -- and that is that the pampered press corpse has enabled the BushCo Reign of Error and has ceaselessly savaged Dems (especially the Clintons and collateral Gore). Commenting on noxious Dowd's using Geffen to trash the Clintons, Somerby writes:

Good God, what a loser! As these boys have done since the dawn of time, Geffen knows to slime the woman for daring to be so “ambitious.” And what does it mean when Geffen says that Clinton is “incredibly polarizing?” It means this: Right-wing nut jobs invented a string of ugly tales about Clinton —and Geffen is tired of fighting the fight. In fact, Hillary Clinton is “incredibly polarizing” because Maureen Dowd sat and stared while high-profile crackpots accused her and her husband of (for example) a long string of murders. Today, Geffen isn’t angry at the haters and crackpots for this sorry history. Not him! He’s angry at Clinton instead!

Crackpots invented wild stories about her.

And David Geffen is now blaming her.

Meanwhile, Geffen is too stupid to understand a basic fact about Obama, his own (perfectly reasonable) choice for the White House. Here’s that fact: Obama will turn out to be “incredibly polarizing” himself, as soon as he gets the nomination. (Or he’ll turn out to be a flip-flopper, like Kerry. Or he’ll turn out to be a big liar, like Gore.) The same Hate Machine which made Clinton so “polarizing” will make this brilliant man a big punch-line too.

[...]

But then, nothing is dumber than Maureen Dowd—unless it’s Dowd writing from Hollywood.

Let’s say it—these people are barely sane. And yes, Dowd will do this to Obama too; as we’ve seen (though you can’t quite accept it), she has already started. Libs and Dems can’t pick-and-choose their outrage over this sort of clowning. We have to react to it every time. We have to defend all our candidates.

Meanwhile, the Times should finally do the right thing. Maureen Dowd is barely sane. There are nice rehab centers near Beverly Hills. The Times should escort her to one.

Read Somerby's "incomparable archives" if you want to see it laid out chapter and verse back to the late 90's. Dowd is exceptionally bad but, sadly, not alone among the guilty.