I've always thought Maureen Dowd was a bit too snarky for my tastes. Her latest widely-distributed NYT post proves why: she professes to balk at Palin's nomination because of Palin's dearth of substance (perhaps correctly labeling it 'affirmative action'), and yet the bulk of Dowd's rebuttal effectively attacks Palin on non-substantive issues, using every stereotype available vs. facts to slam Palin. Dowd does our gender a disservice to "stay there" in attacks on Palin's looks and personal life rather than going for the real stuff - which is there - like her actual record (or lack thereof).
Definitely a missed opportunity Maureen ... but sticking to stereotypes is easier; it's just unfortunate that someone published in the NYT doesn't need to work harder. So, I won't even comment on her bio photo.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment