On Tuesday, Maureen Dowd had a funny and somewhat insightful column in the New York Times, but it seems a bit like she is still sleepwalking through her column, and unsure how to use her considerable talents and opportunities. Dowd is a biting writer, has amazing access to people who shape policy, and the New York Times op-ed page as her platform.
Maybe my expectations are too high, but I have been expecting more from her, and am not that impressed. Dowd seems to care little about government policies, and much on personal foibles and speculative amateur psychiatry.
I don't think that being famous is a pass when it comes to doing reporting, research or other things that might justify the real estate she uses at the New York Times. It is not as if this is a boring time. The country is facing deep crises at home and abroad, and the democrats are just beginning to take control. Even if you don't know what should be done, there is plenty of opportunity to explain what is being done, why it is being done, and what the critics say. Some dimensions of this are partisan, and other dimensions at not.
I'm not suggesting that Maureen Dowd needs to dig into Afghanistan, the TARP or the apparently aimless work on health policy, but it would be nice if she would dig into something real, and something important.