MoDo's Latest No-Nos

I definitely second this post from Scott Lemieux today (h/t Atrios) about what passed for punditry in yesterday’s New York Times, specifically concerning the rehashing of all of the “can Hillary cut it” and “where does her ambition come from” and “can she make it without Bill” story lines about one of the leading nominees for next year’s Democratic presidential nomination (snoozerama time regardless of the gender in question).

And no, my objection is not based on the fact that Frank Rich and Maureen Dowd were taking on Democrats as opposed to Republicans. To prove it, I’ll cut Rich a little more slack because he noted the issues where HRC has recently advocated positions, though a little late as if to worry more about alienating potential voters than stating a case (namely, Iraq and health care – actually, a lot late on heath care, but perhaps because she knew she would get blamed for 1994 all over again, but still). I would add as well HRC’s uncomfortable (to me, anyway) reliance on donations from Big Pharma (as a prior commenter noted astutely).

And I want to give Rich credit for actually noting that, in Iowa, it is still a competitive contest between her, Barack Obama, and John Edwards (a fact so obvious that it seems to be frequently ignored by our corporate media).

However, between Rich and fellow pundit Maureen Dowd, I believe the latter wins the nod for most fatuous “reporting,” particularly with these choice items (from here)…

When asked by Tim Russert at the New Hampshire debate about the d-word, as Poppy Bush calls it (concerning nepotism – that’s as much as I could figure out), Hillary replied: “I’m running on my own. I’m going to the people on my own.”

Without nepotism, Hillary would be running for the president of Vassar...

That’s a pretty loathsome insult towards someone who has served in the United States Senate for the last seven years representing New York state. And if someone wants to look at the substance of what Senator Clinton has done during that time as opposed to listening solely to pundit fluff and basing an opinion on that, just look here.

Also…

On Friday, Bill (Clinton) gave an interview to Al Hunt dissing Obama’s experience level — a brazen assist to his wife.

We can only hope that Laura Bush’s comments on the crisis in Burma don’t signal a sudden interest in politics. President Laura following President Hillary would be too much, especially with W. back as the second First Laddie.

Oh, how clever Dowd is! I’m sure our elite media know it alls are chuckling over that one as they congregate at their watering holes, trying to drown their inadequacies with their alcoholic beverages of choice.

The notion that Laura Bush’s background could somehow qualify her for any role whatsoever in public life beyond that of district governor for a Rotary Club is simply hilarious. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton was named one of the most influential lawyers in America in 1988 and 1991 and has served as a senior partner at a law firm.

I’m grateful every day that I can learn about the issues that truly matter from highly qualified sources beyond these self-appointed arbiters of our discourse. Given the utter dreck they manufacture and inflict upon us, I don’t even want to imagine the world in which these people live.