On Topic And Off Base

Maureen Dowd was described by a reviewer/admirer shortly after she was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1999 (for her articles on Clinton/Lewinsky, of course) as "fully in tune with the political and cultural moment."

That was meant, sadly, as a compliment.  This past Monday, the Daily Howler's Bob Somerby found that, having received the award for several columns about sex,  Dowd followed up in 1999 with column after column about nothing.  In May, former White House spokesman Robert Gibbs on Morning Joe remarked “I don’t read Dowd," pointing out "largely because it’s sort of largely the same column for the last, like, eight years." It has kept her in a most prestigious position, on the op-ed page of The New York Times.  

Fox News, a frequent (and justified) object of scorn on MSNBC, has been particularly bashed the past few days for an interview conducted by backbencher Lauren Green with religion scholar Reza Aslan.  Green obviously was peturbed because Aslan is a Muslim who has written a book about Jesus Christ. Summarizing his professional credentials, Aslan noted he "has been studying the origins of Christianity for two decades" and "also just happens to be a Muslim."

It's a lesson Dowd ought to learn.  Dowd, who has been having fun with Anthony Weiner- as she once did with Bill Clinton- turned to the New York mayoral candidate's wife, Huma Abedin, as she once did Monica Lewinsky.  She writes

When you puzzle over why the elegant Huma Abedin is propping up the eel-like Anthony Weiner, you must remember one thing: Huma was raised in Saudi Arabia, where women are treated worse by men than anywhere else on the planet.

Comparatively speaking, the pol from Queens probably seems like a prince. 

Ha! So funny.  Except that we know little about Huma Abedin's faith, except that she is of parents who are Muslim and apparently has not converted.  Judging from Dowd's article, she knows a little less than a little about whether Abedin is observant, completely secular, or something in between.    The columnist appears, as the religious editor of The Huffington Post implies, either of the latter two. But we don't know.

It would be useful information if, as with Dowd, one is little concerned about stop-and-frisk, food bans, education, or other issues in determining who might become mayor of the financial capital of the world. But then, as one Wonkette blogger comments, "reading Maureen Dowd is like paying one of the Mean Girls to write columns for you forever and ever."

Dowd's interest is less policy than sex, and she seems unaware that not all Muslims march in lockstep with the dictates of their religion. The range of diversity in adherence to the precepts of a faith among individuals who have the same religious background is common most places, and especially in this nation.  Otherwise, Mitt Romney and Kyrsten Sinema, and Steny Hoyer and Mitch McConnell would be theological twins.

Dowd dangerously leaves room to speculate on Huma Abedin's place of birth, just as some of those alleging President Obama is a Muslim subtly (or not so subtly) suggests that he may be a foreigner.   Although raised in Saudi Arabia, the 37-year-old Abedin was born in Michigan and has lived since she was 18 in the U.S.A., which appears to suit her just fine. And that ought to count for more than cheap shots about being raised in an Arabic country.

   
Share |

Not So Fast

No one can accuse Maureen Dowd of mincing words, fence-sitting, or ambivalence. She wrote in her Saturday column in The New York Times:

The normally nonchalant Barack Obama looked nonplussed, as Nancy Pelosi glowered behind.

Surrounded by middle-aged white guys — a sepia snapshot of the days when such pols ran Washington like their own men’s club — Joe Wilson yelled “You lie!” at a president who didn’t.

But, fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!

....Wilson clearly did not like being lectured and even rebuked by the brainy black president presiding over the majestic chamber.

There is far, far more to it than that. In making another point(s), a "driftglass," at crooksandliars.com reminds us:

Once upon a time, there was a President named Bill Clinton, who was, by most historical standards, a typical Centrist Republican, although by a fluke of geography and circumstances he ran for public office with a "(D)" after his name.

Under his Administration, many Conservative ideas which had long gathered dust on the shelf -- ideas such as welfare reform, a balanced budget, debt reduction, a strict “Pay as You Go” fiscal regime, a boom in technology jobs, budget surpluses, NAFTA, GATT, official bans on gay marriage, etc. -- were finally realized.

And for all of his good work on behalf of their ideology, Conservatives spent eight, long years treating Bill Clinton -- a Southern, White, Christian man -- as if he were a case of flesh eating nuclear syphilis.

Because he did not run for office with an "(R)" after his name.

And because he did not run for office with an "(R)" after his name, according to the leading voices in the Republican Party and the Conservative Movement, Bill Clinton was, in no particular order, Hitler, a Socialist, a rapist, a warmonger, a serial murderer, and a drug dealer, whose Presidency was somehow vaguely illegitimate.

And counterpointing the 24/7 slime campaign, there were those endless, endless hearings. Whitewater. Travel office. Christmas Card lists. Lincoln bedroom. Etc ad nauseum.

Or don’t you remember?

He was “Not my President!” (Ollie North: War criminal, terrorist arms dealer, GOP Senate Candidate [1994] and FoxNews Contributor.)

He was warned “not to set foot in my state.” (Jesse Helms: Professional Bigot, Confederate Senator, 1820-2003)

His picture was used for target practice by G. Gordon Liddy. (Watergate felon, would-be assassin, radio 'personality' and Republican hero.)

From "The American Prospect":

...it's worth remembering just how virulent the opposition to Clinton's presidency was. Republicans began plotting to impeach Clinton long before anyone had ever heard the name "Lewinsky," and many on the right simply refused to accept that he legitimately occupied the office he held. Then-House Majority Leader Dick Armey, when talking to Democrats, used to refer to Clinton as "your president."

It was a warped, hysterical campaign funded by wealthy Right Wing thugs like Richard Mellon Scaife and propagated by wealthy Right Wing thugs like Rupert Murdoch who made sure the lies were jack-hammered into the headlines day after day, year after year.

It didn't begin with Barack Obama and it has continued to the present day, sinking with help of the mainstream media, including Maureen Dowd (described here and here), the candidacy of Al Gore. Attacks on President Clinton were routine, as these quotes indicate:

“Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?”
-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

“This is President Clinton’s war, and when he falls flat on his face, that’s his problem.”
-Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

And my personal favorite, uttered in the days when Tom DeLay and other prominent Republicans thought Al Qaeda was a minor nuisance and Osama bin Laden a mere annoyance:

“Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly.”
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

There are reasons for the remarkable and despicable (but not extraordinary) and irrational hatred directed against President Obama. One of them is the disturbing influence of the self-serving antics of the second most popular radio talk show host in the nation, who has described himself as "a rodeo clown;" and of the nation's most popular radio talk show host and loyal corporate apologist. Race is a factor but easily overrated and making the charge without powerful evidence that it is the prime catalyst behind the right-wing assault on the presidency denies recent GOP history and obscures more complex motivation, preventing a full exploration of the extremist mind of the early 21st century. And it is a backlash waiting to happen.