Dowd cautiously endorsing Trump?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/06/opinion/sunday/the-end-is-nigh.html?ref=opinion&_r=1

Dowd invites brother to guest post his Republican views to short circuit politics during Thanksgiving meal

"Donald Trump: With all his bombast and incivility, Trump has joyfully debunked political correctness for the complete fraud that it is. With his talent for making debate ratings soar, he has allowed all the other candidates to be seen and heard at celestial levels unreachable without him. He has touched a nerve because people are fed up with liberal groups being offended at every slight, real or imagined. (I can assure you none of these people were taught by Jesuits.) Three Ivy League schools are currently under siege, with students at Princeton demanding the removal of Woodrow Wilson’s name from a building. Washington and Jefferson are up next as former slave owners, leaving Al Sharpton as the default “father of our country.” We are tired of apologies for America’s exceptionalism.

Ben Carson: Not since Eisenhower has a complete novice politician been so legitimate a contender. Can he avoid the traps set for him by the media? He presents intriguing possibilities as part of the ticket, forcing African-Americans to choose between him and the wife of the man Toni Morrison called our “first black president.”

Marco Rubio: Young, whip smart and self-assured, he has an encyclopedic knowledge of foreign affairs and is a stunning contrast to Hillary Clinton both in generation and vision. Wait until he starts delivering his speeches in Spanish.

Ted Cruz: The Hispanic heir apparent to Barry Goldwater had the best moment in the third debate, calling out an obscure cable TV host looking for his 10 minutes of fame.

Jeb Bush: I like the Bushes, all of them. Jeb would have been the perfect Republican candidate from 1988 to 2000. In this age of instant gratification, his wonkish grasp of policy does not move the needle. Too bad.

Chris Christie: Trump with better manners. A certain pick for attorney general if this gig does not work out.

...Our enemies do not fear us, and authority at home is being questioned by a disgraceful campaign since Ferguson to undermine the police. I am the son of a policeman, and a police officer is killed in the line of duty every 60 hours. The thin blue line is the only thing that separates our society from anarchy. There will be awful shootings by police officers like the one in Chicago, but these are exceptions. My dad told me that any job where you can legally carry a gun will occasionally draw the wrong type of person. Police officers certainly do not deserve to see the media turning criminals into celebrated victims. The next time you see a police officer, say thank you.

So, ask yourself three questions: Do you want a president who refuses to name the enemy? Who do you want to appoint the next three Supreme Court justices? And who will protect the homeland and honor the Constitution? Then pray that you got it right."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/opinion/king-kevin-versus-queen-cersei.html?ref=opinion&_r=1

Matalin and Dowd on Jeb

"Former Bush family advisor Mary Matalin says she was “flummoxed” by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s performance at Wednesday’s GOP presidential debate.

 

The veteran GOP strategist said Bush’s decision to go after Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) for missing votes in the Senate was an example of “political malfeasance.”

 

...“It’s a violation of debate 101: Never ask an opponent or never address to an opponent something you know he’s prepared for, which clearly Rubio was,” she said, adding: “It cuts against his message of ‘I’m a happy warrior.’ ”

 

...“My money right now is on Ted Cruz,” she said. “Again, I’m unaligned, but I think he speaks to the myriad factions of conservatism: Constitutionalists, Libertarians, the social conservatives.”

 

“I think he’s whip-smart, as evidenced by his debate appearances, and he’s a true, true, true constitutionalist, and everything’s lining up for him,” she added."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/258764-ex-bush-family-advisor-flummoxed-by-jebs-debate-performance

---------------

When I think of Jeb's expression and demeanor after Rubio's slap down, I can't help thinking there may actually be something mentally wrong with him. He looked like a whipped dog. He recently said he loved his father so much he would commit murder and go to prison for him. That's not too swift.

MoDo covered the Bushes at the time Jeb was running for governor of Florida, and W. jumped in and decided to run for governor of Texas. The upshot of the article is that Jeb was the one expected to be the golden boy by his parents.

-----------------

"I covered the Jeb and Junior sibling smashdown from the start. In 1993, I went on the road to watch Jeb run for governor in Florida and W. run for governor in Texas.

 

Barbara had blurted out to W. that he shouldn’t run because he couldn’t win. And when I talked to Jeb, he seemed annoyed that his older brother had jumped into the race in Texas because it turned it into “a People magazine story.”

 

...When Jeb came up with a line on the trail in Florida that worked, W. just swiped it. When Jeb said, “I am running for governor not because I am George and Barbara Bush’s son; I am running because I am George P. and Noelle and Jeb’s father,” W. began saying: “I am not running for governor because I am George Bush’s son. I am running because I am Jenna and Barbara’s father.” Karl Rove laughed about the shoplifting.

 

...On election night, W. was steamed that his father seemed more upset by Jeb’s loss than excited by his oldest son’s win. Not only did W. shock his family by making it to the Oval Office before Jeb. In the tie election, Jeb had to be prodded into helping his brother snatch Florida away from Al Gore."

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/opinion/sunday/fall-of-the-house-of-bush.html?_r=1

Maureen Dowd asks Joe Biden, are you in?

"Joe Biden is also talking to friends, family and donors about jumping in. The 72-year-old vice president has been having meetings at his Washington residence to explore the idea of taking on Hillary in Iowa and New Hampshire."

He gets along with Hillary and has always been respectful of the Democratic Party’s desire to make more history by putting the first woman in the Oval Office.

But going through the crucible of the loss of his oldest son, Beau, to brain cancer made the vice president consider the quest again.

As a little boy, Beau helped get his father through the tragedy of losing his beautiful first wife and 13-month-old daughter in the car crash that injured Beau and his brother, Hunter.

When Beau realized he was not going to make it, he asked his father if he had a minute to sit down and talk.

“Of course, honey,” the vice president replied.

At the table, Beau told his dad he was worried about him.

My kid’s dying, an anguished Joe Biden thought to himself, and he’s making sure I’m O.K.

“Dad, I know you don’t give a damn about money,” Beau told him, dismissing the idea that his father would take some sort of cushy job after the vice presidency to cash in.

Beau was losing his nouns and the right side of his face was partially paralyzed. But he had a mission: He tried to make his father promise to run, arguing that the White House should not revert to the Clintons and that the country would be better off with Biden values.

Hunter also pushed his father, telling him, “Dad, it’s who you are.”

Is he or isn't he, jumping in the race for president?

"Hillary is like Coca-Cola’s Dasani water: She’s got a great distribution system, but nobody likes the taste"

Maureen Dow takes Hollywood's Ready for Hillary temperature.

IS Hollywood really ready to give a 67-year-old woman a leading role in a big-budget production?

Hillary Clinton’s campaign has echoes of various classic movies: “Single White Female,” with Hillary creepily co-opting the identity of the more trendy Elizabeth Warren; “My Fair Lady,” with Hillary sitting meekly and being schooled on how to behave by tyrannical Pygmalions (Iowa voters); “The Usual Suspects,” with Hillary’s hoodlums, Sidney Blumenthal and David Brock, vying to be Keyser Söze; and, of course, “How to Steal a Million,” a caper about a heist plotted by a couple that doesn’t need the money.

From a narrative point of view, Hollywood is more intrigued with the scenario of their old raffish Southern favorite, Bill Clinton, as the first First Lad than the earnest Midwestern Hillary as the first female POTUS. On TV, after all, women presidents are old hat. (read more)

Sony hacked emails show Maureen Dowd is a hack?

"Leaked emails from Sony suggest that New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd promised to show Sony Pictures co-chair Amy Pascal’s husband, Bernard Weinraub, — a former Times reporter — a version of a column featuring Pascal before publication."

The end result was a column that painted Pascal in such a good light that she engaged in a round of mutual adulation with Dowd over email after its publication. It also scored Pascal points back at the studio, with Sony’s then-communications-chief calling the column “impressive.”

The column, published after the Academy Awards earlier this year, lamented how “Oscar voters and industry top brass are still overwhelmingly white, male and middle-aged.”

What does it mean and will anybody care?

The Dowding of Hillary Clinton

In an unusual move with degree of difficulty 3.75, Maureen Dowd spring-boarded off Robin Williams' death and into the muck of politics, berating Hillary Clinton and taking a potshot at President Obama:

"...With the diplomatic finesse of a wrecking ball, [Hillary Clinton] the former diplomat gave an interview to The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, a hawk, in a calculated attempt to be tough and show that, as a Democratic woman, she’s not afraid to use power.

Channeling her pal John McCain, she took a cheap shot at President Obama when his approval rating on foreign policy had dropped to 36 percent, calling him a wimp just as he was preparing to order airstrikes against ISIS.

...It’s not that she’s too old, despite nasty cracks on conservative websites like the Washington Free Beacon. It’s that she’s too old-think, thrusting herself forward as a hawk at a time when hawks — in the season of Elizabeth Warren and Rand Paul — aren’t so cool. Americans are sick of the idea that we should plunge in and plant our flag in the ground and work out the details later. It’s a complicated world, where you cross the border from Syria to Iraq and your allies are the enemy.

Hillary booed the president, who has been boosting her at the expense of his own vice president, and said that, as secretary of state, she had wanted to do more to help the Syrian rebels. She said that Obama’s “failure” in Syria led to the rise of ISIS and sniped about Obama’s slogan: “Great nations need organizing principles, and ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle.”

...David Axelrod tartly tweeted: “Just to clarify: ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ means stuff like occupying Iraq in the first place, which was a tragically bad decision.”

Hillary may know that she seemed unseemly. She called Obama to assert that she wasn’t attacking him, trying to avoid an awkward encounter when they both attend a Vernon Jordan party Wednesday night at the Martha’s Vineyard golf course where the president has been relaxing while the world explodes."

Dowd: Chelsea Clinton unseemly

"Chelsea Clinton never acted out during the eight years she came of age as America’s first daughter. 

No ditching of her Secret Service detail. No fake IDs for underage tippling. No drug scandal. No court appearance in tank top and toe ring. Not even any dirty dancing. 

Despite a tough role as the go-between in the highly public and embarrassing marital contretemps of her parents, Chelsea stayed classy. 

So it’s strange to see her acting out in a sense now, joining her parents in cashing in to help feed the rapacious, gaping maw of Clinton Inc. 

...As the 34-year-old tries to wean some of the cronies from the Clinton Foundation — which is, like the Clintons themselves, well-intended, wasteful and disorganized — Chelsea is making speeches that go into foundation coffers. She is commanding, as The Times’s Amy Chozickozick reported, up to $75,000 per appearance. 

Chozick wrote: “Ms. Clinton’s speeches focus on causes like eradicating waterborne diseases. (‘I’m obsessed with diarrhea’ is a favorite line.)” 

There’s something unseemly about it, making one wonder: Why on earth is she worth that much money? Why, given her dabbling in management consulting, hedge-funding and coattail-riding, is an hour of her time valued at an amount that most Americans her age don’t make in a year? (Median household income in the United States is $53,046.) 

If she really wants to be altruistic, let her contribute the money to some independent charity not designed to burnish the Clinton name as her mother ramps up to return to the White House and as she herself drops a handkerchief about getting into politics.   Or let her speak for free. After all, she is in effect going to candidate school. No need to get paid for it, too. 

...The Clintons were fiercely protective of Chelsea when she was a teenager, insisting on respect from the media and getting it. They need to protect their daughter again, this time from their wanton acquisitiveness."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Chelsea should definitely make speeches for free. I hope Ms. Dowd lead by example in the speech above. And in this one, where the presenter says Dowd will sign books after the speech.

Why is Chelsea Clinton worth that much money per speech? Because people are willing to pay it.

It's not a reach to conclude that the Clinton Foundation is designed mainly for campaign purposes, be it for Hillary or one of her heirs. But hopefully Dowd knows how the game is played and is aware of how soft money is shifted around in vehicles such as think tanks:

Nowadays, many Washington think tanks effectively serve as unregistered lobbyists for corporate donors, and companies strategically contribute to them just as they hire a PR or lobby shop or make campaign donations. And unlike lobbyists and elected officials, think tanks are not subject to financial disclosure requirements, so they reveal their donors only if they choose to. That makes it impossible for the public and lawmakers to know if a think tank is putting out an impartial study or one that’s been shaped by a donor’s political agenda. “If you’re a lobbyist, whatever you say is heavily discounted,” says Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University and an expert on political ethics. “If a think tank is saying it, it obviously sounds a lot better. Maybe think tanks aren’t aware of how useful that makes them to private interests. On the other hand, maybe it’s part of their revenue model.”

Money is everywhere, and to begin and end her article concern trolling about Chelsea is just too cute. 

The Night Maureen Dowd Got Hi on Chocolate Marijuana

"Sitting in my hotel room in Denver, I nibbled off the end and then, when nothing happened, nibbled some more. I figured if I was reporting on the social revolution rocking Colorado in January, the giddy culmination of pot Prohibition, I should try a taste of legal, edible pot from a local shop."

"What could go wrong with a bite or two?" (read more)

 

Exclusive photo of Maureen Dowd's bad trip pic.twitter.com/GaD8GvzQhy
— Hunter Walker (@hunterw) June 4, 2014

"Please fire Maureen Dowd"

"...or at least get her a fact-checker," requests middle-brow Salon, according to which, there has been "another screw-up that would get a less famous reporter axed." This latest brouhaha is over a misquote which Dowd attributes to conducting an interview in a noisy restaurant.

The New York mayoral race this week detoured into one of the occasional rounds of umbrage-taking that are a regular feature of American campaigns, as City Council Speaker Christine Quinn claimed that the wife of Public Advocate Bill de Blasio unfairly criticized Quinn for being childless. This wouldn’t necessarily be a big deal, even in terms of our little municipal election, except that the quote was actually a misquote. Making matters worse: The misquoter was New York Times political columnist Maureen Dowd. And Maureen Dowd has something of a history of screw-ups like this.

In chopping and screwing that response, Dowd turned what is basically a policy criticism, and one clearly based on de Blasio’s well-known campaign message, into a much juicier personal slam. The Times corrected the column and Dowd apologized, blaming the error on the noisiness of the diner where the interview was conducted — a diner whose name she also got wrong in her column, necessitating another correction. But the thing was already out there, a little outrage balloon launched into the frenzied last weeks of a primary campaign.

Is Dowd just another boomer resting on the laurels of past glories, ready to be comfortably stabled with a feedbag of organic oats? Has the time come to replace her with a newer princess of snark to serve up misquotes that sway public elections? I seriously doubt it.