The World of Dowd: Facts Don't Matter
Maureen Dowd had an atrocious column in the New York Times today. I have added my own comments in italics to the first part of her column:
"Flush with endorsing license plates discouraging conjugal license - entwined gold rings with the message "Traditional Marriage" - the Virginia House of Delegates is pulling up the fabric of society again.
Literally, this time.
The delegates have passed a bill authorizing a $50 fine for any Virginians - from randy Desperate Housewives to droopy chic teenagers - who wear pants that ride so low that their underwear shows "in a lewd or indecent manner."
Given that several generations now have unsuccessfully tried to meddle in the matter of teens' jeans, you would think lawmakers would know it is the ultimate futility. But the bill's sponsor, Delegate Algie Howell Jr., a 67-year-old Democrat and barbershop owner from Norfolk, told The Virginian-Pilot that he's got high, or rather low, hopes: "I think if there's a law saying you can't walk down the street with 8 to 10 inches of your undergarments showing, at least some of them might stop doing it."
A very nice sleight-of-hand is pulled here. The endorsement of marital fidelity (which, apparently, Dowd does not think is a good policy) is linked to an admittedly ridiculous bill about indecent exposure of underwear. Thrown in, almost as an afterthought, is the fact that the sponsor of the bill is a Democrat. One party endorses a vanity license plate about marriage, and the other makes people pull their pants up. Yet, apparently, they are linked by more than geography! Notice that one of the bills restricts and the other expands our options. If I lived in Virginia and was so inclined, I can get a license plate that expresses my views. These are not the official plates of Virginia. The no-gangsta-pants law, however, enforces a dress code on everyone. Of course, we know it’ll only be targeted at skaters and other disreputable elements of the corrupt youth. Now, when I drive through Virginia, I better be wearing a belt on my jeans.
This guy should be on the Bush team. Controlling what does not need to be controlled is its specialty.
Oh, I see. They aren’t linked at all! The anecdote was just a way to get a jab in at President Bush. However, the impression still lingers Bush secretly ordered Virginia Republicans to pass the no-gangsta -pants law.
Condoleezza Rice plays hardball with foes and allies around the world. But she's afraid of a few French schoolkids?
Keith Richburg reported in The Washington Post that the Bushies ensured that Condi's appearance at the elite Institute of Political Sciences was more sheep pen than lion's den. "Only a handful of the school's 5,500 students were allowed near the auditorium where Rice spoke," he wrote, "and the initial questions were vetted in advance by the school and the State Department."
The article said Benjamin Barnier, the son of Foreign Minister Michel Barnier, asked the first question, about the possibility of a theocratic government in Iraq. But the real question he wanted to ask was vetoed after he submitted it to the school on Monday. It was: "George Bush is not particularly well perceived in the world, particularly in the Middle East. Can you do something to change that?"
Perhaps Dowd should have read the article more closely. These “schoolkids” are hardly children. Benjamin Barnier (who, by the way, is not related to the Foreign Minister) is 24 years old, according to the article. He submitted two questions, and one was chosen. The question about the Shiites was the better question, in my opinion. Rice was not there to discuss the President. I do not know general procedures here, but checking out questions before they are asked is generally a good idea. After all, we did that ourselves in the “townhall” debate last fall. Extraneous, obscure, or insulting questions are liable to be asked if no oversight occurs. I am not endorsing this policy in all cases, but here, at a formal speech, it is a good thing.
Only a handful of students were let in because there were only 500 seats! Here were the allotments of seats: “Of 500 seats, only 150 went to the school's students and staff. Another 150 were given to French opinion leaders and government officials. Fifty went to American organizations, including the American University of Paris, the French-American Foundation, the American Chamber of Commerce and Sisters, a group of black American professional women. Seats were also reserved for officials of the French Institute on International Relations, which initially had been considered as a possible venue for Rice's speech.” Those all seem like reasonable choices. It was, perhaps, bad planning, but hardly Rice’s fault or any devious scheme by the State Department.
Surely, the "princess warrior" and "Madame Hawk," as she has been dubbed in France, could have handled that one.
But Bush officials prefer to write the script, or "create their own reality," as one Bushie put it, whenever they can. Besides the W.M.D. scare, there was the Kabuki "Ask President Bush" campaign sessions where voters had to take written pledges of support before they were allowed in, and the micromanaged town hall debates, where Bush strategists would not allow truly undecided voters to ask W. questions. And don't forget the administration's payments to conservative "journalists" to sell programs they would have promoted anyway.
Here is the punchline. Apparently, only filling 150 of the 500 seats with students and checking the questions beforehand is the same as the bizarre campaign sessions that President Bush had."
The column continues in this idiotic way.
"Flush with endorsing license plates discouraging conjugal license - entwined gold rings with the message "Traditional Marriage" - the Virginia House of Delegates is pulling up the fabric of society again.
Literally, this time.
The delegates have passed a bill authorizing a $50 fine for any Virginians - from randy Desperate Housewives to droopy chic teenagers - who wear pants that ride so low that their underwear shows "in a lewd or indecent manner."
Given that several generations now have unsuccessfully tried to meddle in the matter of teens' jeans, you would think lawmakers would know it is the ultimate futility. But the bill's sponsor, Delegate Algie Howell Jr., a 67-year-old Democrat and barbershop owner from Norfolk, told The Virginian-Pilot that he's got high, or rather low, hopes: "I think if there's a law saying you can't walk down the street with 8 to 10 inches of your undergarments showing, at least some of them might stop doing it."
A very nice sleight-of-hand is pulled here. The endorsement of marital fidelity (which, apparently, Dowd does not think is a good policy) is linked to an admittedly ridiculous bill about indecent exposure of underwear. Thrown in, almost as an afterthought, is the fact that the sponsor of the bill is a Democrat. One party endorses a vanity license plate about marriage, and the other makes people pull their pants up. Yet, apparently, they are linked by more than geography! Notice that one of the bills restricts and the other expands our options. If I lived in Virginia and was so inclined, I can get a license plate that expresses my views. These are not the official plates of Virginia. The no-gangsta-pants law, however, enforces a dress code on everyone. Of course, we know it’ll only be targeted at skaters and other disreputable elements of the corrupt youth. Now, when I drive through Virginia, I better be wearing a belt on my jeans.
This guy should be on the Bush team. Controlling what does not need to be controlled is its specialty.
Oh, I see. They aren’t linked at all! The anecdote was just a way to get a jab in at President Bush. However, the impression still lingers Bush secretly ordered Virginia Republicans to pass the no-gangsta -pants law.
Condoleezza Rice plays hardball with foes and allies around the world. But she's afraid of a few French schoolkids?
Keith Richburg reported in The Washington Post that the Bushies ensured that Condi's appearance at the elite Institute of Political Sciences was more sheep pen than lion's den. "Only a handful of the school's 5,500 students were allowed near the auditorium where Rice spoke," he wrote, "and the initial questions were vetted in advance by the school and the State Department."
The article said Benjamin Barnier, the son of Foreign Minister Michel Barnier, asked the first question, about the possibility of a theocratic government in Iraq. But the real question he wanted to ask was vetoed after he submitted it to the school on Monday. It was: "George Bush is not particularly well perceived in the world, particularly in the Middle East. Can you do something to change that?"
Perhaps Dowd should have read the article more closely. These “schoolkids” are hardly children. Benjamin Barnier (who, by the way, is not related to the Foreign Minister) is 24 years old, according to the article. He submitted two questions, and one was chosen. The question about the Shiites was the better question, in my opinion. Rice was not there to discuss the President. I do not know general procedures here, but checking out questions before they are asked is generally a good idea. After all, we did that ourselves in the “townhall” debate last fall. Extraneous, obscure, or insulting questions are liable to be asked if no oversight occurs. I am not endorsing this policy in all cases, but here, at a formal speech, it is a good thing.
Only a handful of students were let in because there were only 500 seats! Here were the allotments of seats: “Of 500 seats, only 150 went to the school's students and staff. Another 150 were given to French opinion leaders and government officials. Fifty went to American organizations, including the American University of Paris, the French-American Foundation, the American Chamber of Commerce and Sisters, a group of black American professional women. Seats were also reserved for officials of the French Institute on International Relations, which initially had been considered as a possible venue for Rice's speech.” Those all seem like reasonable choices. It was, perhaps, bad planning, but hardly Rice’s fault or any devious scheme by the State Department.
Surely, the "princess warrior" and "Madame Hawk," as she has been dubbed in France, could have handled that one.
But Bush officials prefer to write the script, or "create their own reality," as one Bushie put it, whenever they can. Besides the W.M.D. scare, there was the Kabuki "Ask President Bush" campaign sessions where voters had to take written pledges of support before they were allowed in, and the micromanaged town hall debates, where Bush strategists would not allow truly undecided voters to ask W. questions. And don't forget the administration's payments to conservative "journalists" to sell programs they would have promoted anyway.
Here is the punchline. Apparently, only filling 150 of the 500 seats with students and checking the questions beforehand is the same as the bizarre campaign sessions that President Bush had."
The column continues in this idiotic way.
posted by Joshua Frear at 11:34 AM
|
<< Home