Norah is better looking than Maureen too.
Posted on 10/10/2005 5:30:36 AM PDT by Cincinatus
STANFORD, Calif. -- I just witnessed a fascinating juxtaposition. On Tuesday, I attended a lecture, "All the President's Women," by veteran MSNBC reporter Norah O'Donnnell at Stanford University. The next day, a piece by columnist Maureen Dowd with the very same title appeared in the New York Times.
They couldn't have been more dissimilar.
O'Donnell's presentation was charming, insightful and literate. She described the nuanced professional relationships that President Bush has with women. How some, such as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Under Secretary of State Karen Hughes, have become genuine "family," even vacationing with the Bushes. How others, such as Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, comprise a sort of "professional family" on whom the President knows he can depend for loyalty and hard work.
She also described the unique role of Laura Bush, who, among her other duties, in the most dire circumstances prepares the President for bad news. (According to O'Donnell, who has covered the White House extensively, the inner circle dreads bringing bad tidings to the Oval Office, viewing it as "walking into the propeller.")
O'Donnell also noted that the loyalty flows both ways, with the President apparently grooming Secretary of State Rice for a future presidential candidacy.
Dowd's column, by contrast, was a tacky, inaccurate hatchet job. Worse still, it was unentertaining. In an excruciatingly patronizing way, she described Dr. Rice, Ms. Hughes and Ms. Miers as "office wives," who are "not qualified to get . . . supremely powerful jobs."
Dowd criticizes Dr. Rice's performance as both National Security Adviser during the first Bush term, calling her more of "an enabler than an honest broker," and as Secretary of State.
Oh, please. Dr. Rice is one of the best qualified and most talented persons to serve as secretary of state in modern times. And where was foreign policy critic Dowd during the travesties of the Clinton administration, when the nation had to endure the buffoonery of Secretary of State Madeline Albright; the relentless disingenuousness of Under Secretary of State Tim Wirth, who worked tirelessly to circumvent Congress's explicit refusal to ratify radical, wrong-headed treaties signed by the Clinton administration; and the chronic ineptitude of National Security Adviser Sandy Berger (who gained fame only after leaving office, convicted of stealing classified documents by shoving them into his trousers)?
Dowd's column is remarkable not only for its snideness but for its mean-spirited anti-feminist tone. In fact, all of the women she slams rose to their positions through merit and accomplishments - not through mindless affirmative action, the apparent method of selection of some columnists at the New York Times.
Henry I. Miller is a fellow at the Hoover Institution. Barron's selected his most recent book, "The Frankenfood Myth," as one of the 25 Best Books of 2004.
Norah is better looking than Maureen too.
IMO if Harriet Miers was instead Henry Miers, there would be none of this condescending talk of cronyism, etc.
Golly, there's a shocker. Yet another pedestrian bit of work from Dowd.
Anyone else notice that Maureen is morphing into Helen Thomas?
Dowd is not qualified for any job either but then again, we are talking about the NY Times.
There sister's...You didn't know???
Now that's a scary observation! Must be due to Maureen's bile working its way to the surface.
Here's a good alternative to Dowd and her ilk, coming up at nine on C-SPAN's Washington Journal:
http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/schedule.csp
Call-In
Supreme Court Watch
C-SPAN, Washington Journal
Washington, District of Columbia (United States)
ID: 189227 - 5 - 10/10/2005 - 0:30 - No Sale
Wright, Wendy, Executive Vice President, Concerned Women for America
The guest talks about abortion and the Miers Supreme Court nomination. Wright represents a group that is opposed to abortion. CWA has said that before deciding to support the Miers nomination, more must be learned about Miers’ record on the topic in the past and in the upcoming hearing process.
If Dowd is a jounalist, I am the king of England. She is just a hack for the Damolrat party.
Norah 's a hottie. And a pretty good golfer too!
The big difference is between how Clinton treated women and compared to Bush. Clinton used women particularly those in subordinate positions or who he perceived as vulnerable as sex objects. His selection of women for positions of power(Albright, Reno and Shalala) was done by Hillary.
So that explains why all the power women during his regime were u-glie.
I had wondered about that <not>.
The "Mighty Mo" has spoken, but as usual, she is as full of it as a Christmas turkey! The only "enabler" I can recall in the White House was Hillary...she enabled Billy by making sure he had lots of interns, secretaries, etc. to play toucy, feely games with!She did it for him in Arkansas, and in Washington. Maureen Dowd is so wrong all of the time, she amazes me. Is she related to Jason Blair?
***She also described the unique role of Laura Bush, who, among her other duties, in the most dire circumstances prepares the President for bad news. (According to O'Donnell, who has covered the White House extensively, the inner circle dreads bringing bad tidings to the Oval Office, viewing it as "walking into the propeller.") ***
I strongly object to that statement. Perhaps O'Donnell's statement was taken out of context. I can see Laura being the one to tell the President something personal, but I cannot possibly imagine that his staff are afraid to tell him anything else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.