|
|||||||||||||||
 |
Meet Maureen Dowd: New York Times’ Columnist Asks ‘Are Men Necessary?’ |
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
Apparently, for Ms.Dowd, men are only necessary when you need to steal their intellectual property for your own use. Her article can be summarized in one short sentence: Men do not find Ms.Dowd attractive or interesting, therefore they are unnecessary.
She may have a point…
Women don’t need men around…who needs someone who really knows what the hell is going on…
Women would much rather run around half cocked on emotion doing what their inner self tells them to rather than face reality….
Men are reality for women…
Women are flighty at best and men only hold their feet to the ground…
Dowd isn’t as bright as women wish she were…Children raised by single mothers are far less capable than children from two parent families….I wouldn’t be surprised if Dowed were a test tube child…
Lifting someone else’s words isn’t an “error”, it’s “theft”. But it;s something that The New York Times rarely apologizes for when they use unsubstantiated blog material as their only source on many stories. That’s one of their Machiavelli-like behaviors that is responsible for their impending demise. And Maureen Dowd is beyond contempt. She tries to deride men and at the same time plays the part of ingenue and c**k tease, as in most of her photos and behavior. That sort of thing is disgusting to people of both sexes, and even those of us who the New York Times disdains for not being among the proud faux-intellectuals can see when these little empresses wear no clothes. Dowd is little more than another name you drop within law firms and ivy halls as a silent nod that you;re one of the “in” crowd, but when viewed from above, the people who play this little game to the benefit of Dowd are infinitely more stooge-like than the “Okies”, “rubes”, and “people from flyover states” that Dowd and her doe-eyed readers and believers so enjoy ridiculing. Now we see this is a woman who isn’t even the creator of her own words! Like Pelosi, another hypocrite smacked rightly, right where it hurts, in the mirror!
Are “Maureen Dowd’s” Necessary?
The AP reports….
“Dowd acknowledged the error in an e-mail to the Huffington Post on Sunday, the Web site reported. The Times corrected her column online.”
Acknowledged the error? If this were a columnist from The National Review it would be called “Blatant plagerism.” I’m glad The Times “Corrected her column” instead of firing her a$$ for theft of another’s work. Liberals are hypocrites and nuts!!!!
Maureen, remember me?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
who needs men.
I can speak for any gay man. Yes we do need men. You don’t expect us to do anything with women do you? I need men and so do most of the men in California. What an idiot. Vibrators in your but kind of hurt.
When you have no innate wisdom, as is the case of Dowd, you have to plagiarize or polarize or create fake controversy.
MAUREEN DOWD WHO?
Never have read an articule by her.
She may as well go and work for AP. No one cares what she or AP writes.
Post a Comment
[...] Meet Maureen Dowd: New York Times’ Columnist Asks ‘Are Men Necessary?’ Posted on 17 May 2009by admin (0) // Quick Take: Meet Maureen Dowd: New York Times’ Columnist Asks ‘Are Men Necessary?’ → Read full article… [...]