Gotcha, Sullivan Tells Times' Dowd

NewsMax.com ^ | 5/14/03 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[kattracks]

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd had distorted a quote from President Bush, drawing a quick slap on the wrist from columnist Andrew Sullivan.

"In case you thought the Blair debacle was the only indicator of the Times' slide, you obviously haven't been reading Maureen Dowd," Sullivan wrote on his website. "Today featured a classic, well, distortion. Here's Dowd's dumb-as-a-post take on Bush's conduct of the war on terror:

"Busy chasing off Saddam," Dowd wrote, "the president and vice president had told us that Al Qaeda was spent. "Al Qaeda is on the run," President Bush said last week. "That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly but surely being decimated... They're not a problem anymore."

Wrong, as Sullivan points out. "Here's what Bush actually said: 'Al Qaeda is on the run. That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly, but surely being decimated. Right now, about half of all the top al Qaeda operatives are either jailed or dead. In either case, they're not a problem anymore."

In other words, the half of the top al Qaeda leadership that is dead or in jail are no longer a problem - not the whole outfit as Dowd wrongfully suggests.

It looks as if the Blair witch disorder is spreading around the Times.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

Media Bias

[syriacus]

I apologize to kattracks for the misquote.

[lowbridge]

dowdy bump

[1Old Pro]

Dowd probably just made a little editing error......

[RansomOttawa]

It must be more affirmative action.

Dowd is the NYT's token Stupo-American?

[fightinJAG]

"less of a threat" does not equal "no longer a problem."

Dowdy was setting up an absolute standard--NO problem---so she and her cronies could crow when a problem did occur.

[SamAdams76]

Maureen Dowd's column looks like something you'd expect to see in the National Enquirer or the Midnight Globe or any of those other supermarket tabloid magazines that usually features some new diet or some Hollywood star that recently put on a lot of weight (those supermarket housewives love to read about people who are fatter than they are). But I digress. That is where Maureen Dowd's column belongs. Then again, they could always start putting the New York Times in the supermarket checkout bins. Right between People Magazine and Good Housekeeping.

[amused]

Dowd ping...your story is heating up.

[Ironword]

So who caught this first: Sully or the Freeper? (See the link in the thread.) I suppose simultaneous isn't impossible.

[Shermy]

This is a pretty blatant quoting to mislead. Much more disturbing than Blair copying stuff from other papers without attribution.

But will Dowd be lynched too?

[gridlock]

Good to see that somebody around here has respect for the rules...

[Psycho_Bunny]

As recent events have painfully shown, that is clearly not the case. I think that is the substance of Dowd's argument.. 

The Sauds have done very little to combat Al Qaeda so it's to be expected that there would be bombings in Saudi Arabia.  It's been a while since they've pulled off major attacks outside of their Safe Harbors.

Welcome to Free Republic.

[Shermy]

Here's the original NYTimes column

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/911390/posts
Osama's Offspring(MAUREEN DOWD ALERT!!)

[kattracks]

It seems Dowd and her cronies have been waiting with bated breath for another attack, just so this type of BS could be written.

Apparently, she, and they, weren't listening when President Bush said this is an ongoing war against terrorism, and IT'S NOT OVER YET!

[Grampa Dave]

No, Dowd has been in bed with the non Gay elites of the NY Slimes forever. So she will not be blasted unless they decide to call her an Old Diversity Hen.

[MightyMouseToSaveThe Day]

No, "Mr Concerned Gentleman-who-joined-today-to-tell-us-what-Dowd-MEANT-to-say-in-her-article", the purpose of dowd's article was to try to make the President look stupid by purposely misquoting. It's an old, sleazy trick to insert ellipses and delete content in an overt effort to distort and manipulate. Didn't fool any of us FReepers, nor does your recent membership.

[UB355]

I didn't have time to compose a reply so I had Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator do it.

http://hugin.sigusr1.org/~pakin/complaint



Guns? Absence of religion? Lack of self esteem? Poor parenting? The entertainment industry? Who's to blame for Miss Maureen Dowd's overbearing treatises? Numerous professionals (and not-so-professionals) have speculated and mulled, publicly and privately, over what has caused Maureen to jawbone aimlessly. Before examining the present situation, however, it is important that I give peace a chance.

Maybe she is being manipulated by prolix Huns, but even so, she says that it is better that a hundred thousand people should perish than that she should be even slightly inconvenienced. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life. The struggle against unforgiving Neanderthals must be a struggle against animalism, parasitism, and opportunism, or it is doomed to failure. It is reasonable to infer that if history follows its course, it should be evident that it has been said that Maureen uses good motives as a cover for evil ones. I believe that to be true. I also believe that her shell games are an icon for the deterioration of the city, for its slow slide into crime, malaise, and filth. I'm willing to accept that I don't trust atrabilious stool pigeons. I'm even willing to accept that she is talking out of her posterior. But there is a simple answer to the question of what to do about her harangues. The difficult part is in implementing the answer. The answer is that we must provide an antidote to contemporary manifestations of scummy paternalism. If you've read any of the pestilential slop that Maureen has concocted, you'll unmistakably recall Maureen's description of her plan to assail all that is holy. If you haven't read any of it, well, all you really need to know is that one can consecrate one's life to the service of a noble idea or a glorious ideology. Maureen, however, is more likely to use lethal violence as a source of humor.

To tolerate her immoral perceptions simply because they're not packaged and sold as spineless is to make a fetish of the virtues of dodgy boosterism. It's a pity that two thousand years after Christ, the voices of beer-guzzling prigs like Maureen can still be heard, worse still that they're listened to, and worst of all that anyone believes them. Her imprecations have kept us separated for too long from the love, contributions, and challenges of our brothers and sisters in this wonderful adventure we share together -- life! When a political condition of greed, massive corruption, and diversity of objective is coupled to a social condition of drugs, violence, and discontent, therein exists the perfect environment for Maureen to scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties. We must compile readers' remarks and suggestions and use them to delegitimize her. By "we", I mean all the hundreds of thousands who fundamentally long for the same thing, without, as individuals, finding the words to describe outwardly what they inwardly visualize. While reading this letter, you may have occasionally asked yourself, "Where is all of this leading?" and, "What is the point exactly?" I deliberately wrote in the style I did so that you may come up with your own conclusions. Therefore, I leave you with only the following: Miss Maureen Dowd's constant whining and yammering is a background noise that never seems to go away.

[kattracks]

I think that is the substance of Dowd's argument.

So, to give her argument "substance" she had to "doctor" what President Bush said.

Just like Blair "doctored" his reports to give them substance.

[AndyTheBear]

If the Times had any real integrity

if false then anything. If the Times has any real integrity then pigs could fly.