Another week, another episode of “I’m Maureen Dowd and I’m so jealous of Hillary my soul is about to explode.” In her latest fact-starved Clinton-bashing column, Dowd conflates Hillary with the extreme right. But she also makes a major confession about the national media’s adversarial stance toward Hillary.
For years, the New York Times has provided a platform for Maureen Dowd to publish vindictive and hateful anti-Clinton columns. On July 10, 2016, Dowd crossed the line, belittling President Obama by derisively calling him “Barry” and triggering a massive backlash for echoing language used by his racist critics.
A few weeks later, she maligned Hillary yet again, calling her crazy and comparing her to Dick Cheney.
On August 21, she wrote a column channeling Trump’s voice, and designed to deliver another heaping dose of Hillary hate, from peddling conspiracies about her health to falsely accusing her of illegal activity.
And now, in another poison-penned column, she finally confesses that she and her media peers have developed a “giant bubble of hostility” toward Hillary.
This echoes Mark Halperin’s similar August admission: “There’s a deep well of anti-Clinton sentiment in the press.”
Dowd and Halperin are revealing what anyone who follows the 2016 election intuitively knows: With a few notable exceptions, the national media are purveying an atmosphere of disrespect and disdain for the first woman with a viable shot at the presidency.
It is disgraceful.
[NOTE: This is repurposed from an August 21 article titled Clinton-Obsessed Maureen Dowd Masquerades as Trump to Bash Hillary.]