Maureen Dowd once again confuses the gals she has lunch with for “everyone.”
It is not yet clear if the Valkyries will get the credit or the blame on Libya. But everyone is fascinated with the gender flip: the reluctant men — the generals, the secretary of defense, top male White House national security advisers — outmuscled by the fierce women around President Obama urging him to man up against the crazy Qaddafi.
She's turning into Liz Smith.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI’m not fascinated because the “Valkyrie” narrative seems too overly simplistic to reflect the reality of what actually happened. I suspect that after dithering for over a week on Libya, Obama’s decision to go to war on Tuesday had more to do with it becoming clear that the UN SC would overwhelmingly vote for action. In other words, the governments of the 9 other UNSC members had a lot more to do with Obama’s decision to go to war than the three female advisors in the room. I wonder if Maureen Dowd would be as fascinated by that narrative as she is by the one that confirms her own preconceived notions of what girl power should be?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf nothing else this whole fiasco shows that Hillary is not the smartest woman in the world. Of all the people in this administration, you would've thought she'd have been the adult in this situation along with Sec Def Gates (who should've resigned rather than carry out BHO's orders).
But I guess not
So much for Hillary being president.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDon't the likes of Maureen Dowd claim if women ruled the world there would be no wars.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMaureen doesn't get out much, does she? But we already knew that.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd, "fierce" women? Really? Another word comes to mind.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs a Person who happens to be of the female gender, I can state unequivocally that I am not fascinated by the so-called "gender-flip."
In my, apparently unenlightened mind, I don't believe that all men are macho-men and all women are delicate earth-mothers. I believe people are individuals and deserve the respect to be assessed by what they do and say verses their gender or race.
What I do find fascinating is the disintegration of the Obama "team" and I see this as a reflection of his leadership style and skill. The fraying of any team cohesion is to the point that otherwise politically loyal associates would engage in an open breach is the story not the so-called "gender flip" of traditional roles.
This could be merely another public manifestation of a "failure to communicate" within the leader/follower dynamic in Obama's team. There may not be a "breach" but merely that they don't have their story straight and people are confused as to what is the "official truth."
If it is a breach of the leader/follower relationship between the POTUS and his secretary of state, then I would expect a severing of the relationship. A leader cannot allow a openly rebellious lieutenant to continue in place and any strong lieutenant that loses respect for his/her leader or cannot accept the leader's decisions, has a moral and ethical obligation to excuse themselves from further service and openly confirm the breech.
If this is truly a breach, we should expect the Secretary of State to resign shortly.
Considering that I have long believed that Hilary only accepted the Secretary of State position to fill out the missing "foreign policy experience" in her resume. This was the one area in which she took the most flack during the last campaign. From a calculating perspective, it would be a win-win for her. IF Obama were successful, she could get credit for being a key member of the successful presidency of the first "black" president and if he proves to be a loser, she can break ranks in the his first term without blame (at least with some level of understanding and sympathy), just in time to announce her candidacy for the presidency before 2012. If this theory is sound, then the "breach" over foreign policy signals her resignation will be forthcoming. She will, of course, deride any claims that she will be seeking the presidency at least for a few months. Then, with great regret, she will be forced to run to save the country. She will do so "reluctantly and with great respect for the President" but the situation, globally, has become too challenging and needs a new, firmer, stronger hand.
If this is not the case, then I think this disconnect is merely that.. no one on the team listens to each other, do not agree on the "messaging", and are more concerned about how they come across individually than about how they represent the United States. They are not a team.
They come across as amateurs and opportunists.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis woman needs to be pleasured: often; and, by a man who knows how.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMaureen Dowd is still employed?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNothing wrong with criticizing Maureen Dowd, who seems to think that "too clever by half" is the ideal mix for a column. But shouldn't the same criticism be leveled at Mark Krikorian, who used essentially the same argument to criticize the Obama administration?
It seems strange that Krikorian's comments generated comment and widespread criticism on the web as a whole, but none on The Corner, a site ostensibly about debating conservative ideas. Yet it's apparent that at least one frequent poster thought Krikorian's argument was as stupid as many others did, but was waiting for it to be voiced by a liberal before he was willing to pounce.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"fierce"? So i guess this will be the narrative. Next up the glossy newsweek or time cover of these three powerful "fierce" women standing back to back -- like that idiotic Whistleblowers cover from 10 years ago. "Warrior Queens" or "The New Tough Guys" or "Obama's Spine" (hearkening back to those good old days of Rove being "Bush's Brain").
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGovernment is a party game in which the girls play against the boys? Heaven help us.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLil Mo as she is known around the newsroom at NY Times has spent the past decade looking for real men who remind her of her father.
Case in point - Lil Mo loves Cheney, Rummy and W. She looks at them and looks at the turds like Frank Rich, Bob Herbert, David Brooks and the rest of the newsroom and wonders aloud "I enjoy working at the Village Voice because I can always get a good compliment about my fashion."
Lastly, her little heart was toyed with by a mean man. Do not worry Mo, Spring is here and Fire Island is ready.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseObama has the Daughters of Boudicca working for him? Who knew?
Watch out, Libyan Palace Guard amazons.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs a comic Dowd turned into a female version of Rupert Pupkin at least five years ago. Bill Maher finished in second place. I can't think of anyone offhand who has turned into a male version of Pupkin.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTo anyone paying any attention over the past few decades to Indira Ghandi, Golda Meir, or Margaret Thatcher, not to mention Jeanne Kirkpatrick or even Madeleine Albright, the notion that a "gender flip" is necessary for women to act forcefully is ludicrous. It is only the official feminist narrative of "women as victims" which allows such commentary.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePennsylvania Yankee: We're ridiculing Dowd not over the substance of her comment, but rather over her assumption (once again) that she speaks for "everyone".
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseraf: Not to mention Elizabeth I or Catherine the Great?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse