Home > Perspective

Beautiful but Fearful -- Eek!

by John F. Tamburo, Editor in Chief, Publisher
Originally Posted: 1/27/2006 1:32:05 PM
Last Updated: 1/28/2006 10:44:24 PM

Let me begin this article by stating the obvious:  Maureen Dowd, physically speaking, is a breathtakingly beautiful woman.  That said, Miss Dowd proves the premise that beauty is only skin deep.  Sometimes, a person’s bitterness and unhappiness can make him or her quite ugly.  Michelle Malkin and others are covering Miss Dowd’s MSNBC interview with Keith Olbermann last night.  Michelle’s article shows just how much liberalism can ugly up someone who is, strictly physically speaking, a knockout.

Maureen Dowd won a Pulitzer prize in 1998 for a series of columns excoriating Bill Clinton for his dishonesty.  Her criticisms sound Limbaugh-esque in their spot-on accuracy.  To wit:

His problems stem from his instinct, when he runs into trouble, to shroud rather than illuminate.

He tries to make words subjective, insisting they mean only what he wants them to. Just as he made the Democratic Party about himself, and the Democratic Conventions about himself, and the Presidency about himself, he tries to make the language about himself.

But he can’t. Laws are composed of words. The President is in charge of our laws. When he drains meaning from words, he jeopardizes his ability to govern. He has made Washington Orwellian. His corrupt language corrupts thought.

How true.  Yet she hates President Bush more than Bill Clinton’s lies, and she has dissembled from her award winning prose.  She now is defending the last Democrat to win a Presidential (although by plurality and not majority).  It is, of course, unconscionable for any leading writer for the New York Times to support or even respect a Republican, so I guess I ought not to be surprised.  And I really am not.  Here is Miss Dowd’s backtrack:

Olbermann: "Who has enabled this? I mean, in a perverse way, is it almost necessary to say that Bill Clinton paved the way for George Bush to conduct a kind of fingers-in-his-ears, shout la-la-la-la-la presidency?"

Dowd: "No, they’re two entirely different things because when Bill Clinton would deceive, he would throw in a semantic clue that let you know he was deceiving. ’I did not have sexual relations with that woman.’ We knew what he meant by that. You know, ’I did not,’ about dope, ’I didn’t break the laws of this country.’ So it was sort of poignant and endearing. He would let you know he was lying, and then the right wing would come down so hard on him and overpunish him. And in the case of Bush, he’s just in a completely different reality. You know, they call us the ’reality-based community,’ and they create their own reality, and so Bush is just in a bubble. And when you’re in the bubble, you don’t know you’re in the bubble."

Again I thank Michelle Malkin for these quotes.

Which side of the country is running around with ears in fingers and shouting la-la-la-la-la-la?  Our President is one of a very few DC residents who is not divorced from reality.  Perhaps this is a beneficial side effect from his frequent retreats to his Crawford, Texas ranch.  I don’t know and I don’t care.  Enough; I digress.

Maureen Dowd, in her rampant hatred for the mere idea of the GOP, now calls Bill Clinton’s court-certified perjury "poignant and endearing," when in 1998, it was making "Washington Orwellian." Either "his corrupt language corrupts thought" or he is a sympathetic person with a "poignant but endearing" fault.  This is not something susceptible of changing meaning based on who won the last Presidential election.  But nothing is firm when it’s time to attack President Bush.  Maureen said "Laws have words."  I add that words have meanings.  Miss Dowd, in mid-September, 1998, did not allege that the Earth was flat or the Sun revolved about our planet.  She observed a fact that cannot be refuted, and expressed an opinion based on those facts, an opinion that I heartily endorse.

Back in the 1990’s, you could find photos of Maureen smiling and happy.  Nowadays, you find photos like the one at the left.  A physically beautiful woman made ugly by her sullenness.  She is angry and sad and she should not be.  She just wrote a book entitled Are Men Necessary?  It essentially bemoans her perception that men are afraid to date her.  Gaze at that face to the left.  Now try to deny that Maureen Dowd is very physically beautiful.  Then return to the facial expression.  Does that face say "I would be fun to spend time with" or "Get away before I castrate you with my teeth?!"  And this is her expression when being interviewed by a fellow leftist with softball questions.

I know that, in the past, I have urged Rush Limbaugh to date Maureen.  After all, a man’s man with more money and political oomph than Maureen could indeed make Rush + Maureen the 2006 version of Matalin and Carville.  However, I am one of Rush’s biggest fans, and I have no desire to punish a man who I hold in such high esteem.

Maureen Dowd "trie[d] to make words subjective, insisting they mean only what [s]he wants them to." Hence, what once "corrupt[ed] thought" is now "poignant and endearing."  This is part of her continuing hatred of George W. Bush, for having the temerity to twice be elected although his ideology differs from hers.  In my humble opinion, this issue has made Miss Dowd bitter beyond my ability to understand.  And it is that bitterness, which seethes out from between the lines of Are Men Necessary and other Dowd tomes like Bushworld, that converts Maureen Dowd from a breathtakingly beautiful woman into a person who men, according to Miss Dowd’s book, apparently fear to date.

Physically, Maureen Dowd is better looking to me than Ann Coulter.  But, if I were not married, I would ask Ann Coulter out in a heartbeat.  Why?  She is, at her core, an optimist who laughs and smiles and has fun.  Need proof?  She’s a Dead head (an extreme fan of the band The Grateful Dead)!  She has pictures of herself on her web site both waterskiing and holding a high-powered rifle. Pessimism could turn any beauty queen into someone who is ugly where it counts.  Regretfully, that appears to have happened to Maureen Dowd.