MoDo Gets Obamarized

Oh she tries to retain her cynical worldly approach and the title tries to stir up trouble, but Maureen Dowd got, to use her phrase, Obamarized. She portrays Obama as the anti-presumptuous one. Some snippets:

After 200,000 people thronged to see Obama at the Victory Column in Berlin, christening him “Redeemer” and “Savior,” it turned out Sarko [French President Nicolas Sarkozy] was also Obamarized, as the Germans were calling the mesmerizing effect. “You must want a cigarette after that,” I teased [Obama] after the amorous joint press conference, as he flew from Paris to London for the finale of his grand tour.

“I think we could work well together,” he said of Sarko, smiling broadly.

More . . .

[Obama] admitted showing “extraordinarily poor judgment” in leaving Paris after only a few hours. Watching Paris recede from behind the frosted glass of his limo was “a pretty good metaphor” for how constricted his life has become, he said, compared with his student days tramping around Europe with “a feeling of complete freedom.” “But the flip side is that I deeply enjoy the work,” he said, “so it’s a trade-off.”

How do you go back to the Iowa farm after you’ve seen Paree? “One of the values of this trip for me was to remind me of what this campaign should be about,” he said. “It’s so easy to get sucked into day-to-day, tit-for-tat thinking, finding some clever retort for whatever comment your opponent made. And then I think I’m not doing my job, which should be to raise up some big important issues.”

Obama is stolid and solid in his replies. And Dowd can't make fun of him. She even ends on a sympathetic note:

In Berlin, the tabloid Bild sent an attractive blonde reporter to stalk Obama at the Ritz-Carlton gym as he exercised with his body man, Reggie Love. She then wrote a tell-all, enthusing, “I’m getting hot, and not from the workout,” and concluding, “What a man.”

Obama marveled: “I’m just realizing what I’ve got to become accustomed to. The fact that I was played like that at the gym. Do you remember ‘The Color of Money’ with Paul Newman? And Forest Whitaker is sort of sitting there, acting like he doesn’t know how to play pool. And then he hustles the hustler. She hustled us. We walk into the gym. She’s already on the treadmill. She looks like just an ordinary German girl. She smiles and sort of waves, shyly, but doesn’t go out of her way to say anything. As I’m walking out, she says: ‘Oh, can I have a picture? I’m a big fan.’ Reggie takes the picture.”

I ask him if he found it a bit creepy that she described his T-shirt as smelling like “fabric softener with spring scent.” He looked nonplused: “Did she describe what my T-shirt smelled like?”

Dowd thinks she was writing a hard, cynical piece here. That is how we know she was Obamarized. Because it is in essence an Obama fluff piece. Good work by Obama.

Speaking for me only

< Late Night: Keep On Rocking in the Free World | Cass Sunstein "Liberals" >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Fluffy and ridiculous (5.00 / 6) (#1)
    by andgarden on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:02:12 AM EST
    She is an embarrassment to the Times. I am surprised that Andrew Rosenthal let this go to press.

    More embarrassing for her I think (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:14:41 AM EST
    She seems incapable of writing an actual opinion piece now.

    At least as far back as the 2000 election, (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by tigercourse on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:15:34 AM EST
    her opinion wasn't worth reading.

    That's different (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:17:28 AM EST
    At least then there was a level of coherence in his pieces. Now they are just a complete mess.

    Well, since she has only one column (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by andgarden on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:16:11 AM EST
    and one style, her "method" was bound to run into a wall at some point, no?

    Anyway, I still think it's embarrassing for the Times to print this.


    Oh I don't know (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:18:26 AM EST
    There used to be a certain coherence to her columns. Now they are just a mess. It is embarrassing. She can't write anymore. At all.

    Well, now she's "miss run amuck" (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by andgarden on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:19:41 AM EST
    there hasn't been (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by cpinva on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:33:23 AM EST
    any "coherence" to her columns for 16 years. she's just a flaming nutjob, who should have been sent to an institution years ago.

    it's early yet, she'll get into her "democrat males are effeminate" mode soon enough.


    Her writing has a certain (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Fabian on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:54:23 AM EST
    "foolish consistency"!

    Why bother with it then and fill a whole thread? (none / 0) (#85)
    by bridget on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 05:00:34 PM EST
    People really should ignore her scribbles. I do.
    And she is not the only paper pundit who should be ignored. There are so many of them. And they make undeserved $$$ millions with writing nonsense year after year.

    It is much more difficult to come up with a line of really smart no-nonsense writers I like and read and could recommend.


    I fully agree with bridget on this. (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by weltec2 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 01:41:41 AM EST
    I never read her unless forced to on some blog or other. The woman has sex on the brain. "You must have felt like you needed a cigarette after that." I became fed up with her Gore/earth tones rubbish and on and on. The woman is obnoxious beyond polite tolerance.

    That is where you miss IT (none / 0) (#80)
    by Truth Sayer on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 02:26:11 PM EST
    She never was an opinion writer. She is not David Brooks or Paul Krugman offering opionion with their own bent and style of writing.

    Dowd is a humorist with a liberal dose of sarcasm who writes on current affairs with a bit of gossip columnist thrown in for good measure.

    As with all sarcastic comedy not everyone like it but many do. It's obvious that with her many do because she writes for the NYT and gets paid big bucks for doing so. Some others who don't are just envious, maybe even a bit jealous.


    You're surprised? (5.00 / 4) (#59)
    by lambert on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 11:28:29 AM EST

    The kindest thing I can say about (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by litigatormom on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 06:41:07 PM EST
    that column is that perhaps MoDo is paying some sort of bizarre penance for what she did to Al Gore in 2000.

    That's probably way too kind.  Hypocrisy is the more likely explanation.


    Wait. MoDo isn't an actual (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:11:11 AM EST
    news reporter is she? I always thought she was more of a social/political commentator. I find her snarky pieces funny and a breath of fresh air from the bulk of "news" and "critiques" of Obama.

    I don't (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:14:04 AM EST
    But you say potato and  . . .

    If the fix is in, all well and good. (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by Salo on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 12:04:05 PM EST
    If it isn't fixed good the pain from the loss will be like hitting a brick wall driving a Yugo going 100mph.

    I don't think there's anything funny (5.00 / 6) (#9)
    by andgarden on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:14:53 AM EST
    about the trash she spews on a weekly basis.

    Make Lemonade (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:24:15 AM EST
    And laugh. Funny to see her heart aflutter, imo. Everyman. Besides, her main point is that he is going to kill them all with love.

    He thinks most people recognize that "there is a concrete advantage to not only foreign leaders, but foreign populations liking the American president, because it makes it easier for Sarkozy to send troops into Afghanistan if his voting base likes the United States."

    Same goes for the press.


    I'm trying to learn to laugh over all this (5.00 / 8) (#71)
    by dianem on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 01:29:09 PM EST
    It's not easy after years of watching the press roll over for BushCo and the Iraq War, followed by having most of the left go totally bats**t crazy for Obama and against Clinton to the point that they seemed to forget that progressives aren't supposed to tolerate sexism. I used to be a much funnier person, in a snarky but light way. Now... not so much. Somewhere between the 2,000th soldier death and the reports of 100,000 Iraqi dead and the 10th announcement that terrorists were about to get us and the 50th time I told somebody on the web off for using sexist language about Clinton... my sense of humor disappeared. I'm looking for it. I'm sure I'll find it eventually. I'm afraid it may be in Canada, though.

    LOL Is What The Doctor Recommends (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 01:41:54 PM EST
    The benefits of laughter are many and there is evidence that our thoughts, emotions and belief systems can impact the body`s healing mechanisms.. Laughing out loud can help lower blood pressure, reduce stress hormones, increase muscle flexion, boost immune function by raising levels of infection-fighting T-cells, help with pain reduction, and even give you a healthy cardiac exercise. Laughter and health are intricately connected. In other words, it can be the cure for all that ails you.


    Don't let the terrorists win. Laugh, it doesn't take away the seriousness of it all.

    And there is always yogic laughing which is pretty funny if you ask me.


    But I'll bet you didn't know Obama (none / 0) (#86)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 05:56:22 PM EST
    had a "body man."  

    Dowd may be different air.... (5.00 / 9) (#29)
    by p lukasiak on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:25:10 AM EST
    than that omitted by the Obama-fluffers, but its just as toxic.

    as an aside, I really get annoyed with this "pundit X is a complete waste....except when s/he agrees with me" dynamic.  I know its human nature, but that doesn't make it less irritating.


    Sorry but (5.00 / 8) (#34)
    by Valhalla on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:30:27 AM EST
    even if MoDo volunteered to become a big cat, I still wouldn't claim her.  I don't care whose side she's on.  She's hateful and her ego far outstrips her talent.

    Valhalla....that description of "her ego (4.50 / 6) (#47)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:47:39 AM EST
    far outstrips her talent" REALLY reminds me of the person she is writing about...

    She's become more of a personality (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by zfran on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 12:14:23 PM EST
    than a columnist. Judge for yourself the personality.

    Zfran....what personality?? (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 01:39:18 PM EST
    I think it's a look in her eye (5.00 / 0) (#77)
    by zfran on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 01:58:43 PM EST
    she seems to get when she is being (man)interviewed or asked her opinion and I've seen a look on her face that, I guess, emits something you can call a personality?

    This was the best line (5.00 / 3) (#79)
    by Truth Sayer on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 02:07:57 PM EST
    of the column and Dowd didn't even write it. It came from Mr. Ego himself:

    "It's so easy to get sucked into day-to-day, tit-for-tat thinking, finding some clever retort for whatever comment your opponent made.

    Now that's Obama describing Obama. How many cleaver retorts have we heard from him mega-multiple times? Yeah it's hard not to get sucked into the cleaver retorts that are part of your fabric, right cool breeze?

    Seriously no one could describe him any better. Short on substance - long of clever retorts. Perfect!


    I do not (none / 0) (#91)
    by weltec2 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 01:45:48 AM EST
    find her amusing. Even when she is not outright offending me... something about the tone of her writing annoys me deeply.

    Smarmy. (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by oldpro on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:18:57 AM EST
    And too cute by half.

    I find it more than a bit creepy that this column exists.


    Attempted to be smarmy (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:22:19 AM EST
    and to cute by half.

    I say it fails to achieve any of that.


    Well my goodness... (none / 0) (#37)
    by oldpro on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:31:37 AM EST
    aren't we determined te be contentious this morning!

    OK...I'll agree.  The column is an all-around failure.

    I still say "Ick!"


    um. okay. (5.00 / 7) (#18)
    by Turkana on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:19:07 AM EST

    shouldn't modo be promoted to people magazine, already?

    IT is not good enough (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:21:53 AM EST
    for People, or for publication by anyone frankly.

    Her editors need to take her in hand to save her from herself.

    This is really incoherent.


    watching in slow motion (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Turkana on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:26:36 AM EST
    as she grows progressively less hinged.

    Maybe someone should start a rumor (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by andgarden on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:28:54 AM EST
    about drug use.

    Absinthe? (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:30:04 AM EST
    she could start that herself (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by Turkana on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:30:48 AM EST
    when she's not writing about her sorry personal life. she's the perfect gossip-monger- even loves to gossip about herself.

    It's the koolaide (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by Lahdee on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:57:01 AM EST
    too much koolaide. FDA knows but isn't allowed to release it; koolaide rots brains, sort a this is your brain on koolaide thing.

    Oh now wait a minute... (none / 0) (#92)
    by weltec2 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 01:48:37 AM EST
    That's Rove-talk. We're supposed to be the good guys.

    I think Clark Hoyt has shaken her (5.00 / 5) (#70)
    by ajain on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 01:06:30 PM EST
    She doesn't know what to do now that she has been chastised in her own publication for gender-bashing.

    She sounds like a total idiot because she is more wary of gender-bashing and without gender-bashing (and creating false and petty story lines) there really is not much else in her writing.


    Preemptive Move? (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by JimWash08 on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:40:52 AM EST
    I asked how his "Citizen of the World" tour will go down in Steubenville, Ohio.

    "There will probably be some backlash," he said. "I'm a big believer that if something's good then there's a bad to it, and vice versa. We had a good week. That always inspires the press to knock me down a peg."

    I'm noticing that Obama increasingly loves to make these types of statements, sort of like he's totally aware that what he says/does is going to cause some problems, but if he beats the press or expected reaction to the punch, he'll be OK.

    Sort of when he said in Florida a couple of months ago that the Republicans are going to make voters scared of him, before adding, "Oh, and about the fact that I'm black" ... or something to that effect. Was that his way of warning the press and Repubs that anything they say or write can be, and will be considered as potential racism?

    Heh (5.00 / 5) (#45)
    by Steve M on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:44:34 AM EST
    Same trick McCain has practiced all these years.  Behave just like every other politician, and express amazement to your buddies in the press at all these things the awful political system forces you to do.  They'll nod and sympathize.  It's a nod to their cynicism.

    Obama really does seem to have mastered a lot of the political strategies that the GOP has used successfully in recent years.  On some level it bothers me, but whatever.  This meta stuff isn't the stuff that matters.

    Steve, you're one of the few (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:51:30 AM EST
    "netrooters" that realize this. As BTD (another one who gets it) says, a pol is a pol. If you read the New Yorker piece, it also suggests that Obama has a more than passing grasp on Clintonian tactics as well.

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Steve M on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 11:42:39 AM EST
    I try to reserve my real anger for the people who have created this harmful paradigm, the media.

    I was struck, when I read that NYer article (none / 0) (#88)
    by litigatormom on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 06:45:47 PM EST
    how much Obama's rise in Chicago resembled "triangulation."

    Not that there's anything wrong with that. (tm-Jerry Seinfeld)


    I'm too sexy for my shirt....too sexy!" (5.00 / 6) (#46)
    by bmc on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:45:10 AM EST
    "I'm too sexy for my shirt....too sexy for my shirt....too sexy!"

    Oh, yes. Obama "marveled" at what he would have to get used to....

    Legions of adoring women practically throwing themselves at his feet because he is just too sexy for his shirt, too sexy!

    Didn't you detect the slightest whiff of Obama's pride in that as he recounted the story of how he was "hustled" by the "beautiful" young woman in the gym?

    bwahahahaha...Obama believes he's "the greatest." Michelle better watch out; Barack is narcissus.

    "I'm too sexy for my shirt....too sexy for my shirt....too sexy!"

    She's been Obamorized. She needs to be (5.00 / 5) (#48)
    by Angel on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:50:09 AM EST

    They need to send some (5.00 / 4) (#51)
    by Fabian on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:52:50 AM EST
    of these "writers" back to college for a refresher course in composition.  I can't believe they get paid for writing that poorly.

    English Composition 101: F (5.00 / 7) (#49)
    by Fabian on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:50:40 AM EST
    I went.  I read.  I was confused.  Paragraphs?  Structure?  Beginning, middle, end?

    There was a theme: "Barack Obama - Tour of a Political Pop Star".  

    It was silly.  I'd rather read "What I did on summer vacation." - written by a ten year old.

    Dowd v Rich (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by santarita on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 11:01:22 AM EST
    I couldn't decide which columnist was more fawning.  I think Rich wins, though.  

    I think Dowd's column is explainable.  She was sent on the Obama World Tour so she had to come up with something to show for the expense.  And two or three weeks ago she was chastised by the Public Editor for being too hard on Hillary.  So she comes up with a puff piece that will go into the count to counterbalance the negative columns to come.  There may be a perverse form of patriotism at work as well.  To Down and Rich perhaps, Obama is so clearly superior to Bush and to McCain that it seems downright unpatriotic to say anything negative about the AntiBush.

    I don't know ... (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by TChris on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 11:20:02 AM EST
    what's "fawning" about Rich's summation of the various ways that McCain has moved his positions closer to Obama's.  I think Rich is making the point that McCain is proving himself to be a follower, not a leader.  Seems like a legitimate point to make.  Dowd's column, on the other hand, is just silly.

    Perhaps a small point... (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by santarita on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 11:44:53 AM EST
    but Rich attributes these ideas to Obama.  They are not novel ideas that Obama came up with. They've been kicked around by people like Biden for a long time.  I accept that McCain may be moving closer to the notion of timetables etc because the popularity of his opponent is pushing him.  I don't accept the notion that Obama has done much more than give voice to the majority of Americans who think that Bush has screwed up the Iraq occupation.  I read Rich's column as a puff piece.  

    Not So Small A Point (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by daring grace on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 12:00:08 PM EST
    and a welcome one if Obama is indeed "[giving] voice to the majority of Americans who think that Bush has screwed up the Iraq occupation."

    After eight years of Bush-Cheney manufacturing consensus for their sins, this feels like a big thing to me.


    Maybe a small point but a good point (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 11:50:03 AM EST
    Agree (none / 0) (#58)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 11:22:50 AM EST
    Rich is good this week.

    Ick... (5.00 / 3) (#55)
    by lilburro on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 11:05:59 AM EST
    fluff...I'm tired of reading it.  But then again, nobody is making me click on her moronic column.

    I wonder if Obama regrets cultivating a relationship with her.  Then again it's clear that this trip abroad was intended to demonstrate the principle that a priori popularity is a most worthwhile political asset, and a great reason to vote Obama.  If it's not giving her too much credit, she has been as good a vessel for that message as anybody else.

    The Obamarized Bump (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 12:17:57 PM EST
    Not sure if the proper term is Obamarized but it sure appears that Maureen isn't alone. Today's Gallup tracking has Obama up +9. BTD is right. It's a landslide in the making, and watching McCain in action lately he also sees the writing on the wall.

    So the had room for MoDo (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by ChrisO on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 12:59:40 PM EST
    on the trip, but not Ryan Lizza? Right, no retribution there.

    Other than my personal distaste for Obama, I really don't have much difference on policy, which is why I'll vote for him. But what really bothers me is his campaign's relationship to the press, which has been evident from the early going. In the first five or so years of the Bush administration, he treated the press with contempt,and his followers loved it. Bush realized that support for the war had put him in a position where he could dismiss them anytime he wanted, with no consequences. Unfortunately, the press perceived this as well, and became lapdogs.

    Now it's Obama's turn, and his supporters think it's just grand.

    I for one am not an MSM hater. The Internet has made errors and biases in the MSM easier to catch, which is a good thing. But I still don't buy into the blogger triumphalism that claims there's no difference in training or standards between bloggers and professional journalists. It's an imperfect system, but I see journalists as our proxies when it comes to questioning the President. If their questions are so easily dismissed, who does the President answer to? Bloggers? I don't like it when Bush ignores the press, and I like it even less when Obama does it. Is "Bush does it too" the standard to which Obama's going to be held?

    If I ever find myself on the same side as MoDo (5.00 / 4) (#75)
    by myiq2xu on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 01:45:35 PM EST
    I know it's time to change sides.

    So Obama thinks he's (4.50 / 6) (#2)
    by zfran on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:09:18 AM EST
    been played. Interesting. I don't find that "good work for Obama" I find that naive and gullable. When you are a presidential candidate, travelling all around the world, meeting leaders and "the people of the world" no one found it odd, that he walks into a place (with entourage and security) and no one did anything about a pretty woman on a treadmill etc.  and "Obama marveled: "I'm just realizing what I've got to become accustomed to. The fact that I was played like that at the gym"
    I find it ludicrous. I'm all one for a laugh, but what if she wasn't with the press, what if she had more sinister plans?

    Umm (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:13:21 AM EST
    Whatever. I think at this point your reactions to anything about Obama are quite predictable. And not in a good way.

    You mean no one checked her (none / 0) (#21)
    by zfran on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:20:25 AM EST
    (the reporter's) credentials before Obama went in?
    I could, certainly, say the same about you in your willingness to "accept" all as truth and justice. I do, however, sometimes agree with what he says and does. He is human, so am I.

    Please correct BTD to read: (none / 0) (#23)
    by zfran on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:21:30 AM EST
    your willingness to accept "some" not all as truth and justice. You, too, have criticized Sen. Obama.

    You can say what you want (none / 0) (#26)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:23:12 AM EST
    and you do.

    I have no idea what you mean by that comment but you are welcome to make it.


    Thank you. The feeling is mutual (none / 0) (#35)
    by zfran on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:30:34 AM EST

    You know, I'm wondering where the Secret Service (none / 0) (#93)
    by splashy on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 03:04:22 AM EST
    Folks were.

    Shouldn't they have checked the gym and made sure it was safe for Obama? How could someone waylay him like that?

    They are falling down on the job, IMHO.


    If Obama wants to reference The Color of (none / 0) (#7)
    by tigercourse on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:14:23 AM EST
    Money, he should think about what happened to the Tom Cruise character when he went up against Paul Newman.

    The idea of McCain as Paul Newman is ludicrous (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:16:32 AM EST
    Perhaps you mean to refer to someone else as Paul Newman.

    Time to smell the coffee, McCain is a TERRIBLE candidate. He cultivated a nice image in theory with the Media but as a candidate he has been as bad as you can possibly get.

    To me it is now clear that Republicans made a mistake nominating McCain. Romney would have had a better chance.


    No, I think Romney would have been worse. (none / 0) (#33)
    by tigercourse on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:30:08 AM EST
    Sure, he's alot more presentable (he was basically the only Republican candidate who didn't look like he had one foot in the grave or, even worse, like Rudy Giuliani). But poll after poll showed that a large percentage of Americans don't want a Mormon President. He couldn't possibly overcome that.

    McCain can't win this election (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:39:19 AM EST
    He can't. He is that bad a candidate.

    Seriously (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Dr Molly on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:41:42 AM EST
    His campaign is shockingly pathetic. Have Rove and all of them just lost their attack mojo? It's like they've been lobotomized. They are passively losing.

    The saddest part (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:44:05 AM EST
    is the McCain campaign has actually gotten BETTER since S. McMahan took over.

    He is seeming small and petulant (5.00 / 0) (#84)
    by MKS on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 02:36:17 PM EST
    And hanging out with Bush I--in a golf cart?  

    I assume McCain was doing that as part of the Colin Powell sweepstakes...trying to get his endorsement. But even on that score, Obama is doing better and likely to win--Obama praises the foreign policy of Bush I (which Bill did too) and Brent Scowcroft, and implicity Powell.


    LOL (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:15:23 AM EST
    Modo (none / 0) (#14)
    by Lahdee on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:17:25 AM EST
    seemed impressed by the "What a man" comment. Did she get a tingly feeling up her leg?

    Hard to tell (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:20:52 AM EST
    She is incoherent now. You can not even get upset one way or another about it. It is as if a 10 year old is writing her columns now.

    Either she is no longer trying or she just lost the ability to write.

    My point here is that the couple of anecdotes she drops in her column really do not do what I think she intends, which is to make fun of Obama. In the end, she is ridiculing herself, unintentionally one presumes.


    No profanity please (none / 0) (#27)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:23:48 AM EST

    Not Meant As A Profanity (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by JimWash08 on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:33:00 AM EST
    Sorry about that, but you probably aren't aware that "shoot the -hit" is a manner of a description; a euphemism maybe. In context, it wasn't used as a profanity.

    It does not matter what your intent was (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:40:19 AM EST
    The filters catch the profanity.

    WE do not object to the words it is a practical question.


    Shared Metaphor (none / 0) (#65)
    by KeysDan on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 12:05:44 PM EST
    Watching Paris recede "from behind the frosted glass of the limo" as Senator Obama's metaphoric analysis of his new  and constricted life and Miss Dowd's own circumscribed powers of clever  analysis of newsworthy people and events seem to  have some commonality . However, the metaphor differs in that when peering at Mr. Obama through the opaque limo divider we can make out a semblance of Bill Clinton whereas with Miss Dowd we begin to see Norma Desmond.  Never-the-less, I am still willing to cut her some slack as she was among he few columnists who criticized the Bush administration when it was not so popular to do so, and was early to ridicule the purported reasons for the Iraq war.

    "I'm ready for my close up" Mr. (none / 0) (#66)
    by zfran on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 12:11:30 PM EST

    Mo is just late seeking a way (none / 0) (#78)
    by MichaelGale on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 02:02:44 PM EST
    to transend into the new opinion writing.  She is searching for her new niche. Sally Quinn found hers in faith and psychics; Peggy Noonan in dreams full of mythical messages; Chris Matthews has gone to the body for messaging and Keith is flying with teleometry - if you believe you are ERM and say it enough, it will come true.

    The new politics, the new Democracy, the new Democrats, the new netroots, the new journalism.


    MoDo is about access (none / 0) (#81)
    by kredwyn on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 02:27:24 PM EST
    Her petulance towards the Bush II admin in the early days was about the fact that they refused to give her a pass for her "gentle" proddings at Bush I's expense.

    Man (none / 0) (#89)
    by paul ramon on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 11:49:44 PM EST
    You know, he is a charming, warm, extraordinarily intelligent and empathetic man, who has already brought most of the country together around him. And with a sense of optimism you can't argue with. And if you do, well, it makes me suspect the motives - you are, I would bet, someone who would ascribe "optimism-building" as crucial otherwise. And there is still this grudge from the left. I will take someone who genuinely is able to synthesize what two sides want and come out with an obvious understanding of a solution over self-consciously embarrassed cheap shots any day. I am all for keeping your candidate faithful to what put him/ her there, but lose superiority complex that ironically enough makes you accuse him of that very same thing, with little reason to do so. You are one shade away from a Nader vote, you just have more political cover right now.