How Maureen Dowd Writes A Column (FLOWCHART)

People have had a lot to say about Maureen Dowd in the past few weeks. Karl Rove called her a "bitter, twisted, deranged columnist," which is seriously rough considering the inherent offensiveness of the word "columnist." Elizabeth Edwards took Dowd on for attacking the personal nature of her book, saying her kids already know about all the hardships the family has endured because of the Internet and that Dowd "wrote an editorial where she clearly does not understand this." Even our own Jason Linkins took her to task for one of her "unique" choices.

We here in the comedy section thought the world deserved a look at how Maureen pens her polemics, and how she negotiates the world of gender politics.


Enjoy...

Get HuffPost Comedy On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[BocaMom]

Very, very funny!

[amantell]

This is really funny.

[onnyang]

LAME!!!
I Really Don't Get This...

[DataPoint]

That's because - You're Maureen Dowd.

[bikerdude]

REALLY lame!

[PalaceOfWisdom]

How the authors wrote this column:

We need to write something. Any ideas? None? Well let's see, who has been criticized lately? Maureen Dowd. Has she said anything controversial lately? No, nothing we can quote. But she's intelligent and articulate, and a lot of people find it offensive if a person isn't apologetic for having a working brain. So, vague personal attack? Yeah, that's comedy gold!

No, it isn't.

[ladyskeptik]

Is that you Maureen?

[bikerdude]

This "flow chart" has to have been written by a bitter broad...or someone pretending to be one...

[mdavidson]

Perfect response.

I laughed reading your version.
But at the original? ....snore.

[374662]

LOL! They forgot the box where she just plagarizes someone else's material. Why write when she can just steal it!

[monsieurjac]

Don't mess with my MO.

[OhComeOnNow]

Hilarious!!!!

[pfc1369]

Her average column is far better than this extremely lame parody.

[DataPoint]

That's really setting the bar high.

[HLL]

I used to read Maureen Down with relish a couple of years ago. Then she started attacking Hillary Clinton mercilessly. If the sky was falling it was Hillary's fault. I quit reading Dowd after that.

[bikerdude]

That miscue was the only thing that bothered me about Maureen Dowd. She was wrong and never apologized.

[rattler99]

who cares how this airhead does her so-called 'writing'?

[bikerdude]

Me, and the zillions who enjoy her wit and writing skill. She is a red head, but certainly NOT an air head...

[Nathan909]

This isn't very funny or clever.

[raker]

Agreed. Attacking the messengers won't make the Republicans any less vile or venal. And it won't make Bristol Palin a virgin again.

[Sherzie]

Niether are Dowd's current columns.

[Halter]

Maureen is great. Her sharp wit is not limited to the pen-I wish she were a regular on Chris Matthews Sunday show-she is quick and funny and her satire is biting.

[goodog]

I have to admit that I never see what people see in Maureen Dowd's writing. I try it again, every now and then and always get the feeling she must be married to someone important or close friends with someone who gets her this column as a social favor, because she mostly just does a retread of what most people already got last week or during the week, and she's like all snarky about it, even though it's already been done in all the papers already, but she seems to think she thought of it herself, except she clearly hasn't, like she doesn't realize that repeating re-heated gossip pretty much mean's it's 1) not original, and 2) that it's already over.

Obviously, her signature jab at a man's masculinity is college-level rhetoric and embarrassing to read in a NYT opinion piece, but at least it's expected, at this point, and you can just skim past the inevitability of it while looking for a more salient point just in case she has one. The danger is she takes too long to say it, and your eyes glaze over and you fall asleep.

[scootmandubious2]

I normally go to the NYT on Sunday to read Frank Rich, but when I have also checked out Maureen Dowd, I am appalled at her shallowness. This is the best the Times can do?

I think the last straw for me was a couple of months back when Down actually devoted an entire column to the caliber of Michelle Obama's biceps.

Dowd comes across as very full of herself and yet, the more she writes, the less she says.

I have also been hearing lately that much of her column is ghost-written by staffers. If I remember correctly, that was used as a partial excuse to explain some alleged plagiarizing. I do not know how much validity that has, but it might explain the depth of intellect in her scribblings these days.

[goodog]

Frank Rich seems to be the best they can do, and it's pretty damn good.

[LiarLiarIraqsOnFire]

MoDo's column is the bastard love child of Drudge and Page 6.

The more I have to hear about MoDo the more I miss Molly Ivins.

[goodog]

Molly Ivins was a goddess... or is a goddess now.

Gawd, wouldn't it be sad if Dowd thought of herself as anything remotely close Ivins?

Cue crawling skin.

[armadillo]

I love them both. Boy I miss Ann Richards though.