Dowd’s Stopped Clock Gets It Right

You know the old saying about how even stopped clocks are right twice a day.  The New York Times op-ed columnist version of this would be that one of the Krugman-Friedman-Collins-Dowd foursome will get something right about once a year.  (I’ll take once a decade from Friedman or Krugman.)

Today is Maureen Dowd’s turn to get something right, reminding us of why she was a popular political news journalist before the Times ruined her by making her an self-indulgent, faux-introspective op-ed columnist.  She trains her snarky eye on a worthy target: the Clintons.  A couple of samples:

Why is it that America’s roil family always seems better in abstract than in concrete? The closer it gets to running the world once more, the more you are reminded of all the things that bugged you the last time around.

The Clintons’ neediness, their sense of what they are owed in material terms for their public service, their assumption that they’re entitled to everyone’s money.

Are we about to put the “For Rent” sign back on the Lincoln Bedroom?

If Americans are worried about money in politics, there is no larger concern than the Clintons, who are cosseted in a world where rich people endlessly scratch the backs of rich people.

They have a Wile E. Coyote problem; something is always blowing up. Just when the Clintons are supposed to be floating above it all, on a dignified cloud of do-gooding leading into 2016, pop-pop-pop, little explosions go off everywhere, reminding us of the troubling connections and values they drag around. . .

We are supposed to believe that every dollar given to a Clinton is a dollar that improves the world. But is it? Clintonworld is a galaxy where personal enrichment and political advancement blend seamlessly, and where a cast of jarringly familiar characters pad their pockets every which way to Sunday. . .

There’s more, but this is enough.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.