Dowd's column on Dean and Dr. Judith Steinberg is

[Feanorcurufinwe]

This article is:

[jonoboy]

1. Disappointing of Maureen..she should have been discussing issues

[JI7]

2. not sure if i want to read it

for those who did. should i , or not ? i have an idea of what to expect which has me leaning against reading it. but it's being talked about very much so i would like to hear what you all have to say.

[sandnsea]

3. I didn't read it

Is that the one where she was crying about a phone call or something? Too stupid to waste my time on.

[GainesT1958]

4. Hack job by MoDo...

Kind of a "Gore-ing" type column. Reminds me, also, of some colums in '92 which questioned if Chelsea Clinton was "normal", since her parents shielded her from the media so much. Typical hack job by a media whore. x(

B-)

[AP]

5. It's stupid and nasty

however, I do think there is a legitimate issue worth discussing in there somewhere, but it's not the ones the insipid Mo Dowd talks about.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

6. What's creepiest

is the way it starts out so reasonable sounding, but by the time you get to the end you feel like you have to take a shower.

[Skwmom]

7. I am no Howard Dean supporter but this column

is wrong and disgusting.

[tishaLA]

8. This is the same MoDo who last week

discussed Clark's sweaters. Why would we expect better of her? She is a fashion columnist and a hatchetperson. And she has more in common with Bill Saffire and David Brooks than we'd like to admit.

Again--ask the Bob Somerby question: what editor lets them print this stuff? We should be emailing her editor and telling her that we demand better of the Times.