Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

HEY! Judy! What happened to that goofy, dumb-ass annoying grin?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Bush_Eats_Beef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 07:41 PM
Original message
HEY! Judy! What happened to that goofy, dumb-ass annoying grin?
Did the Aspens turn or something?



'Woman of Mass Destruction' jibe turns into catfight
By Philip Sherwell in Washington
(Filed: 13/11/2005)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/11/13/wmd13.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/11/13/ixworld.html

It has erupted into one of the great catfights of American journalism: Judith Miller, the veteran reporter who went to jail because she refused to reveal a source's name, and Maureen Dowd, her equally outspoken long-term colleague on the New York Times.

The pencil-thin Miller, who quit the newspaper last week after being criticised by her editors, has launched a fightback after being denounced by Dowd.

In an article entitled "Woman of Mass Destruction", the flame-haired columnist flayed Miller for inaccurate reports on Iraq's pre-war weapons programmes and said she was known on the newspaper as "Miss Run Amok".

Miller, 57, has now delivered her riposte. In an interview with the New York Post she repeatedly referred to Dowd, 53, as having once been a great reporter. "She used to combine brilliant reporting with her rapier wit," Miller said. "Now you just get her rapier wit. She was brilliant. I really do think that. That's what made it worse." She added that her former colleague "has a book to sell", a reference to Dowd's Are Men Necessary?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
1. can't say I'm surprised, I doubted Miller would take this lying down n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. Big fat rotten sour grapes? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
3. Miller liked Dowd while she hated Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tularetom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. Ooh Ooh a "cat fight"
When does the mud wrestling start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
5. So, when Judy has here book finished and is out making the rounds
to see it, we need to remind her that we don't put much store in her words because, after all, she has a book to sell, right?

Those words will come back to haunt her!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. Who knows, it could be she may have to shop it elsewhere
It was supposedly a good six figure deal, but the way those things work is that they give you a bit at signing, and they retain the right to waltz away if either the product does not meet their expectations or they decide not to go forward with it.

Could be they gave her a hundred grand, or less, and told her to hit the bricks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
6. How many lies are in
the first two paragraphs?

Did judy quit? Did she go to jail because she refused to reveal a source that said she could reveal him?

Oh yeah, blame it on the book dowd has to sell, judy.

What conscience, judy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Burried News Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
7. From the look on Judy's face you have to wonder if she told
the Grand Jury the 'whole truth'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
8. Miller is 57?
Wow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
9. When was Dowd a great reporter? When she made up the Nieman
Marcus gift registration list for Hillary?
At least Dowd is not a stenographer, like "First Amendment " heroine Judy Miller.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NightOwwl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
10. "Pencil-thin" Miller and "flame-haired" Dowd...
It's not uncommon (unfortunately) for a news item featuring women to mention their physical attributes, but these are certainly two of the most imaginative adjectives I've seen used to describe someone's looks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
11. Maureen has a book to sell, eh Judy?
Should we take it, then, that perhaps you don't????

Whiner!!

Sucks not being the queen of the dance, don't it!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
12. Maureen has a book to sell, eh Judy?
Should we take it, then, that perhaps you don't????

Whiner!!

Sucks not being the queen of the dance, don't it!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Thug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
13. Glad to see the smug smacked from the mug...
All i can say is (to quote Nelson from the Simpsons), "HA HA!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tactical Progressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
15. She's right about Dowd and her 'rapier wit' slam
I've long called Dowd the Rapier Twit for her empty reporting.

Maureen Dowd, more than probably any single 'reporter', turned American journalism ugly against the Clintons. Not that there isn't enough responsibility on that score to go around ten times over, but I've always felt it was Dowd whose sniggering, demeaning diatribes against the Clintons and Gore, in the 'paper of record', and more importantly the 'liberal' paper of record, set the stage for the entire cadre of self-serving scumwits to treat them so nasty. She was their prodigy, they loved to parrot her, and there wasn't a half-truth or a lie against the Clintons that Dowd wouldn't use to demean them at every turn. She's more responsible for getting us into this mess than Judith Miller *ever* could be, because she helped turn American 'journalists' against the Dems and more than anything that's what allowed Bush to steal the presidency and do all the things he's done. Judith Miller is just an ugly side-effect of that entire process, a process that would never have come to the fruition it has without the likes of Maureen Dowd. So I really don't like seeing her held as any kind of champion by progressives.

They both deserve to be held in contempt, and while Dowd may have had some change in heart, it's far too late to mean much at this point.

Progressives shouldn't be so easy to forgive and forget those sleazy scumwads that have a change of heart as the wind changes. There are going to be alot of journalists that will be surrepticiously switching sides as the Repub ship starts sinking, and they're all going to be sanctimoniously attacking the Bush administration before too long. They'll have been 'fooled' like everybody else. Except that we know who did the fooling. Republican supremacy wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the American journalistic establishment turning traitor. I plan on being nauseated as they miraculously change heart and act like the protector of truth and integrity in journalism. You should be ready for it. Dowd is just one of the early movers and again, long after it could have made any difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Dowd's a columnist. Lots of these "reporters" and "journalists" simply
aren't, especially if they're writing opinion pieces. Or in Judy's case, stenography and propaganda.

Both Dowd and Miller had their own agendas. Both IMO appear to be more in love with their own stardom and cleverness than with facts and accuracy. So Dowd does her witticisms and shots and Miller does the "intrepid girl reporter" thing. And both do a disservice to their readers.

Miller's sins are many and well known. But I suspect Dowd if anything was more of an "insider" in the media elite circles than the problematic and difficult Judy ever was. And Dowd possibly was most effective with the left in her shots against Clinton and Gore from her genteel nest at the "lib" NYT than with the wingers who likely were not among her audience to begin with. But she, who didn't write for the Moonie Times or other clearly RW rag, gave those shots "legitimacy" even if they were factually BS. What was that about and who benefitted? Dowd apparently skates on that because she now takes on Bush and Miller. But it's a star turn and she's the star. It's not journalism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. Miller is a propagandist. Dowd is merely shallow and easily distracted.
I agree that Maureen Dowd is a rather poor thinker, but certainly Ms. Miller is a notch below in terms of guilt for this war.

Dowd simply was incompetent in discerning that the most important issue in the 2000 election was not Al Gore's suit.

Miller on the other hand put her byline - nominally supposed to be objective - on crap spit out by her boyfriends in the Bush administration. Miller's role in the scandal was to provide a mechanism using the New York Times (former) credibility as a tool for the justification of fraud for the purposes of making war and killing human beings.

Dowd on the other hand played a far less direct role. She merely is a poor thinker with very poor comprehension of what government is supposed to be about. She has substituted spoiled brat whining for insightful and thoughtful analysis.

Neither of them should be in a serious newspaper.

Thus the real loser in all of this is the New York Times itself, which is now revealed as editorially incompetent. Nothing printed in the New York Times can be taken at face value any more. It is reduced to a rag permanently stuck in the spin cycle. If Bill Keller had any integrity, he'd resign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
17. I don't know why they can't be civilized about this?
One wet tee shirt contest should end this spat once and for all.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
callady Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
18. That's General Judy to you private
now drop and give me fifty!!



hup-2-3-4
who's marchin' through the door
hup-2-3-4
another corporate media whore
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-13-05 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
20. Miss Run Amok Don't Smile n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 02:38 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC