I notice they had to post that inanity twice to get anyone to comment. But since you did, Rich Lowry, tell us what you REALLY think about Maureen Dowd:
Speaking of NRO, can anyone explain yesterday's bizarre online column by National Review editor Rich Lowry? Entitled "Dowd Addendum," it addresses "a few legitimate complaints" about his Monday column on New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd. But it's more of a "subtractum," since the first column--which should appear here--has vanished from NRO.
As you might expect, the Monday column's disappearance got our attention. We were dying to find out what made it naughty enough to pull offline. We had no luck with our usual trick of looking for a cached copy at Google.com, but with a bit of technical wizardry we managed to outsmart NR's site and get it to cough up the text of the column. Well, were we ever disappointed. It was nothing special, just a rant. Sample:
One assumes that someone at the Times would tell Maureen if her slip were showing, if she had something caught in her teeth, if toilet paper were caught on the bottom of her shoe. But apparently, no one will tell her that her columns are a shameless regurgitation of her favorite tropes, fused on top of recycled conventional wisdom, uninformed bloviating, and a more and more brazen anti-Americanism. Maureen Dowd has become Bob Herbert, without the reporting and the frank ideological commitment--which just leaves us with the crashing dullness, made all the more unbearable by the fact that she still thinks she's being clever.
Lowry concludes with the mildly witty suggestion that Dowd "freshen up her act by taking her column to Le Monde." We'd love to know the inside story here: Who decided, and on what basis, to play Ministry of Information and "unpublish" the Monday Lowry column from NRO?
opinionjournal.com |
