Just stopblogging Mo Dowd. Linking to her column every week, even to ridicule her, just encourages her.
8 thoughts on “Memo to Brother and Sister Bloggers”
I actually think Dowd sees herself as heiress to that adroit female quipper, Dorothy Parker. Unlike Parker who had the brilliant Algonquin Round Table bunch to feed and feed off of, Dowd’s sarcasm and wit – and I think she had some – has through the years deteriorated into mean-spirited gibes.
Sort of like because she’s had only swine to cast her pearls among, her pearls have turned into merely ugly growths?
I count 7 “progressive” bloggers referring to the thing, including yours. It must be because she is somehow perceived to be a turncoat that she gets so much attention. There’s plenty of toxic stuff out there that is happily ignored, so what really gives?
I count 7 “progressive†bloggers referring to the thing, including yours.
I didn’t refer to Dowd. I referred to bloggers referring to Dowd.
It must be because she is somehow perceived to be a turncoat that she gets so much attention.
I don’t think so. I don’t consider her to be a “turncoat,” because it’s been obvious for years that what few loyalties she might have, if any, lean more Right than Left. I think it’s more of a freak show thing. Her column is horrible, yet the New York Times still runs it. And, oh, look; there’s a two-headed snake!
Well I wouldn’t have seen the snake if the bloggers didn’t keep pointing at it directly or indirectly. She’s not that difficult to avoid if it weren’t for that. It isn’t however a case where every full time stupidity of Fox news is chronicled by the same blogs that seem to jump on Dowd’s every other piece. So it is still a mystery as to what it is that sets it off.
YY — I never watch Faux Snooze. Those lefties that do know what to expect from it. However, Dowd is published by the New York Times. We hold them to a higher standard.
I think that’s where the disappointment comes from. But Brooks does not get as much flack and given Dowd as writing essentially fluff, it does not explain the special place she holds. From what I can see Brooks is far more harmful given his multiple outlets and message. Dowd just pisses off the liberals and is ignored by the rest.
YY — #6 — Yes, and that’s why I wrote the memo to just stop blogging Dowd. Why are you arguing with me, exactly?
Maha, I’m not arguing with you. But I think there’s something that is success for Dowd that keeps her stuff from not being ignored by people who should know better.
Basically its a horror show – but why this particular horror show? Enough, anyway…
I actually think Dowd sees herself as heiress to that adroit female quipper, Dorothy Parker. Unlike Parker who had the brilliant Algonquin Round Table bunch to feed and feed off of, Dowd’s sarcasm and wit – and I think she had some – has through the years deteriorated into mean-spirited gibes.
Sort of like because she’s had only swine to cast her pearls among, her pearls have turned into merely ugly growths?
I count 7 “progressive” bloggers referring to the thing, including yours. It must be because she is somehow perceived to be a turncoat that she gets so much attention. There’s plenty of toxic stuff out there that is happily ignored, so what really gives?
I count 7 “progressive†bloggers referring to the thing, including yours.
I didn’t refer to Dowd. I referred to bloggers referring to Dowd.
It must be because she is somehow perceived to be a turncoat that she gets so much attention.
I don’t think so. I don’t consider her to be a “turncoat,” because it’s been obvious for years that what few loyalties she might have, if any, lean more Right than Left. I think it’s more of a freak show thing. Her column is horrible, yet the New York Times still runs it. And, oh, look; there’s a two-headed snake!
Well I wouldn’t have seen the snake if the bloggers didn’t keep pointing at it directly or indirectly. She’s not that difficult to avoid if it weren’t for that. It isn’t however a case where every full time stupidity of Fox news is chronicled by the same blogs that seem to jump on Dowd’s every other piece. So it is still a mystery as to what it is that sets it off.
YY — I never watch Faux Snooze. Those lefties that do know what to expect from it. However, Dowd is published by the New York Times. We hold them to a higher standard.
I think that’s where the disappointment comes from. But Brooks does not get as much flack and given Dowd as writing essentially fluff, it does not explain the special place she holds. From what I can see Brooks is far more harmful given his multiple outlets and message. Dowd just pisses off the liberals and is ignored by the rest.
YY — #6 — Yes, and that’s why I wrote the memo to just stop blogging Dowd. Why are you arguing with me, exactly?
Maha, I’m not arguing with you. But I think there’s something that is success for Dowd that keeps her stuff from not being ignored by people who should know better.
Basically its a horror show – but why this particular horror show? Enough, anyway…