Maureen Dowd, Liberal, hypocritical, but then, I repeat myself

It’s virtually impossible to go through life without being hypocritical, at least some of the time.  We tell our children not to lie, but we also encourage them to believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.  We let them know that is important to report wrongdoing by others, but also tell them,  “Don’t be a tattle tale”.  We also punish them for infractions that we have committed ourselves in the past.

We all do it.  We say that no one should break the speed limit, unless of course, it’s us and we’re late for work.  We demand that no one abuse our equipment, except for us, when we see no other way of getting a particular job done.  If you’re honest, and spend any amount of time thinking about it, you can come up with a very long list of situations where you have been hypocritical.

Now don’t waste any time worrying about this.  It’s not that big a deal.  We have laws against the really bad stuff, like theft and murder.  If hypocrisy was such a heinous crime, there would be laws against that too. Hypocrisy falls under the category of “Everyone else does it and is impossible to completely avoid, so in certain circumstances, it’s OK”.

It’s OK, unless you’ve spent a lifetime demanding that others live up to standards that you have no intention of maintaining for yourself.  It’s OK, unless you have spent a lifetime demanding that one side live up to certain standards, but consistently give the other side, a free pass.  It’s OK, if you didn’t try to keep your transgressions a secret, and then deny them when you’re caught red handed.

Both liberals and conservatives are hypocritical at times, but the type of hypocrisy, often differs.  Conservatives get into trouble when they fail to live up to standards to which they say we should all be held.  Liberals, both publicly and secretly, have one set of rules for themselves, and another, higher set of standards for everyone else.  

So now we got the whole Sony Hack thing which is turning out to be one of those rare occasions when although a crime has been committed, the rest of society benefits as a whole.  Kind of like when a burglar breaks into house and discovers that the homeowner is a serial killer.

The Sony Hackers have exposed serial killer of the truth, Maureen Dowd.  It appears that Dowd, at least on one occasion, agreed to have her buddies review and OK her column, before it was published.  Of course, she denies it, and if it is ever proven to be true, beyond a shadow of a doubt, she will expect us all to  believe that this was the only time such a thing ever happened, and then, all of her liberal buddies will give her a pass on that.  

This kind of thing happens with liberals all the time.  It’s how they keep on truckin’.  It’s how Clinton and Obama got away with all the crap they pulled.  Do you think that Dowd ever gave George W. Bush (or any other conservative) editorial control over her work before it was published?

Journalists are supposed to be like referees, both knowledgeable and impartial, blowing their whistle when infractions occur.  Dowd is neither.  We’ve always known that she’s a hometown ref who does not have complete understanding of the rules of the game, but now we find out that she is even worse than that.  She’s like a ref that has been paid off in a fixed game.  She’s willing to commit the same transgressions which she would never forgive anyone else of doing (at least if they were a conservative).  She was willing to collaborate with the subject of her story, offering to write a glowing review, in order to advance her own personal liberal agenda.

Once at work, we were having incidents of money and other things going missing from people’s lockers.  We finally discovered who the perpetrator was in at least one of the incidents, and of course he denied any wrongdoing, in spite of all of the evidence against him.  

Naturally, everyone assumed that he was responsible for all the other thefts as well.  Maybe he was, and maybe he wasn’t.  It really didn’t make any difference.  He betrayed everyone’s trust, whether he stole one or ten items.

Now maybe we should have withheld our judgment on the guy mentioned in the paragraph unless he was allowed all the protections of the accused under the due process of the law, but with journalists, things are different.  They make their living dealing with conjecture and influencing the court of public opinion.  All of this means that they must be extra careful when tiptoeing around the edges of what is, and what is not ethical.  

If the general public cuts Dowd, the same amount of slack that she cut conservatives all of these years, she should have already be sent packing, and never be heard from again.






















No comments:

Post a Comment