The reason many women wanted to save Franken: A more nuanced look at his firing offenses reveals not sexual harassment but a boorishness that dispassionately uses sex parts as stage props. But subtle distinction can't save a sacrificial lamb.
TIME Magazine's 2017 #MeToo 'Person of the Year' is the "cover" story of cynical left-wing political positioning masquerading as courage. By dumping their minor, powerless players—and much too late and at no cost, the Left is able to claim—falsely—that they occupy the higher moral ground. This move sets up the demagoguing of their old standby, the right-wing “war on women," whether Roy Moore wins or not.
But the old battle cry rings hollow. For a quarter century, the Left has protected and elevated to icon status two of the most pernicious abusers of women and power extant, the Clintons, who reduced the savaging of women to a lifestyle and career choice and who gave their imprimatur to do so to the generation now in power.
The Pensacola stream-of-consciousness delivery and cadence last night were familiar, but the performance was exceptional. Trump achieved everything he needed to—brilliantly. Roy Moore was always the subtext—the location, of course, but more important, the greater morality of denying power to the corrupt, existential threat to the Republic—the swamp-dwelling Left and Deep State.
40
The substance of this piece is what the Trump supporters are throwing out every day, Maureen. Uranium, Bengazi, Wall Street & blue dresses. Give it a rest please. Let us give the Clintons their deserved retirement from the public sphere. We've heard quite enough from them at this late date.
The Demos need new faces & soon. We know who they are. Let's acquaint the harried & preoccupied public with their faces & credentials. You could help. Just whose train are you riding anyway?
71
Ted Kennedy is all I have to say
26
"Democrats often lose out ..."
Give me a break.
Bill Clinton
Ted Kennedy
JFK
RFK
Weiner (took years to get him)
LBJ
John Conyers (took decades to get him)
Plus, all of HOLLYWOOD
32
Hillary was the worst possible candidate the Democrats could have nominated. Without Hillary, there would have been no email scandal, no Benghazi snafu, no Clinton Foundation accusations, no million dollar speeches to Wall Street left unexplained, no Bill baggage, and no idiotic James Comey interference.
57
Lena Dunham?
3
Ms. Dowd...
You need to get over Hillary Clinton. She is yesterday's newspaper. SO is her husband. Thankfully, they're done with politics. We get that you don't like either one of them. We've known it for a long time. Neither do I. Enough, already!
It'd be so much more productive to simply point out the fact that it's time to throw the bums out. And it's time for Democrats to grow a pair. In this atmosphere nice guys finish last.
76
I find it amusing how Kristen Gillibrand has barely said a word after Franken correctly slammed the hypocrisy of his departure. Maybe she realized all too late what it means to sacrifice one of your own for the sake of morals, and be destroyed by a party who could now care less. Obie Wan let Vader destroy him for the sake of the just. Look how that turned out.
43
Of COURSE Maureen would somehow make this scourge of men all about Hillary. Hilarious if not so sickening.
102
That damned 2006 USO tour... hearts and flowers. Right?
5
Hillary lost the election and Bill is fading.
When will you turn your attention to some real unfinished business -- Clarence Thomas?
87
It seems like a time of political progress. The sacrifice of Franken; the end of Clinton relevance; the normality of sexual faults being revealed. Us old men are remembering when we first started exploring sex. Testing the limits. The limits of what we could get as well as the limits of our guilt about pushing. Many didn’t even try to explore. God knows how screwed up they are, but they may be the only ones who have a clean distant past.
The guys would meet up after dates. An ugly truck stop diner with the best meatball subs. Friends would arrive, usually shrug at our raised eyebrows and give little funny motions such as a hand motion that said they only got a hand job. Most of us pretended. Always razzing, always laughter.
We got slapped when we went too far. It would still be many years before most of us no longer had to trade sex for commitment, sometimes engagement. As we became more accomplished in our careers a strange thing happened. What Chris Rock said (“Sexual harassment be about when a ugly guy try to get some”) no longer seemed true. Even us ugly guys were offered as much as a high school quarterback. Sometimes we took it the wrong way, thinking we could expect it. Often the response to a suggestive touch was enthusiastic, but sometimes women warned us in no uncertain terms. Almost all of us had limits such as no grabbing, no forcing, no quid pro quo.
It goes on. Peers play a big part. Where can it be changed?
I miss those meatball subs.
7
Wow, . . . I mean Wow! Maureen has finally shown her true colors. Thanks again Donald, in this great game of strip poker, she is down to her underwear. In a phony attempt to be impartial, she falls flat.
"The accused pervert and pedophile Roy Moore . . ." No bias in that sentence structure. So what was the pervert and pedophile accused of?
"Running the gamut from Bill to Harvey to Trump to Anthony Weiner . . ." On a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being a "cad" and 10 being a true rapist) Trump might score 1 on a very bad day. No woman supporting Trump has ever had to retract anything she said. And your use of given names for your Democrat buddies (3 out of the 4) is telling.
15
The Democrats 'Ate Their Young '.
11
Opine, Maureen, opine on a woman who is not president, but horror of horrors, took money from Weinstein. By all means, don't talk against the pudenda-grabber in the White House which you and your fellow pundits helped elect and are now helping to normalize. Soon, you'll probably have Roy Moore to ignore as you continue to demolish Al Franken. I hope some day--and soon--all of you Hillary haters are forced to face your ridiculous bias and realize that no candidate for the presidency is perfect, but some are less dangerous and destructive than others. With their forced removal of Franken, the Democrats are on their way to giving the Republicans the 2018 and 2020 elections. They just can't get beyond political malpractice, just as you Maureen can't get beyond pundit incompetency.
90
Maureen,
The media must stop mentioning Hillary so the Democrats can become the party of sexual restraint and justice.
12
Five years ago, Mitt Romney made that stupid, clumsy comment, "Binders full of women," and you liberals had an aneurysm! You tarred and feathered one of the most boring men ever to run for President. My goodness, I think Mitt calls bingo numbers at a senior center for his Friday night fun! But you couldn't help yourselves- just had to take down a Republican. Well- look where we are now? You destroyed Mitt over nothing and practically had to beg Al Franken to resign over his actions. Actions far greater in severity than anything Mitt ever did.. You liberals are a bunch of Hypocrites!
20
Okay, everybody is shaking fingers at everyone else. What I want to know is, if there really is a Creep List, and it seems likely that there is, why hasn't it appeared on the front page of this newspaper?
10
From Chappaquiddick Ted to Chappaqua Bill, Democrats, women, feminists, told us that we should live with it. We did. After all the litmus tests of past decades, Dems come up with the Franken purity test to figure out a new way to win. Let's see how it plays out.
16
And yet Roy Moore and Trump walk into office with big, ugly smiles
49
Would someone please tell me what Hillary Clinton actually did to smear her husband’s victims? Believe him along with the majority of democrats at the time? Thank Juanita Broderick for her volunteer work long before she had any reason to know of her alleged rape? Question Monica Lewinsky’s stability in a private email written to a friend? What was she supposed to do, ask her out for a mani pedi? Dowd, along with Trump, seems to have an endless need to cast and recast Clinton as a villain, now over a year after her campaign has ended. I’m still waiting for an objective retelling of HRC’s imperfect record of public service, but that may not happen until voices like Dowd’s are replaced by journalists whose views aren’t shaped by a mean spirited distrust for a woman who had the audacity to seek power.
100
To me, the real horror is that for too many voters, including women, a candidate's being a “Neanderthal on women’s rights” is a feature, not a big.
6
So in the end, Maureen Dowd has favored us all with yet another diatribe about Hillary Clinton--not about Weinstein, not about Trump, not about the way Cingress insulated itself, not about this Administration's shrieking attacks on women and kids, not about the ways that our political parties have depended on sniggering misogyny, but about Hillary Clinton.
Once again, the wimmins is the problem.
95
I get it you have always hated the Clintons and I believe that you do like Trump because he bought you lunch and said nice things to you. What I don't understand is why you have not called for Trump to resign or for that matter Justice Thomas? You complain about the Democrats but not a peep about the republicans... Frankly I see little difference between you and your right-wing brother except he is willing to openly shrill for the cons.
95
What a watershed time. Its a good opportunity to clear out the dead wood in Congress and make way for a whole new generation of crooks, empty suits and sociopaths in dear old DC.
11
It is astonishing and disturbing how many "progressive" women here and on liberal talk radio think that "forcibly wet-kissing and unwanted butt-grabbing" is relatively minor offenses compared to the ALLEGATION that Roy Moore "preyed on young girls" as Frankenstein said. (Note that he did not say ALLEGEDLY PREYED ON YOUNG GIRLS.)
As for Trump, his sexual indiscretions and alleged assaults were exploited by Democrats during the debates and during the campaign against him. But the American voters in 30 States discounted those locker-room claims and allegations from "bimbos" to give him the popular vote mandate in those States, making him the president. So, the Jury has spoken and it is best the Dems left it alone.
As for Roy Moore, why was Beverly Nelson at Olde Hickory house with this fellow and why does the yearbook entry state DA when the dude was ADA? And, who signs the year book as DA?
So, the voters in Alabama are right to discount these "phony" eruptions after 40 years and elect this fellow to the senate.
If he is elected, Dem's credibility and morale will be the true roadkill.
10
Geez Mo, all roads lead to the Clintons with you. Sometimes I think Bill must have groped you or maybe Hilary did. Why do you give the Clinton so much power? Why aren't you calling out McConnell, Ryan or Huckabee? This is an epidemic. Call everyone out!
42
Why is it (yet again) about "Crooked Hillary" and not about Courageous Kirsten and her band of six women Democratic senators who stood up and told Al Franken, Chuck Schumer and all the men in the Senate, "Enough is enough!"? It's not "rough justice" nor "roadkill" when a woman says "No!" and a man still plants unwanted "wet kisses and random squeezes" you know where and that same 55-year-old man then takes a raunchy, degrading photo leering while appearing to grab your breasts. Sen. Gillibrand finally drew the line at zero tolerance for sexual misconduct, and I, for one applaud her for doing so. We need women to step up for women--and men to join them. We need at least one political party that says "NO!" when it comes to sexual assault and harassment. Hopefully, Maureen you'll do the same and join with the new #MeToo generation of women and men rather than flogging the already bruised body of Hillary.
17
Neatly turned to a criticism of Hillary and the D's. Not so much about the R's.
21
The one undeniably positive thing to emerge from all of this is that the Clintons will go away and stay away. For good. 25 years is plenty.
Including Chelsea, the 1% "feminist". Get a job.
11
".....Democrats often lose out because Republicans play to win, and they play rough."
In other words, when coming to a gunfight, Republicans bring AR-15s and Democrats arm themselves with non-GMO oat bran.
15
Would love to hear your brother’s (your alter ego or bad twin, etc) point of view on this current topic. Grant him a column beyond his once yearly TG allotment and let’s see if your shared DNA requires inclusion of a Clinton diss. I agree with others who felt the brilliance of today’s article had less impact once you went there. Why did you choose to contaminate everything at the end, and throw Franken back under the bus in the process after you discussed his comparative innocence?
9
Seems we have a pattern here. Maureen Dowd dares point out the self-dealing, predatory, and congenitally hypocritical nature of the Clintons, and their abundant defenders among the NYT's readership come roaring back. It's a bit tiresome, though I do believe Dowd has done a public service by pulling back the royal curtain; repeatedly, if we missed it the eighteenth and nineteenth times.
And when it comes to Al Franken's demise, we see another long-running pattern. Progressives, Democrats, what-have-you simply don't possess the toughness and fighting spirit to ruthlessly engage in the political war against the conservatives, reactionaries, and Republicans who started it (and continue to win it handily). The neutered "left," such as it is, is left to exorcise its powerlessness and take out its frustrations on its own.
Democrats get their clocks cleaned almost every day, then come home and take it out on their family, friends, and pets.
9
This clumsy column appears to associate what Bill Clinton and Weinstein did with poor Al Franken's slightly bumbling Colombo imitation. Al walked into a buzz saw instigated by a group of "furies" as Ms Dowd rightly calls them. One of them is my senator, Tammy Baldwin. She's up for reelection next year. Hmmmm.
12
“I know Ashley Judd is going through a tough time right now,” Weinstein told Page Six’s Emily Smith. “I read her book in which she talks about being the victim of sexual abuse and depression as a child.”
Where did Weinstein get the time to read Judd's book? More likely a well-paid lawyer did the digging and fed him his lines.
As for Hillary Clinton, you hear the same righteous indignation on her behalf when you question her very questionable reaction when Bill's 'hobbies' were outed by people who should know better, just like Trump. I voted for her, but only because the alternative was our present worst nightmare.
7
The article is by Emily Yoffe in Politico,
Forgot to include, apologies
1
With Bill it was inamorati--plural.
3
Lena Dunham says she told the campaign that Harvey was a rapist, but the people she says she told absolutely deny she said it. Maureen Dowd did not read that part of the Times' article, I guess.
4
As I started to read this editorial, I thought "at last I can agree with Mo Do on something." Then, predictably, you turned it into yet another Mo Do screed against the Clintons.
You won, Maureen: Hillary will never be president, and Bill will never again be president. Just congratulate yourself and your brother, and give it a rest. You helped give us trump, and saved us from any chance of good government.
45
Mrs Dowd missed perhaps one of ultimate ironies of the Thomas Hearings ... which fits perfectly in the questions at hand....
During the Thomas Hearings, Ted Kennedy, "Democratic Lion of the Senate" sat on his high throne and questioned Thomas. "Mr Thomas, somehow you managed to sexual harrass this woman, and yet have her keep quiet about for 20 years. How did you do that? I'd really really like to know!!"
Democrats set the bar incredibly low with Kennedy (I guess both, but mostly with Ted) and Clinton. As long as Trump hasn't actually killed anyone, he clears the Ted Kennedy moral qualification test. Franken should be using THAT example ... none of the women he groped or pinched actually DIED which puts him a rung up on the moral ladder over Ted, and Ted got to stay in the Senate for decades!
Yeah, the Dems are exploring their support of Clinton, and they are doing alot of soul searching on that ... but the Ted Kennedy Scar is still sitting there waiting to be picked at and reopening THAT wound will be really painful.
6
During the Romney campaign, Gail Collins managed to fit Sean the dog into every single column; that was genuinely funny, and we loved her for it. When Maureen Dowd does the same with Hillary Clinton, it's not amusing at all. Why all this resentful acridity, against a woman who for all her human weaknesses and faults would surely have made a decent President?
45
Yawn. Once more you show your true colors and hang on to your hatred of all things Hilary, using torturous reasoning to try yet again to vilify her. Hilary stayed with her flawed husband, urging him to grow and change. While working hard and continuing to believe that we can all do better, her underestimation of just how Un-Christian the right is was her downfall.
27
Classic Maureen, twisted up in political correctness; the real story is Dems are being set up to falsely claim the moral high ground when in fact there is no such thing.
6
Hillary’s blindness to the myriad sexual predators in her milieu pales in comparison to her inability to ID classified material in her emails. To this day, she maintains (with a straight face!) that, during her four years as Sec. of State, she never once sent or received anything classified. No less a master of incredulity than FBI Dir. Comey chose to believe her (despite finding a cornucopia of classified material amongst her emails); why shouldn’t you?
5
I don't understand you, Maureen. You and the NY Times did not come out 20 years ago to protect the women that Bill Clinton abused with impunity. You defended him and supported his wife because of their politics. Now, it's like we find that there is gambling going on in Rick's. Oh gosh!
Look at Senator Gillibrand. She is the quintessential political opportunist who is hurting all of us, whether or not she's of the correct political persuasion.
I admire you as being honest; but I don't understand why you are not calling for Senator Gillibrand and the other Senators who recently "got it" to resign. Otherwise, it will never end.
I reread the Chappaquiddick incident the other day. Teddy Kennedy was hailed as the lion of the Senate for years after the incident and was never held to account; poor Mary Jo Kopechne. Political persuasion is not everything.
I guess I don't get it.
Chuck
8
Maureen, you make some good points, but they mean nothing when they are only used as stepping stones in your obsessive quest to turn every story into something to bash Bill or Hillary with. Honestly, I am sure you would find a way to turn an earthquake in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, somehow, into being Hillary's fault. Rabid isn't the half of it. Who needs Trump when they've MoDo?
Get over it, and move on -- like we've had to -- or become your own caricature. I'm really tired of this old game.
25
It's a trifle late to come down hard on the Clintons, since they are now relics, but what concerns me more is that Ms. Dowd, who once was a very funny writer, has now become a humorless proselytizer for feminism. What did SP Justice Thomas do that was so unforgivable? He spoke about pubic hairs and called himself Long John Silver in front of Anita Hill. Not the worse thing in the world! Ms. Hill profited big time from the hearings, with a handsome book contract, automatic acceptance on the lucrative lecture circuit, and appointment as a professor at a prestigious law school. What's not to like in that outcome? Recall that when it was announced that the hearings were finally adjourned,Ms. Hill smiled broadly.Ms. DOWD: Return to you roots, leave the proselytizing aside, and resume writing articles as hilarious as those you once penned regarding the Bushes, "pere et fils!"
5
P.S., Maureen: I nominate Al Franken for president.
14
Franken deserved an ethics investigation that I have no doubt would have cleared him. No accident that such a powerful opponent of the right was accused by woman of dubious intent and very fleeting acquaintance, and never by the women he respectfully worked along side for 40 years, three dozen of whom were clammering to come forward to vouch for him. The Dems fell for a trap. And what was a,good Dem seat wrested,from the GOP by the particular appeal of Franken, an especially talented and. Spot on Democrat, will no doubt revert back to being a GOP seat in the 2018 special election. Democrats never seem to skip a brat in slitting their own throats and letting the GOP lap up the blood.
I
25
Though I have been utterly demoralized by Trump’s presidency and often angry at what has been happening since he rode down that escalator like the vulgar man he is, nothing has angered me nearly as much as the liberals’ inability to see their way out of this. I am furious, and that is no exaggeration, at what the feminazis have done to Al Franken in a cynical and ill-advised ploy to take 2018. They so misunderstand the electorate that they threw out arguably the best senator we have. It will backfire spectacularly. I was pro-woman in politics. No more. If they can’t act in our best interests they don’t have my support. They showed me nothing by their latest actions other than mob mentality and a desire to further their own political rise. Yes, I’m talking to you, Gillibrand. I’m not in your state but I will donate all that I can to your opponent the next time you run. All of the major news outlets have been touting how many women are running for office across the country. Apparently, they can’t handle the responsibility. By the way, I am an elderly woman.
27
Trump is draining the swamp! I bet Robespierre never thought he'd go to the guillotine either.
This is all about power, power men AND WOMEN have as elected representatives at the federal level. The correct path is to reduce the federal government drastically so that there is less money in politics and fewer power hungry people in DC, but the left cannot understand that the idea of universal government and freedom from harassment and political donors is mutually exclusive.
1
The gold standard for destroying women who accuse powerful men of sexual harassment was set by the dems in the 90's when they protected Bill Clinton and attempted to DESTROY the lives of his multiple, believable accusers.
It's the Republicans who "play rough"? Don't make me laugh.
5
Comparing Al Franken’s physical actions to President Trump’s raunchy words is like comparing lightning to a lightning bug, as Mark Twain observed.
4
To destroy Republicans, the Democrats first weaponized the IRS, then they weaponized the FBI, and now they have weaponized male/female relationships.
I guess this is all in line with their call for diversity (root word divide) rather than E. Pluribus Unum (out of many one). We are all at risk both women and men by the current weaponization of personal relationships. Where is the promise of innocence until proven guilty? Have we opened the doors to massive amounts of blackmail? How many marriages, jobs, and families will be destroyed on the alter of political advantage. Time will tell how this will turn out, may God save the constitution and the United States of America.
4
Great piece.
There's filth on both sides and the filth is not just abuse (though that's plenty),it's money corrupt, Russia corrupt, self dealing corrupt.
Out them all.
Spare no one deserving of exposure.
Maybe we will get a real cleansing that includes all plus trump, the supposed cleansing agent of the swamp.
3
Winning back Congress is all that maters right now.
2
Al Franken’s forced resignation, which was done to make a clear contrast between Roy Moore’s terrible behavior and the squeaky clean Dems, has actually benefitted Moore.
Moore voters see him as a man of conviction, who stands up to pressure and doesn’t quit when the going gets rough.
Contrast More’s bulldog nature with the Dems, who bend like reeds in the political winds. Even one of their best loved senators can be brought down by obsessive political correctness.
When a party is more interested in projecting an image than doing what they believe is right, they lose.
11
"They can no longer justify the way they defended Bill Clinton’s retrograde treatment of women simply because of his progressive policies toward women."
"They also are aware that they sound tinny hailing Hillary Clinton as a feminist icon when she participated in smear campaigns against Bill’s girlfriends and prey."
They no longer need to; the Clintons are history. That makes this all political theatre. The only thing that counts is today.
2
Al Franken. A classic case of identity politics, and an example of why Democrats always are able to seize defeat from the jaws of victory.
15
Oh well. Too bad about the rough justice. Sorry that men will lose their jobs for relatively minor offenses, while others who should lose them destroy our democracy. Before this new self-righteous movement completely crashes and burns I beg women to do the following. If a guy puts his hand on your butt, swat it away and tell him never do it again. If he does then you have a case. There's got to be a way now to at least attempt to identify legitimate sexual harassment cases, rather than shrug your shoulders saying "we're doing what's right". Gillibrand will lead the Dems to oblivion.
12
I fundamentally agree with Dowd.
After Al Franken resigns, I would have no problem with him running for the Senate again. And, win.
10
Moving past why Hillary lost, which is not a productive course given what's going on now in the White House, what Dowd names is a pervasive diminishing and abuse of women by men in control. Anita Hill, right after the hearings ended and she eturned to a very happy life, once surpirsed me when I felt defeated when she said, "Always believe in magic." What's happening now with women stepping forward and naming those men who violated them is a little bit of magic I've been waiting for a long time.
3
Why does nobody face the simple truth?
- Because Ms Clinton HAS taken the public donation Mr. Weinstein could give the signal: "Look, no chance, I own your allies. Even if don´t own them totally I´m able neutralize them - in your case also. Got it?" This is the most likely explanation why he did so. No use to beat about the bush.
- But if Ms. Clinton would have NOT taken the donation of Mr. Weinstein she would not even have lost the money but would have provoked the risk of "more than one phone call" of Mr. Weinstein in his MEDIA business. As all readers may know now Mr. Weinstein had been an expert for these kind of phone calls for decades. You remember the "done" quote? Ms. Clinton as a professional part of "the system" was certainly not the last to know.
So what could a candidate like Ms. Clinton do in her situation depending on all kinds of party establishment without significant backing of a popular movement? She had to take the donation not to jeopardize her already shaky campaign by a potential backlash from a possibly dangerous person. That´s how the story goes and these are the rules of this game. No choice. This has nothing to do with "pecunia non olet." or "Oh, what a evil woman". It´s a simple case of being caught in a campaign trap.
So what are this Chozick tweet, the column and all these comments in the comment section all about? I don´t know. It´s not about (US) politics in 2015/16. Useless., naive - in the best case.
3
I would like just once for somebody to show me some substantive, definitive proof that Roy Moore or Donald Trump sexually harassed women, something more than just a woman said it happened. The allegations against Roy Moore are from decades ago and have surfaced just now as he's running for a Senate seat even though he has been in the political limelight in Alabama for many, many years. That and the revelation of a forged inscription of a supposedly smoking gun piece of evidence, pretty much destroy the credibility of Moore's accusers. Donald Trump boasted of mistreating women, but where are his accusers?...there are supposedly a dozen or more but where are they?...we don't even know their names, why are they hiding? John Conyers, Al Franken, the congressmen from Texas and Arizona all admitted to sexually harassing women, as did most of the leftist show biz and media accused, and they are gone as they should be. But as for Moore and Trump, much more than decades old claims and questionable locker room talk needs to be put forth before the allegations against them are creditable.
Moore will be elected next week and may or may not serve well, Trump is moving the country forward as he said he would and will continue to do so, probably for seven more years. Bottom line, this is all about Donald Trump and the left's continually failing efforts to get rid of him. None of its working, instead it's backfiring, the Democrats and the progressive movement are in shambles.
3
Just want to say this clearly and frankly. Why the point in 'bashing' Clinton now?
What does it matter right now? We should focus on the person making all the mistakes right now. Oh, except hundred times worse it seems. Let the sun go down on Bill Clinton..Oh..maybe not.
5
Ah, yes, Maureen, the Clintons again, because they are, of course, always the real problem. I thank you for your focus as does Donald.
24
I think it’s a good time to recap some of the highlights of the Hill/Thomas congressional hearings, particularly the accusations from Anita of repeated crude sexual harassment. I recall something about pubic hair on a coke can for starters . Perhaps today people will believe the woman. It’s time some social media shaming bring some social justice for Justice Clarence Thomas lewd misconduct.
4
Ramparts are DEFENSIVE, Maureen. You wrote: "Even though then-Senator Simpson absurdly claimed during those hearings that it was puzzling that Hill had not come forward sooner given that the nation’s capital was “fertile ground” for a woman with a sexual harassment complaint to be treated fairly, it took 26 more years of rampant sexual harassment — and a fortune in secret settlements on Capitol Hill — before women took to the ramparts."
1
To all the writers claiming Franken could have defended himself before the Judiciary Committee and somehow salvaged his seat: he has no defense save for immaturity, poor judgement---and with numerous claims of uninvited open-mouthed kissing attempts-- a deep and abiding contempt for women coupled with a very disturbed sense of entitlement.
All the idiotic TV goofballs ought to stay out of politics and stay in their shallow pools.
3
After all is said and done Al Franken is still the victim of the Democrat's circular firing squad. It is well and good that women are taking to the ramparts but shouldn't at least one of you tell Leanne Tweeden that she is not needed leading the charge?
8
All women should be heard. And all men should be heard.
4
The Democrats eat their young while Republicans usher theirs in.
When we aim high- they aim low should be change to When they win- we lose.
4
Of course Franken had to go. I saw this whole process from the minute I saw that Tweeden photo. Did that photo tell me he's some sort of mastermind? No, it told me he has lousy impulse control, and lousy impulse control is not a sometime time. If it happened once it happened a dozen times, so trying to keep him around means waiting for the next ten or twelve shoes to drop. And of course that's exactly what happened.
Franken's electoral career is over in any case, and Giovernor Dayton will appoint somebody who just might have a future.
But here's the real point:
I think the Republicans are looking at the mother of all bloodbaths in 2018, to be followed by the end of this miserable interlude in 2020, IF the Democrats present any sort of reasonable alternative; but it's not going to come off if the Democrats look like nothing more than that other bunch of hacks. As far as I'm concerned, that matters and Al Franken doesn't matter at all
5
I'm an old lady, and I am very aware of sexual harassment in the workplace. I once worked for a man who, every time he gave me a project, insisted on putting his hands on my shoulders to make sure I understood his work request. I would roll my chair as close to my desk as possible in the hopes he would get the idea that I disliked his behavior. It never sank in with him, and I never said anything to management. Would they believe me? Probably not. Would it cause me to lose my job? Very possibly.
Having said all that, I do believe Al Franken was a sacrificial lamb. Did he do some stupid stuff? Sure. We have a photo! Gillibrand and Schumer seized on this to further her political career. But I do believe it's backfiring. As someone mentioned in another comment, where was Sen. Gillibrand or, for that matter, Nancy Pelosi when this tax plan abomination was taking place?
The problem with the current iteration of the Democratic party is that they capitulate while the Republicans forge ahead no matter what to pursue their agenda--in this case for the 1%. And they keep winning.
As for Hillary, calling Bill's accusers "trailer park trash" does nothing to further the agenda of women's rights in the workplace. Where were the feminists during Bill's transgressions? Gillibrand condemns him now when it's politically convenient. Too little. Too late.
16
To continue to blame Hillary Clinton for Bill’s behavior is just as bad as blaming the victims in cases of sexual harrassment and assault. Hillary was trying to be the good wife by supporting her husband which was expected of her, especially when he was the governor of Arkansas. Who knows how many times she thought of leaving him. After all the years of putting up with his infidelity, she used him to climb the political ladder and I don’t blame her for doing that at all. I would have prefered having her in the Oval Office instead of the present occupant.
We must not dismiss complaints about sexual harrassment and assault, but let’s not lose our perspective. Al Franken’s actions were minor and his resignation will be in vain as long as Trump stays in the White House and Roy Moore is allowed to serve in the senate.
13
Bernie might as well announce his Progressive Party run right now. W/ Sen. Franken's resignation while Moore continues his bid for the Senate, and Trump continues to wreck our nation's reputation abroad, and our national monuments at home, the Democrats have displayed themselves as the softball party. Now is the time for Bernie Sanders to put Identiity politics on the back burner and channel money and social services to the poor and middle-class. Will anyone cry if Trump's taxes rise? Not I.
3
Despite an imperfect campaign and besting Trump's popular vote by three million, Hillary lost because Trump and his team cheated by engaging the clever support of Putin and his cronies. Just wait: The investigation hasn't concluded yet.
9
If the last election taught us anything, it is the brutal reality that even among many women, sexual abuse is a low branch in the climb to the White House. This issue will not get them some balance of control in the next election regardless of what pollsters might be telling them.
4
Hillary Clinton was the force behind the Child Health Insurance Program that is now under siege due to Republican indifference if not pure callousness, and neither Al Franken nor his accusers got their day in court to either defend himself or to argue credibility for their allegations under oath, so now we will never know who's credible, and what the proper punishment would have been. This due to Democrats falling over each other to urge him to resign. And for what - expecting that voters would fall for their ploy? Progressive voters are not as dumb as politicians think they are. The result is that when Democrats have a strong male candidate, we can bet our fortune on an accuser coming forward just before election day to charge him of sexual assault - and according to Gillibrand's criteria being accused of a pat on the tush will do - to take him out of the picture. The only strong female candidate I can think of for now is Sally Yates, who at least understands the principles of "due process", "innocent until proven guilty", and "the punishment has to fit the crime". Michelle Obama would be good too.
12
Al Franken should have waited until after Tuesday's Alabama elections before deciding whether or not to resign.
6
"There is rough justice in this initial barrage of j’accuses, before people work out a hierarchy of sins and due process."
Huh? What? Congress has been around for 200 plus years and counting. They have the explicit authority to establish a hierarchy of sins and due process. That's why the institution was created. Why are we only experiencing the "initial barrage" now? Sexuality, and therefore sexual abuse, has been around as long as humans. By this measure, we can push the timeline back roughly 200,000 years.
We've had time enough to figure this one out. The only explanation for delay is self-interest. People win or lose depending on whether the issue is codified into due process. This includes Kristen Gillibrand. You can believe Gillibrand is secretly relieved to see Franken gone. There's 2020 to think about. Meanwhile, child abuse is a nearly universal sexual taboo throughout all human history and Alabama is poised to vote a child molester into the congressional body. The President and Republicans are even supportive.
Yeah, we have a problem alright and its not going anywhere fast.
8
I am told by any number of civil rights lawyers that they are appalled at the complete abandonment of due process in the sexual harassment tempest. One evil does not justify another. Why didn't Kirsten Gillibrand and the other democrats await judgement until the investigation, already agreed to by Franken, had been conducted. Indeed, why didn't they insist that such investigation also include Roy Moore and Donald Trump, and others. Instead she, and the rest of the Democrats who have piled on, have left the door open to decimating the ranks of Democratic members of congress. Republicans, it is clear, don't give a hoot about such charges, and go so far as to libel their accusers to boot. Some women, in cahoots with the Republican Party, are now free to hurl charges willy-nilly
against Democrats. If due process is ignored, we are opening the floodgates to a Warlock hunt. Mark my words, this will not end well for the Democrats. Sexual harassment and forcible rape should not be allowed to trump due process.
13
I don't even like the Clintons but if I were Dowd I'd think twice before believing Lena Dunham's self-serving, after-the-fact remembrance that she warned the Clinton campaign about Weinstein. It's not like Dunham hasn't lied before or defended her own share of dubious friends. Hardly an ethical icon. I'd rather hear what Tina Brown has to stay.
No matter -- nothing seems to give Dowd more pleasure than dancing on the Clintons' reputational graves singing "I told you so". In this she's not all that different from her 'friend' Donald Trump, who also can't let Hillary go. And maybe it's all a way of getting us to forget how loudly Dowd shilled for Trump in '15-16 and normalized him for many.
Watching tv, I've seen many female talking heads speak about how letting women control Washington will make everything better -- as if the real problem is that men are corrupt and women are somehow better or purer. What a dangerous idea. For many of us, the only thing 'pure' about Kristen Gillibrand has been the purity of her ambition/opportunism as she has worked to fell Franken, erase her Clinton sponsored past and get in front of this issue so that she looks like a heroine ready for her closeup in 2020. Women's corruption in power won't be sexual harassment certainly, but to believe that there won't be corruption just because women are in charge is a naïve and silly thought.
21
Piousness is the smell test. Clarence smelled then and the mob that came for Franken smells now. Humanity is not pure. This is a utopian dream and it won’t work as a campaign policy. For the zillionth time, dems need a message. I get the anger of women and will keep an open mind. Indeed, there’s a long overdue cultural revolution unfurling. Am I a sinner by feeling so conflicted?
3
For the "soulless R.N.C." a new acronym is needed. The Republican Party has already died of a rot severing any association it once had with the revered Abe Lincoln. The triumvirate of Putin-Trump-Moore now provides the ethos fueling the Republican Party, a party once known as the Party of Lincoln.
5
The Democrats, whether actual politicians, functionaries or voters, do not have clear, focused points on which most agree and are willing to put first, above all and roll the dice on. The Republicans do: Sacrifice anything for control. Repeal Roe vs. Wade. Support the police no matter how corrupt. Deregulate anything that gets in the way of corporate profits. Protect the wealthy. Never, ever, challenge the NRA. Get rid of every illegal immigrant no matter how legitimate a reason they might have for being here.
We have Donald John Trump as president and the high probability that Roy Moore will be elected Senator from Alabama in two days. I rest my case.
3
The Pandora's box called Judge Moore has opened up a 40 year yardstick of time that every male since middle school has violated the opposite sex at one time or another. This is a long overdue and most welcome .
2
There will be no "new Washington" until Kirsten Gillibrand gets off her high horse and uses her "enough is enough" ire against Trump and Moore. She should go all-out to unite women in Congress who believe in country over party and tear relentlessly into Trump and Moore every single day. If not, then the Laura Ingrahams (a Dartmouth grad, like Gillibrand) of the world will have won. Political power will have defeated sexual harassment again. And Gillibrand will never get my vote.
11
Same old party leadership; the Dems think americans are so stupid:
"Democrats in Congress want to use Trump and Moore as foils to stamp themselves as the party that sticks up for women."
And you think the rest of the country doesn't see the Franken episode the same way - as a bare-faced political move? Do you really think they would have done the same if Minnesota had a Republican governor?
Steve Bannon is grinning from ear to ear over this. They get a double win. They can say now:
1. Democrats just want to play identity politics, and Schemin' Schumer and Kirsten Cigarette-brand are thrilled to throw a popular up-and-coming senator from the progressive wing of the party under the bus.
2. Democrats don't care about truth or justice. They'll say: "Can you imagine if Trump is impeached? They've already made up their mind, and no evidence (or lack of) will convice them not to railroad him out just like Franken!"
And they will be totally right.
3
The truth is the women's rights were nowhere near as far along in the 1990s as they are today. If a woman then came forward like Anita Hill and complained about harassment, she was treated just the way Senator Simpson treated her. People thought there must be something wrong with that woman, and/or she probably brought it on herself. I always thought that Bill Clinton dreamed of himself as the reincarnation of President Kennedy — in more ways than one. And Hillary Clinton did what wives were expected to do, stand by their husband. I felt sorry for her then, and I still do in this respect. She wanted to keep her family together and do what was best for their daughter.
I am totally in favor of the #MeToo movement. I think that Ashley Judd is a hero. But it makes no sense to dredge up the 1990s. Let's concentrate on today's offenders, especially our current President.
7
Isn’t it time to move on from the Clintons? And not circle back to HRC’s sins over and over and over?
Most of this column was spot on (for the first time in a long time), but we’ve got plenty of sitting and probably sitting congressmen to root out. Move on.
Not that you asked, but my belief is that there are a whole lot of gropees and slimily kissed women who haven’t said anything about Franken because he’s “good on women.”
4
I personally thought Al Franken should have stood his ground, but his fate was sealed as soon as Rep. Conyers announced his decision not to seek reelection. Though the offenses they were accused of were not of the same gravity, there was already some talk of a racist double standard, and the Democratic leadership was at pains to put that canard to rest. A further motivation was to create a clear contrast between how Democrats and Republicans handle charges of sexual impropriety.
There’s a latent common thread uniting Ms. Dowd’s column with those of Messrs. Bruni and Douthat: the perils of triumphalism. Our side won, so it’s our turn to stick it to the rest of you. The storming of the Bastille was also an expression of pent-up righteous fury, and we know how that ended. Let’s be happy that women are now speaking up, that workplace mores are changing, and that the ancien régime of male sexual caprice seems to be at an end. But let’s not lose our sense of proportion or nuance, lest we also lose our (figurative) heads. Cases of outright criminality (Weinstein, Moore) should be distinguished from those of men behaving badly (Franken, Wieseltier), even if the underlying mindset may be similar. In the latter cases, sincere contrition ought to be enough; running the bad boys out of town will only lead to bitterness and backlash. Ms. Dowd speaks of the “rough justice” that precedes the working out of “a hierarchy of sins and due process.” I’m afraid the two things are at odds.
4
I don't know, but I have begun to wonder just how many "plants" there are among the women who have accused the Democrat men in office of impropriety. It wouldn't take many. Just a few nondescript women with credible stories that just aren't true. The Republican men who deny responsibility for their actions have long hinted at the possibility that the women who have accused them were planted there by the opposition. And if there is anything that we have learned from this Administration, it is that when they start pointing their stubby little fingers at the alleged sins of other people, that is the sin that they, themselves, are doing. So it would not surprise me at all if at least some of the women who accused Al Franken were, indeed, planted there by the Republicans in order to bring him down, and had, in fact, never met him. And why Al Franken? Because of the half-dozen or so Democrats in office, he was the youngest, the most well-known and the one with the most political potential, and iIf you cut off the head of the snake, the body will die.
11
And yet when it comes to a choice between Clinton and Trump I’ll take Clinton every time.
Yes, yes we know, Hillary didn’t divorce Slick Willie. But in the final analysis when it came down to either her or Trump, you were willing to continue to denounce Hillary thus contributing in your own little way to his ascendance and the horrific state we find the country in now.
And you can’t let go. Do you really think Hillary will run again? So what’s the point of the continuous put down?
At ease, Ms Dowd, at ease.
9
One of Jack Ncholson's famous lines is "you can't handle the truth". One of the biggest problems we are having about news and reporting is we only want to hear what we agree with and only read opinion pieces from writers that share our views. Maureen, keep up the great work.
2
The boring and simple fact is that demographics eventually sink the GOP. The Dems are doing all the right things here - lance the boil, drain the pus, heal the wound. The campaign ads for 2018 and 2020 are writing themselves.
4
"There is rough justice in this initial barrage of j'accuses, before people work out a hierarchy of sins and due process. That may stem from the decades when so many women accusers -- from Anita Hill to Bill Clinton's inamorata and prey -- were treated as collateral damage, smeared and pushed aside so that the careers of powerful men could be preserved."
Easy for you to say -- Ma'am.
Seriously, if crime and "collateral damage" justified treating everyone accused of anything sexual like they were guilty of first-degree rape, then we might as well trade in our own Constitution for North Korea's. The whole point of due process and degrees of punishment is the possibility of a crime.
We had plenty of time ignoring the problem, we can take a few weeks more to work out procedures to make sure everyone is treated fairly.
(PS: Good point with the "j'accuse" -- just the right touch to remind us of the French Revolution. Just the model to follow, right?)
"They can no longer justify the way they defended Bill Clinton's retrograde treatment of women simply because of his progressive policies toward women. Kirsten Gillibrand knew that when she jettisoned her old patrons, the Clintons, in a recent interview with The Times' podcast 'The New Washington.'"
Of course. Just like a family which looks the other way for decades while Daddy fondles the girls and the babysitters -- because he's the breadwinner -- can no longer justify defending that once he gets old and retires.
3
Roadkill? Whatever happened to due process? Elements in the democrat party think it's ok to shutdown speakers they don't agree with, Brendel Eich is fired for donating to the wrong political party, public shaming is popular. Now, selectively running offenders out of office in a bid to establish political moral high ground after decades of knowing about it, protecting offenders, disparaging or paying off victims. Are we re-entering times of histeria, witch hunts, mob rule? Who's next...
4
The cult of the celebrity selfie, put your arm around me moment used to be retail politicking with an aide nearby who controlled the flow of voters to spend limited time with the candidate or official. It's the swollen headed politicians who soak up celebrity and are unable to control their urge to literally press the flesh who are a problem. Check your hubris at the door.
No one is entitled to abuse the public or employees who trust them.
1
Maureen, you have managed once again to make this about the Clintons. It is not about the Clintons. Harvey Weinstein did not have to look at the example of the Clintons to figure out his playbook, and neither have other predators.
You need to get out into America and write about what is going on towards women everywhere.
And BTW, Al Franken's forced resignation is terrible. He is not among the predators, not by any stretch of the imagination.
I do think this is a great moment in many ways; the Franken "sentence" was not great at all, it was a pathetic, overreaction that will damage the Democrats hugely.
I resigned from that party, for one. And I don't think I am alone in that.
The Clintons are done...can we move on to others now? That means YOU Maureen.
6
You’re right: Hillary was wrong to not stand up to men who were sexual predators... but she’s not a sexual predator herself. I’m not necessarily sticking up for her. But this column seems to equate the two things. Trump and his party sexually assault woman with impunity. Hillary is connected to sexual predators and doesn’t—in the case of Weinstein in particular—singularly call them out as such publicly (all these allegations against the movie mogul came out post election, so if she’d have distanced herself from him she would have been the first). Ignoring that difference is exactly what the Republican Party wants. I don’t know why Hillary didn’t divorce Bill, or why any woman doesn’t kick out of their lives creepy men. But to say the two deserve each other is going into odd territory. The worlds full of stories of women sticking by men who are not great human beings. Should all these woman be vilified exactly equal to those men? It’s just a tough road Hillary’s been walking now for some time and I’m not surprised that Maureen Dowd continues on with this theme, but not impressed either.
5
HRC was and is Champion of Herself, period-full-stop-end-of-story. Nothing to do with the current movement...or any other.
5
Re:Al Franken,
I believe we are all missing something here. It is called “Due Process” also know as fairness. Al Franken is not Harvey Weinstein. What Sen. Franken did was not right for sure,but it was not violence and power play as so many of these incidences are. He is a good man and I am saying this as a woman who has felt the sting of men taking liberties.
What we witnessed here is a kind of mob rule and quite frankly, pandering on the part of Schumer and Pelosi and I am sorely disappointed! The Democratic Party needs to show leadership that stands for fairness and ALSO understands that there are men and WOMEN who can analyze a situation and see the difference between criminal behavior and a bad mistake!
Thank you from a woman who knows being a woman has never been easy!
6
Hillary lost because she angered the majority of working class men west of Philadelphia, and apparently did not care. Bashing on gun rights and acting as if only minorities and women mattered did not prove "racism" on the part of men of the upper Mid-West. It just alienated them.
Hillary lost because, like Al Gore, she ran as a prig. If Al Gore had kept Bill at his side in 2000, he would have won. Instead, the Democrats acted like the inexplicable Chuck Todd and others in the media currently do about sex, "Ewww, eek!" Gore lost because he did not know the public enough to know how little sexual behavior matters to those outside the nattering nabobs of neutering.
The vast majority of Americans DO want to stop the abusers and harassers like Harvey Weinstein, but they understand that humans are sexual creatures who do sexually dumb things. If the "me too" movement does not maintain the distinction between the bore and the abuser there will be a reaction that is very damaging to this current (and overdue) moment of ending the silence against abuse.
Finally, I must say that as Franken departs, while Trump and Moore remain, all I see is the Democrats (once again) turning to the Republicans and saying, in falsetto, "We have led the way by castrating ourselves first; now please follow suit." And then they wonder why the American public does not trust them to lead the country.
24
Donald Trump has no shame. Steve Bannon has no shame. Roy Moore has no shame. Mitch McConnell has no shame. Even Neil Gorsuch has no shame or at least no honor.
Democrats apparently feel shame, hopefully change behavior, and then apologize. It's the right thing to do as a human being. It's the right thing to do as an example to your children. But apparently it's not a successful tactic for the modern republican politician. It predates Trump but he has made the conspicuous lack of shame into a badge of 'honor.'
A republic without shame and honor won't long survive.
10
let me add my voice those who say we unnecessarily sacrificed Al Franken. are you paying attention? what has being the party of greater purity done for us so far? what makes you think it will convince one independent voter 2 support a Democratic candidate in the next election? we are the party of timidity, self-doubt, unwilling to do what it takes to win. you can not change anything for the better if you don't win and govern. get it?
18
As a practical matter, is there anyone out there, ANYONE, who has a clean enough history to run for any office? I’m not being snarky. I believe this catharsis must be done. But seriously, where will we find candidates? Not even in the priesthood, as we well know. I guess our chances are best if we stick to women, but the country sure is not ready for that either, because women are “shrill”.
4
Well said.
I am a male survivor of powerful female sexual abuse. 40 years into recovery I am still not ready to face my abuser.
I am grateful so many female victims are now speaking out. It gives me voice.
The Democrats have a brief window of opportunity to claim moral high ground. Will they take it?
5
.
Womanizing is as old as time itself. What’s new is the more limited tolerance of it. Psychologists and sociologists can debate ad nauseam why this cultural shift is happening in America at this time, but here is a warning: simply empowering a woman does not make her a wise and just leader. (There is dark potential here: Al Franken, Prohibition, Salem Witch Trials.)
In both sexes wisdom is a scarce quality, but assuredly rarer among emotionally-based decision makers. We should find the best candidate and not assume that women or minorities will competently fill the shoes of errant Casanovas or miscreants.
5
I agree with Ms. Dowd's criticisms of Hillary Clinton.
But I would still rather have Hillary as president than Trump.
No comparison.
11
"Why had we allowed ourselves to think of abusive behavior as the norm for so long?" - Because there was so much money at stake?
5
It is ridiculous to judge Ms. Clinton's actions in the past by the current climate. When you're climbing a rock wall, you don't reach for the top handhold as your next choice; you take the best one that's right in front of you. At that time it was the person who was willing to be more supportive of women on a nationwide basis in that moment.
I have been a lifelong feminist and very liberal. I am disgusted and angered by the Senators' call for Franken's resignation. There lack of differentiation makes them look unskillful and their bypassing of due process is in opposition to the institutions we need to preserve. (See On Tyranny by Timothy Snyder.)
If they think Republicans will do anything but rejoice and think Democrats are self-destructive and weak, well, they will have plenty of time to watch that unfold.
Also, Tina Dupuy accuses Franken of groping. I've been a trauma therapist, working with sexual traumatized women, for 25 years. Grabbing someone by the waist and squeezing during a photo, especially at an event where everyone was excited about winning, is not sexual harassment. She has said she was embarrassed because she had gained weight after quitting smoking, so she was uncomfortable. But that was not groping. Her accusation damages her credibility.
18
The Clintons are history. They have no further relevance. Note that Hillary Clinton is not President is not going to become President. She lost and will disappear from political life except for the lecture circuit. Accordingly, it is not them to whom we should pay attention, but current and future leaders. In fact, we waste our time focusing on them. Let's move on to people who affect our lives now and in the future, like Moore and Trump.
8
Overall, I like Maureen Dowd's writing, but I fail to see the point of this piece. Clearly, the Clinton campaign made some bad choices, but not rejecting Weinstein's support based on one source, however reliable, hardly represents the scope of what went wrong.
There seems to be a notion that Weinstein's perfidy was a widespread, open secret, and perhaps that was true within the Hollywood community, but frankly I doubt that it was common knowledge outside of that sphere. I certainly didn't and I worked on a number of productions, noting that he appeared to be an equal opportunity abusive/"charming" personality to be avoided interactively as a general rule.
When it comes to Bill Clinton's profile and the Clinton marriage, the circumstances are murkier due to the nature of the "crimes" and the politics that fueled the investigators and those defending the investigated. It's a general rule that when smoke rises to a certain level, there is almost inevitably a fire, but there are still degrees in regard to alarms.
Hillary is hardly the first political wife to stand by her man, although one could argue her real perceived sin is not loyalty to someone of dubious character, but personal ambition. Either way, to draw a thru-line from that marriage to a criminal campaign contributor strikes me as a gratuitous contrivance.
7
This may sound old-fashioned, but I am a millenial male and care about integrity. Good on the Democrats for forcing Franken and Conyers out. It's time someone take the lead and do the right thing.
3
When society changes, people get hurt. Enough people got hurt before the changes to institute the change. Is this some kind of 'law of the jungle' that says change is painful? We might learn eventually to change in a kinder and gentler way but for now, it looks like some people are going to get hurt.
2
"...President Trump, who is awful on women’s rights, skips right past his braggadocio on groping..."
The media keeps harping on Trump's inability to tell the truth while simultaneously insisting he admitted to violating harassment laws. For the sake of consistency then, shouldn't they entertain the possibility that his braggadocio was just another lie? I guess not, because that would get him off the hook as to admitting to sexual harassment crimes, and the media cannot tolerate that
It is too bad that the roadkill we have been witness to will come back to haunt the democratic party. Enduring the Clintons was bad enough but democrats have taken far too long to wake up to reality. So now they over react and try to make up for lost time by cannibalizing themselves, continuing the circus of voter disillusionment. Some things never change.
1
In the absence of sorely needed term limits, this will have to do.
2
What I have not seen the NYT or anyone else assess, though, is how the Party's purge is undemocratic. Minnesotans voted in a Senator and the prescribed ways to oust a senator were bypassed. It's not for party leadership to decide for Minnesotans, the Senate or if it came to it, law enforcement. Ironically, the GOP is letting democracy run its course by letting letting Alabamans decide on Moore, still reserving its right to have the whole congress vote on explusion even if he does win. This is how democracy works.
The Franken case is a missed lesson in how to minimize collateral damage. The over-correction/roadkill does not undo the wrongs of the past. Nor is it a good modus operandus going forward...it's an ironic and bitter thwarting of democractic processes.
7
I have to admit that for a long time I was like Alan Simpson in my opinion that women would never wait years to confront an abuser and the reason was the example of my mother. A very close family friend either groped my mother or made a sexual proposal that my mother didn't find appealing. She was mad and told my dad the same day. My dad didn't question mom, he just called that man and had him come over. He didn't let the man in the house, he met him on the sidewalk and told him he was no longer welcome and we never saw him again.
I don't know what made my mom so determined to stand up for herself. If I did I would share it with all young women today so they could protect themselves as she did.
And I do believe Ms. Hill was right.
5
I am a long term Democrat.
The current Democratic Party will never win if they allow the Republicans to
frame the debate. Reps have managed to call, themselves the party of jobs building the economy,right to bear arms and strength.The 2018 Democrats seem to be the party of women and minority rights. Not yet a word about strength and jobs and winning. In this dangerous world with NK perhaps months away from a missile that can hit Washington DC if the Dems do not change the debate they will remain a minority party. Last week the Labor Dept announced 218,000 jobs in Nov.
3
Good point. The Republicans excel in framing debates (aka lying). Look at how Trump corrupted the Anthem kneeling debate. Look at Freedom Fries and how you were unpatriotic if you disagreed about Iraq, or how Kerry was swift-boated. And what do Democrats do? Cave in and do the dirty work themselves by jettisoning one of their best voices when we need all hands on deck. I am still so angry about Franken that I can't think about anything else this weekend. I might feel a little better if the Democrat wins in Alabama on Tuesday.
5
Without due process the whole outing of predators will just become another partisan sideshow; "women with an agenda torpedoing men they don't like," and so on.
Would it have hurt the cause to have put Franken through a formal review process to determine his culpability, rather than the mob rule approach? Do we really think GOP members of congress will pressure their co-members to resign?
9
My perspective goes like this. If Hillary Clinton ran for President in 2020, and her competition in the primaries was Senator Gillibrand, Hillary would get my vote. If any other Senator male or female that jumped the gun without due process, i.e. Harris, Durbin ran against any other candidate that was not involved, i.e. Governor Inslee of WA, I would vote for them. If one of those Senators won the primary I would vote Independent.
It was a travesty of justice what those senators did to Al Franken.
15
Senator Franken is a necessary martyr. An overwhelming proportion of women, much larger than is the case today, SHOULD be Democrats. The Democratic Party wins hands down against the Republican Party in the category of women's rights - equal pay, beefed up antidiscrimination laws, and the right of all women to be free from State interference to choose to terminate an early-term pregnancy.
The Old Testament story in Exodus of the robbers' murder of a pregnant woman prior to quickening provides biblical support of a woman's right to choose. Further bolstering this right is the long history of government-noninterference with the right.
4
One issue in all this is that elections are NOT decisions made in a vacuum. I voted for Trump, not because I don't care about his boorish behaviour, but because taken as a whole, on economic policy, foreign policy, courts, size of government, etc etc etc I thought that Trump was "less bad" than Hillary. I strongly suspect that is true in Alabama with Moore. Moore is going to win with alot of voters not really liking him personally or approving of what he did or did not do 40 years ago, but who are sure that when looking beyond just one issue, Moore is "less bad" than Jones.
Many make a big deal out of Trump low personal approval poll numbers. That is not the issue .... because unfortunately at this time, we aren't voting for the BEST America has to offer, we are voting for the least bad of two horrible offerings.
It's not a question of moral superiority ... it overall inferiority, and choosing the least inferior option... and the GOP is doing a slightly better job of providing slightly less pathetic options than the Dems
Wow, well said. Talk about an incoming missile, you have scored a direct hit on the ugly underbelly of the Hilary/women problem. It should be no surprise that after, what, millennia of violent inequality woven inextricably into human civilization that it isn't only the male members of the species that perpetuate the status quo. Gillibrand has made the right call. The - clarity is the only Dems cannot equivocate on this issue. - clarity and decisive action is the only way forward.
1
Looking at the women backing Moore and who backed Trump, I don't think either party's position on women really matter. It's painful to say that, but I've yet to see it matter. And so once again the Democrats thunder down a road no one cares all that much about, while the Republicans race along the gutter and win. The Democrats have made Al Franken a sacrificial lamb in a move that will cost them dearly and bring nothing in return.
2
Not only do some men need to learn how to behave respectfully toward the opposite sex, women and girls need training and support. Our role has always been to acquiesce, to accept, to serve. Our complaints have been met with cluelessness for so long that we have not learned how to behave when we encounter it. Aside from an attack that is violent or threatens to be, we need to know what to do and how to assert that what is happening is not OK, and feel confident we will be heard should the offender not be open to clearing the air. But if we simply segregate ourselves into male and female camps and see each other as predator and victim, no ground will be gained.
3
To clarify my previous comment, I turned away from Hillary Clinton by supporting Bernie Sanders in the primaries. But as much as I distrusted HRC for the reasons I posted, I could not bring myself to vote for Donald Trump, and cast, instead, my vote for Hillary.
3
I am not sure how Dowd knows what (privately) all the judiciary committee males of the Thomas hearings may have thought, but her conjecture is always from a point of view. For some reason. As if every white male felt that way. And as if no one has ever, years later, been falsely accused.
But as the queen of cynicism (and the cynicism is often well deserved, no doubt) she misses a clear message here. Moore was not a problem until he went back into the lead in the polls. Faced with that possibility, a majority group of Democratic senators suddenly became a clan of ethical purists, as if they had seen the same light, who could no longer tolerate Franken.
1
Maureen, you put your finger on exactly why Trump was able to parade out Bill’s accusers and blunt his own culpability as a well known sexual harasser and ogler of teen pageant contestants. However it also pokes the administration’s contention that Trump was elected despite all that in the eye. There was equivalent blame. That doesn’t mean absolution.
2
The lesson: Principles are always hardest to stand by when it's inconvenient.
2
Franken fell on the sword for his party. A political stunt or not, he still fell on the sword. The same cannot be said for GOP legislators and our president who have committed far more extreme sexual offenses.
4
‘There is rough justice in this initial barrage of j’accuses, before people work out a hierarchy of sins and due process.‘
Dowd subtlety states one of the more important aspects of a clearly very important time in our history. Everyone should read the very thoughtful and comprehensive article on the risks of backlash to this movement. Equal and moral treatment of women is critical, but eliminating everyone’s rights in the process risks reversing all that could be gained.
2
Amazingly, this piece actually mentions the concept of due process in passing. It seems that no one wants to discuss the issue of whether or not any of the accused persons are entitled to a little bit of it as they lose their careers and reputations to the lynch mob. Accusations of sexual misconduct are now taken at face value with no thought of investigation or corroboration, even though in many cases the acts complained of occurred many years ago and were not reported at the time they allegedly happened. Clearly, the reason for the silence is fear that anyone mentioning the issues of procedural inquiry and fairness will be labeled as an "enabler" or accused of being soft on punishment for bad behavior toward women. I thought that liberals were the great champions of procedural due process protections, but now they are the loudest in calling for immediate hangings. Hypocrisy and double standards are everywhere. Needless to say, the precedent set by this failure to seek justice rather than heads falling from the guillotine is not auspicious.
2
In my view, Franken was punished for asking tough questions of Jeff Sessions. He caught Sessions in a lie, so he had to be eliminated. Out of nowhere comes Leann Tweeden, with a cleverly crafted he-said-she-said story and a photograph that was obviously staged.
Franken took the high road and resigned, knowing that the more he protested or tried to explain, the worse he would appear to his detractors. Now that he will be free of having to protect himself politically, he'll be able to tell his side of the story, which we haven't heard yet.
Personally, I think Franken is an aging man with an embarrassing habit of trying to steal innocent kisses. He is certainly not a super-predator, and he certainly wasn't trying to bribe his staffers into allowing him to impregnate them. And yet he was forced out of Congress quicker than anyone, while Moore and Trump are still around because they use the GOP strategy: deny, deny, deny, and refuse to apologize for anything.
3
This is really turning bizarre, this Trumpian obsession of Ms. Dowd's with the Clintons, or maybe it's Trump's Dowdian obsession with the Clintons?
Really Ms. Dowd, how about turning your focus elsewhere.
Perhaps this can be your New Year's resolution?
4
The Republicans throwbacks successfully divided us on every demographic characteristic they can think of in order to elevate white males (no matter how incompetent and grotesque).
And to get one-track-minded, simple folks to the polls, the Republicans carefully chose and ginned up single issues, such as (a) abortion (which is half what it was in 1981); (b) making the U.S. a theocratic Christian state with the likes of the reprehensible sinful Roy Moore; (c) gun rights over public safety and common sense; and (d) generating as much hate as possible where there should be love and caring.
The Republicans lie their way to power, take from the poor to give to the rich, turn friends into enemies internationally, and refashion their candidates' sins into assets and entertainment. It really is remarkable, and no one seems to be able to stop them, least of all the Democrats.
Why? Because the timid Democrats keep playing the Republicans' demographic, single-issue game, while law, ethics, morality, and the country go down the drain. Bad is good, and good is bad. No better Republican specimens than Donald Trump and Roy Moore.
The fed up women who spoke out about the sexual harassment of powerful men (including our president, and politicians), and Al Franken who resigned over the allegations rather than dismiss, lie, and viciously attack his accusers moved the country in the right direction. It really is decency and ethics that divide us, not demographics and single issues.
1
It's strange that there are no women with current allegations that are coming forward. There are only a raft of allegations from memories of decades ago. And there are no women at all that filed a police report. Of course, filing a false police report is a crime, whereas complaining publicly has no repercussions. Standards of evidence for these transgressions are the same as the standards established at the Salem witch trials.
3
Like the 53 percent of White women who voted for Trump, Maureen is more tolerant of the flaws of men than those of women. I think the 53 percent and Maureen can feel safe and protected if only a man is in charge, and that's why we'll never have a female President. For all the uproar over sexual harassment, I suspect that the 53 percent would vote for Trump today and Maureen would continue to gloss over his dangerous flaws.
2
Does nuance exist? Is there such a thing as context? Is there any such thing as ambiguity? Has it EVER happened that two witnesses to the same event recall it differently and both genuinely believe they are telling the truth? Has a woman EVER lied about sexual assault, or anything, for that matter? Is there a simple statistical test for when certain ALLEGED behavior demonstrates a pattern? Does a person's poor judgment in one or even a few situations define him or her as a person? Does Franken's respectful treatment of his female employees and his championing of women's rights mean ANYTHING? Has anyone heard of a feeding frenzy? I mean, come on. What Franken suffered was WRONG, and the Democrats who chose expediency over fairness will be held accountable.
6
As long as we - journalists, women, humans, continue to look for SOME WOMAN to blame for the poor behavior of men, we are lost. Whether that's blaming Anita Hill for not coming forward sooner, or Hillary Clinton (as Ms. Dowd did in 2017, when she should know better), the trope is the same. It is the fault of the men. It is the fault, and the responsibility of the perpetrators.
2
The Democratic Party wants to stamp itself as the party that sticks up for women?
There's an apple that don't need no polishing.
Democrats didn't lose last year because they didn't appeal to women- they lost because they didn't appeal to men.
I like women and I like a party that will stick up for them.
But I'm a man and I want to see a party that will stick up for me too.
They aren't mutually exclusive you know.
Throwing a sitting Senator under a bus with no hearing based upon shaky and actually weird accusations that started with a grope that wasn't a grope and a kiss she consented to but didn't like, and ending with a waist squeeze during a photo op- that's not sticking up for men.
That's also not sticking up for basic fairness. What's so bad about a hearing?
It's also not sticking up for your party. The Franken allegations sound fishy, like a political hit job - a "missile out of the dark" if you prefer - and I was fine with booting nearly all the other men that have emerged.
And then there was Gillibrand, riding that missile like she was Slim Pickins. Heck, Republicans might have fired it, but that don't mean she can't ride it!
See Franken is a man who tried to do right by women and then, when he needed the benefit of a doubt just long enough to hold a hearing, Democrats denied him.
I view that as a serious cautionary tale for men.
Democrats don't have your back.
Perhaps that's why more men don't vote for Democrats.
8
While we're on the subject, how many of the senators who asked for Franken's resignation have also asked Donald Trump to resign from the Presidency and Roy Moore to resign as a Senate candidate?
4
The main reason this life-long Democrat (over 50 years of voting D in the election booth) turned away from Hillary Clinton in 2016 was because of the gnawing feeling I kept getting that she had become a political opportunist with a strong sense of entitlement that this time around, it was "her turn."
Her trite response about wiping clean her e-mail server "What do you mean, with a cloth?" was another symptom.
Ironically, she turned her head and looked the other way when it came to garnering the support of men like Weinstein. And as a cap to that irony, the Democratic voters in three blue states did the same thing to her and voted for Donald Trump.
2
What too many people assume is precisely what Alan Simpson said about a woman coming out of the night to destroy a man. This can apply just as easily to what men to do women when they want revenge. But women by and large are the ones who are sexually assaulted, harassed, and raped. Not men. And women are the ones who are often underpaid, fondled on the job and elsewhere, and expected to put up with it. Not men.
Whether it's a Roy Moore or an Al Franken, or a Donald Trump, or a Mr. Nobody, women should be able to come forward at the time the incident occurred and know that they will be heard and not penalized. Being molested as a child is hard enough to deal with. It shouldn't be harder to deal with reporting it to your parents or to the authorities. And schools that cover for child molesters or faculty that have had sexual relations with their students deserve whatever they get. The same goes for businesses: sexual harassment should not be an expected part of life for half the population.
If men don't like this there is an answer. Think before you touch or say something. Would you tell a male colleague that he's obviously at that time of the month when he's angry about something? No. Teach your children to respect each other and their friends. Teach your teens that no means no even if that no spoils their fun. Maybe then we can avoid all this angst about destroying "good" men in the future.
8
One thing I did not like about Franken's resignation is that he did not have an opportunity to appear before the Ethics Committee which he requested. For reasons that are incomprehensible to me, the Democrats forced out Franken, one of the most intelligent dedicated Senators, before allowing him his due process.
This did not seem fair. Am sure if Roy Moore makes it to the Senate he will put up a big fight against appearing in front of the Ethics Committee. If the Democrats did not give Franken this option, on what basis could they try to force Roy Moore to appear.
99
"Due process" is a concept that applies to the judicial system. You are not entitled to "due process" elsewhere. Franken is not entitled to a hearing. It is a mistake to keep harping on "due process" being denied when it is a concept that simply does not apply in the present instance.
1
But they didn't "force" him out. They said he should resign. He could have said no, I want a chance to clear my name. I have to believe that he didn't think he could.
It's true, he wouldn't have had a bunch of senators in his corner, asking questions designed to help him but if the claims made against are, in fact, false he should have able to make a good case all on his own.
It's not at all clear to me that Moore could avoid the Ethics Committee. It will be up to the Republican majority to convene hearings or not.
Once again, no one took the "option" of a hearing away from Franken.
Franken did have the opportunity to appear before the Ethics Committee. He chose to cut and run.
There's photographic evidence and it's hard to see what good explanations he could have for molesting a sleeping woman and groping others.
Maureen Dowd: you used all of the opening salvo -- just to get to Hillary? As if SHE is the root of sexual harassment and abuse of power in both major parties, and also, through a throwaway sentence directly responsible for Weinstein. So lock her up sounds about right to you? It is not so far from blaming Ivana, Marla and Melania for Trump's disdain for women. She's not pure; haven;t we had enough of that complaint?
115
Ms. Dowd is no fan of Mrs. Clinton, that's for sure but, in fact, Bill's sexual transgressions & Hillary's enabling of them are most definitely the elephant in the Democrats' room. There's no way to rally talk about this issue while ignoring that.
Saying that "she's not pure" just doesn't cut it.
3
A sensitive essay, Maureen. We live in tumultuous times... tumultuous times that have a history. We can't ignore that history because we see the same sexually discriminatory and sexually abusive behavior today. We're in a gothic novel, or maybe a political soap opera; nasty parts of the past arise to thicken the plot.
There are ironies: in 2016 I was accused of being a sexist by a Hillary supporter. I caucused for Hillary in 2008, so attacks on those who constructively criticized Hillary only served to weaken that campaign. It is no wonder that there is confusion in the ranks on how to approach sexual misconduct.
In 2000, several Democratic women were having a problem voting tor Al Gore, given Clinton's machinations. I had no idea that Gore was in that office with Monica and Bill, and that one could drag Al into that imbroglio. But these women were having difficulty making a choice. In 2000, McCain would have won by a landslide; Democrats would vote for him, but not for W, so we got the results we got.
What this latest round of sexual recalcitrance shows is that higher-ups were able to get away with their vile behavior. There are actual cases of women who harass men, but of course fewer of them. We so like these higher-ups because they bring in the business, fatten our portfolios, handle all of the problems that no one else can... they make America Great Again.
We'll put up with the malfeasance so long as everything goes okay. That is, until its embarrassing.
4
The Clinton's are such damaged goods. From Marc Rich, the Crime bill and supporting Suharto. The Clinton's are bright articulate people. But the lowest common denominator drove their actions. Clinton's, what must seem now shocking serial womanizing, puts one in mind of Tiger Woods. The difference is that Hillary Clinton's political future was tied to Bill. She played hard against those "bimbo eruptions". The Clinton's connection with Weinstein are an example of the grip Citizens United has taken on the political system. Trump is a boorish celebrity who is a shameless serial sexual harasser marches on. The nations news media addicted to his relentless obnoxious behavior. Southern Republicans apparently are obtuse hypocrites that will take Moore in with open arms. All their blather about investigating Moore is nothing but hot air. Trump is an example of how celebrities become Teflon with their supporters.
27
Gee thanks! I have a much brighter outlook now starting my week anew!
1
Slick Willie was the original teflon politician. Democrats love to pave the way for acceptance of corruption.
1
One major challenge in making significant progress towards preventing or minimizing abuse is reflected in a comment that the problem is vastly overstated.
She wrote that few incidents of harassment were reported over the years in her 1000 employeee company ignoring the fact that many victims fail to speak out for fear of retaliation or other reasons.
15
I am dem. Who voted for the Clintons but I used to get so angry when several years ago I would hear talking heads say how much dems loved bill clinton.He was an embarrassment,should have resigned.I would have much more respect for Hillary if she would have divorced him.I also think if Gore had publicly denounced bill Clinton he might have won.Being willing to look the other way when it's politically expedient is how we got to our new all time low, trump.
59
Well, I held my nose when I voted for Bill but was pleasantly surprised by how he handled himself in office. Wait a second, that's not what I meant, and I'm not talking about the blue dress; no, I mean the smartest guy in the room, the guy who could do the Times Friday crossword puzzle in ink while listening to a briefing and interrupting with trenchant questions and knew how to strike a deal.
Gore should have been president with Bill as VP. What a different world we might have today had that been the case.
Refreshing.
Thanks.
Jay Inslee was returned to Congress from Washington State in 1998 because he ran against the impeachment. The public just does not care about sex if here is no coercion.
1
"... she believes that a lot more ... will ... slink away, opening up a lot of seats for women and minorities and a younger generation ...", Maureen Dowd quotes a Democrat as saying. Well, no.
As Ms. Dowd points out, Saint Hillary hasn't exactly been a apostle for women's rights (and these are THE most basic rights, like protection from physical violation), so the Dems are tainted quite as comprehensively as the GOP. In fact, because of the supreme disdain the GOP exudes in this matter, while the Dems are looking for sackcloth and ashes, the former are likely to get away with what misdeeds they have committed, while the latter will find themselves scratching their heads in 2018 (and 2020!), wondering how they could have lost yet another election.
Besides, voters aren't going to vote for a woman or a young person or a member of a minority, merely because of this. Not even if it is a disabled young woman from an ethnic minority group, who has recently celebrated marriage to her transgender partner. If the Dems can't come up with a credible, comprehensive program of legislative proposals plus a group of candidates capable of holding their own in the onslaught the GOP is sure to unleash, they will indeed loose again.
But they will have only themselves to blame.
42
I couldn't agree more; but your, "If," is misplaced: The DP is simply too diverse to cooperate. It can elect a president but that's it: It can't sustain itself: It's the party of self-interest; the other, the party of ideology.
3
The Dems support Planned Parenthood, aid for women with dependent children, and tax relief for after school care; three things I came up with in one minutes time to point out the difference between Dem policy and the GOP. Politics is always messy and the Dems are by no means blameless but to suggest that the Dems are as "comprehensively tainted" as the GOP is simply wrong on the facts.
3
Not quite. it seems you're not paying enough attention to the Republicans. I suggest you read up on this, starting with Joe McCarthy, and on to Richard Nixon...then keep going, you may notice a through-line.
2
Dear Ms. Dowd:
You have the history mostly correct, but not 100% correct. Anita Hill was asked in a public forum a few weeks ago why the Clarence Thomas hearing did not set forth this "roadkill" response 25 years ago. She said, among other things, "because of my race." Imagine how that hearing would have turned out for Justice Thomas had his accuser been a white Anita Hill. Change no other facts. It is very unlikely we would refer to him as Justcie Thomas today.
143
There is no doubt that racism lurks in the subconscious of a majority of Americans. I saw that when Obama was elected. And, I suppose we are all prejudice on some level.
1
^ This. It may not have set off #metoo, I think it took Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, and the election of Trump to release that. but no, we would not have a Justice Thomas.
3
Jeez! I was just about ready to share Maureen's article saying it was one of her best and that she is very perceptive. Then I got near the end and I was so disappointed. Another negative Hillary comment. I'm no fan of Hillary but going after her wasn't necessary.
101
In fact it is necessary. If you want to end the predation of women by men then women who inable that predatory behavior for their own personal gain must be held accountable.
It was obvious to anybody who want's a HRC fan that her ambitions were the only guide she used in any situation. No decision was made without FIRST calculating the political impact. It explains the email servers, the Benghazi claims she knew to be false and many other decision that in retrospect were ignored by those who deemed a female president was an end in itself.
But she has often "gone after" Hillary Clinton. Necessary? That's too strong. Justified? Perhaps, but it doesn't appear to me to alter the message of the column.
1
It's pointless after the election. But, Hillary was the only Democratic candidate who couldn't beat Trump.
1
Ms. Dowd, I think you're missing a small point. The Capitol Hill "roadkill" who were kicked out or went on their own on were outed by women. Donald Trump outed himself. And he was elected. I'm afraid to enlighten you, but too many women approve of sexual aggression by men against themselves--as long as it's *not* themselves, if you take my meaning.
Women, at Trump rallies between October 8, 2016 and November 8, 2016, didn't care that he was an admitted sexual attacker. They would, maybe, have fought of his octopus gropes against their own persons but his (and their) politics didn't get in the way of their admiration for the candidate enough to ask why they would want an admitted felon in the White House. And, by the way, what does it say about the women in his Cabinet, on his staff, or his appointees?
My point is that women find discreditable behavior acceptable only when other women are being victimize. The politics of marginalization never meant anything to them as long as their political viewpoints gained acceptance and approval in the public square. And nothing has changed in the Senate between 1991 and now except that there are more women in the upper chamber now (21) than there were then (2).
Why aren't all the women in the Senate up in arms about the "president" and his admitted transgressions? Al Franken? John Conyers? Trent Franks? There's a monster loose in Washington and he "works" in the Oval Office.
74
That is why it is so ironic that many of Roy Moore's accusers voted for Trump. It seems perfectly acceptable to Moore's victims that a candidate other than the one who abused them would make a fine politician, as long as he is a ultra-conservative Christian Republican, of course.
Now that non-disclosures agreements are being re-examined, hopefully the floodgates against Trump will open and we will finally hear from his victims.
This is a man who should have already been in prison, even without sexual misconduct allegations.There is just so much bad stuff about Trump locked in vaults in New York.
1
Donald Trump is heard on tape saying: "women allow you..."
Exactly what are his transgressions? Yes, maybe the language was crude, but it was a private conversation, and he never once said he had or planned to force himself on any woman. Big, big difference from the reports on Franken, whom I see as a person who acted boorishly but not badly enough to warrant leaving the Senate.
3
Because they can't accomplish anything on Trump right now. They don't support him. If he was impeached by the House they would vote to convict him. Nothing to be done right now.
Should they be like the moronic Republicans who voted to repeal Obamacare many, many, times even though it was obvious that Obama would veto such bills?
1
Maureen knows that most of the time when principles come up against self-interest, the latter prevails.In the Franken saga, it seems that Democrats led with principles given that his Senate seat will now be in play.The huge gamble here is that such action will resonate with the majority of Americans.It is reasonable to assume that most Americans will find sexual assault abhorrent.Not so the childish antics that are being lumped together with egregious acts.The prevailing wisdom is that we are witnessing an inflection point in women's rights and that a few casualties are worth it, given what is at stake.It may well be that Americans do not see it that way and that a just cause is ill served by such "lumping together".Trump's victory is not an encouraging leading indicator.
18
There are always some casualties in a revolution. If Franken is one of them, so be it. White male power has got to end. Women and minorities deserve their turn. This is a democracy, right?
12
Democracies choose their officers in elections, not because someone thinks it is his (or her, in Hillary's case) turn.
2
That is not the meaning of Democracy that I learned in grade school. And that whole thing about "it's her turn" didn't work so well for the Dems the last time around. It will earn them even less votes, outside of California, that it did in 2016.
2
You're not describing a democracy; people don't get "turns" in a democracy (well deserved and valuable they may he). People get elected by a majority of votes cast by their constituents.
Beyond that ask yourself a question; would you vote for Kelly Conway if she was running against Sherrod Brown? She is a woman right?
4
Dowd misremembers the circumstances of the Anita Hill hearings.
The FBI, investigating Thomas, came to her. She wanted her answers to their questions to be kept discretely, and she did not want to testify before the Republican controlled committee. The Republicans subpoenaed her and treated her nasty and dishonestly.
The ungentlemanly way those Republican Senators conducted themselves was a warning to other women to keep quiet.
80
The Democrats held the Senate Majority in 1991 and Sen Joe Biden was the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee that conducted the Anita Hill hearings. Biden is often faulted for losing control of those hearings.
You are correct however that Hill was a reluctant witness, having been told that the details of her FBI interview would not be made public.
4
Thank you for this clarification. And Anita Hill was treated terribly. Thomas should be gone...
3
It's been over 20 years and I'm still outraged at how Anita Hill was treated. Wanna know why it took her so Long to come forward? Because she didn't. She was FORCED under SUBPOENA to testify before congress and was treated like dirt by senators from both sides of the isle. -Including Joe Biden. It's one of the reasons venomous Arlen Specter, one of the most abusive of Anita Hill's inquisitors, was never really accepted back into the Democratic Party when he switched parties to run again in 2010. Some of us have never forgotten that, any more than we've forgotten how women have been abused in Hollywood. This isn't a political problem, this is a HUMAN problem. Patriarchy and the abuses of men have never been addressed, and though conservative women have proved more tractable than their feminist counterparts, that divide may be disappearing in light of recent events. I hope so.
77
Best comment I have read recently. "this isn't a political problem, this is a HUMAN problem."
If we can focus there, we will avoid many stupid mistakes, like forcing Al Franken to resign while Trump still occupies the Oval Office.
4
Gillibrand and the other Democratic women who killed off Franken's career are losing Democratic votes. One only need to read the comments section of all the NY Times articles on this subject to see how the public is reacting. Most of these comments are about the lack of due process, and most are not from the Rust Belt or the South. As long as a sloppy kiss is not differentiated from rape or pedophilia, this is just hysterical venting. Female rage raises fear and defensiveness in males, and that doesn't translate into male votes. Evidently not into many white women's votes either, considering that they went for Trump, in spite of the Access Hollywood tape. There are a number of reasons for Hillary's electoral college loss, but her and Bill's behavior in the 1990's is very low down the list. The latest research suggests that the media's overblown treatment of the emails was the largest reason.
82
So your view is that Democratic senators had to keep supporting Franken because he wasn't actually a rapist? How was he denied "due process" because they voiced their opinions? He chose not to stay & fight for his career before the Ethics Committee. No one forced him to resign.
2
Joe, a great analysis, thank you.
4
“Why are we killing our own when we’re getting Roy Moore?”
It took a woman to write that since no man could get away with it. But this article has mixed messages. Women have a continuing uphill battle that is not yet won. And it is pure idealistic dreaming to believe that there is a cadre of anti-discrimination candidates just waiting to fill the seats of "missile fearing legislators who will quietly slip away".
Women who want to win must heed: A martyr for an idealistic cause serves no purpose at all for the cause after she/he is dead. If women want to win they'd best be willing to put tarnished soldiers in the field to fight rather than killing them off and leaving the likes of Moore and Trump in the opposition. And that's while waiting for the absolutely polished sterling silver candidate to ride up on a white horse to fight for women's rights.
That, women, isn't going to happen. Politics is universally ugly business best left to folks with squishy morals who are willing to cut back room deals in smoke filled rooms. Best to back the tarnished leader rather than wait for the sterling silver Godot who will never come.
28
From what I read, Franken will almost certainly be replaced by another Democrat, probably the popular lieutenant governor. So the effect on the alignment of the Senate will probably be nil.
1
Godot came in the form of Bernie, by far the most popular politician in America today, for excellent reason, and the Clinton machine fed gullible blacks the lie that Bernie didn't care about them, the only way to keep Godot out of the nomination, and then the White House.
1
What this article should say is that Democrats have to be pure, perfect, without stain, because most of their constituents demand decent behavior, while Republicans can do anything they want, no matter how vile, because their constituents don't really care as long as the other side loses.
70
Democrats and Republicans have the same constituents. All voters are constituents.
The Rovian manifesto in a nutshell.
1
We must appreciate the wisdom of Ms. Clinton for all the years of notable silence concerning abuse. Now that Ms. Judd has brought the resounding condemnation directly to the house and senate ,and still yet may be in the early stages of dismissal for some awaiting examination,silence may be golden to the Democrats. Considering Muellers uneventful and uncalculated dismembering of the DNC or whatever is going to be left of it ,if anything by the end of next year and Ms Judds meanderings about men which has women secreted away for decades jumping out from the woodwork,the DNC has brought nothing but havoc. The majority of voters are repulsed not by the recent scandals perpetrated by Democrat entities but by scandal itself and the lack of unity in congress to fix immigration and sustain a viable jobs number and to allow Americans to save.
4
"a viable jobs number"? What is that supposed to mean? Unemployment is near or at record lows. Perhaps the credit should go to Janet Yellen rather than to either Obama or Trump, but this commenter is incoherent.
What are you talking about?
Here you go again. After demonizing Hillary day in and day out and helping Trump win' now you are after Democrats who are standing up for women. You write;
" That is no way to be the party that protects women".
So you rather had Republicans to protect women?
50
Umm, FS, your reading comprehension skills need work. Ms. Dowd was saying that backing Conyers against his accusers because he's an "icon" was "no way to be the party that protects women." And the Democrats in Congress are not doing that. I have no problem with Pelosi taking a little time before going after Conyers. She did the right thing and it didn't take that long. A little consultation with Conyers' friends before dropping the hammer.
1
Poor Maureen. She's got it bad for Hill and Bill. She can't 'move forward' into the modern era where there is masses of outrage of every stripe, served up by the garbage truckload, courtesy of the GOP and their current nutcase figurehead.
Dowd just can't get off the little treadmill roundabout merrygoround of self-conscious outrage over the Clintons. Year after year, grinding away, gnashing, bashing, about how awful they were, are, and always will be. It's really tiring.
And boring.
105
And not at all helpful.
5
Amen, brother, amen. Tired, indeed.
4
I have reread this piece as well as many of the comments. There seems to be a pattern. Readers including myself have called Ms Dowd on her relentless referrals back to the "sins" of the Clintons. That is Ms Dowd's privilege. But it offers us women, and men, no help, ideas, or suggestions on how to fight our exploitation.
I am not sure what is the "plan of operation" as presented by this column. But if we are to be motivated enough to get to the root of this problem, I suggest we once again refer to David Brooks' recent piece. For it can not be denied, that the "rot" is right before our eyes...the Exploiter-in-Chief, aided and abetted by a diseased and soulless GOP-led Congress.
So, Ms Dowd, let us see that sharp mind and wit again next week. Return to the "source of all evil." Hint: It is neither the Clintons nor the man I will always admire and respect, Senator Franken.
57
So by putting the word sins in quotes are you saying that the Clintons did nothing wrong? You really have no problem with Mrs. Clinton's connections with Weinstein?
I know that Republican voters are happy to say that Trump & Moore did nothing wrong. Do you really want to emulate the Republicans?
1
Dowd had me at the beginning (I actually had a moment where I thought she was making a strong argument), but like an addict she needed her Hillary fix to make herself feel better. Her logic is so twisted up it makes one's eyes cross. Apparently it's Hillary's fault that men are sexual predators? Why must she alone take that blame? Because that's how it apparently works in Dowd world.
One thing the Democrats cannot claim is moral superiority (and I'm as liberal as they come) if they take down Franken for some innocuous pats and not call for the impeachment of the groper-in-chief. It's true that the Democrats eat their own. And yet are perfectly fine supporting New Jersey's Bob Menendez, who racked with serious corruption scandals, is morally bankrupt. His problems do not look to be clearing up anytime soon but the democrats are sticking by him regardless. And this because they are afraid of losing his seat to a Republican.
Politics is the name of that game, and I find the whole thing disgusting.
55
Hear! hear!
And most disturbing this morning was Bernie Sanders comments on Menendez and Franken on Meet the Press. As an enthusiastic supporter of Sanders, I found his comments appalling. Something in the water in DC.
6
The proposed new tax bill contains many benefits for the rich investors of this country and for Wall Street. And not one super rich investor or Wall Street mogul has been accused of sexual improprieties during the current storm. Strange.
We now all understand how powerful these financial giants are when it comes to politics. But am I really supposed to believe that Wall Street types are purer when it comes to sexual conduct than those in show biz or politics? Were the movies "Wall Street" and, more recently, "The Wolf of Wall Street" based on no reality?
23
For almost a year, we have been waiting for Trump to become presidential, to show us that he understands the weight and the majesty of the office to which he was elected. We are still waiting.
Al Franken showed us what that transition looks like. Yes, he had a boorish past when he was a comedian. But, as far as I know, he has acted with comity in his life as a senator. Can there be no allowance for that? If not, why are we waiting for Trump to magically morph into something resembling a decent human being?
52
Yep, Hillary struck a bargain with the devil when she stayed with Bill after the Lewinsky scandal, something we had all almost forgotten until her longtime assistant echoed a similar bargain sticking with Anthony Weiner. Who says Democratic women aren't as ruthless as Republican men.
But the 'times they are a changin.' Hillary's many small bargains caught up to us all.
I still don't regret standing up for her essential brand of feminism. For better or worse, we walked the gauntlet and lost the good fight. America is left with a lesser man running things. but the better part of feminism is winning now. There's some justice in that.
13
Ms. Dowd, you forgot to include Newt Gingrich and "the Choir girl" now his wife, oh, I forget, he is a Republican!
I am done with Clinton.
And let me add, I believe in due process. Al Franken was denied, by women who exercised zero-tolerance. Zero-tolerance can be a dangerous tool. Is Gillibrand running for President? Denying a man his opportunity to clarify or be censured by his peers is a troublesome moment for me, I will not vote for a woman candidate that wields the sword of justice with such disregard for the rule of justice. You would all have been better served by allowing the process to go forth. earning leverage to demand that Moore be treated equally by the Ethics Committee, if need be.
By the way, I do not know any woman who speaks kindly of "the other woman".
47
Agree and disagree. It's good that women are fighting back. But it's very easy to lose control of a movement like this. Right now, it looks to many people more like political score-settling and less like a genuine populist movement. Whether that helps women, or men, remains unclear.
11
If they are reporting FACTS, what difference does it make if it's score-setting or movement? Abuse is abuse, and if it took place, it speaks for itself.
1
Dowd cannot stop her hatred for the Clintons to influence every column she writes. Her bias will never end; the Democrats will always be the party of Clinton. Same with Trump, he has to relive his election victory over Hilary every time he speaks in front of a crowd.
We shall see in 2018 whether the voters have moved on. Will there be a tsunami backlash against Trump, as I sincerely believe? 2020 will be more than a mere battle for the White House. It will be a battle to retrieve the American spirit, and our democratic soul. Once again, women will determine which party wins. The party that best represents how women want to be treated, should do well.
13
Perfection is elusive.
And yet we vote on the illusion of perfection. Hillary is crook,little Marco, Pochantis.
We demand much of our public servants but not ourselves. We vote on the illusion of fame and wealth and not on sacrifice and grit.
This week those that seek perfection brought a party together to eliminate one of their own. A voice for women's rights will forever be silenced on the floor of the Senate.
Today politicians must demean another to win. That is not new. But what is a reality in this game of perfection is our quality of public servant has eroded to the point that we become paralyzed in our own hypocrisy.
We now must find perfect candidate to seek office irrespective of their life experiences, professional skill set and their ability to empathize. This is not new. Hubert Humphrey lost to Nixon because Nixon promised a secret plan and divided us by race in his southern strategy.
In our search for perfection, we are losing the best and brightest to serve in public office. We alone are responsible for our politics. And what kind of country we seek.
Senator Franken, thank for your service and your hard work and your commitment to seeking to improve the lives of so many struggling under the weight of greed and corruption.
For the rest of, us, let us focus on the issues that divide us. We have far too
many.
10
Al Franken was forced to resign, ( he hasn't yet ), because he has presidential aspirations. Everyone knows the democrats want to run another women, ( Harris, Warren,Gillibrand or Michelle O ). Franken is the type of person who would not go quietly so he had to be shown the door.
7
I don't know where you get this "everyone knows" stuff. I'm a Democrat, the last thing I want is a second term of Trump, so I'm looking for the standard white male to stand up and take care of this national disgrace. When we get rid of the lunatic, irrational, right wing fringe, then maybe we can move forward on social issues. Right now, we just don't have that luxury.
Oh, and a message to Ms. Gillibrand, as a woman, I do not want you. Take heed, there are many like me.
5
Maureen is totally right about the Clintons - they play to win with no real concern about morals just like Trump. But I don't understand why Franken should get a pass. Is it alright Maureen if someone ask for a picture with you and take a squeeze? Or the way Franken humiliated Tweeden for turning him down? Franken has brought out the same instinct in Democrats to make light of reprehensible conduct and sexual assault. Sorry, just because there are people doing 120 mph on the highway, doesn't mean that you can't be pulled over for doing 100 mph.
1
More like the difference between driving 120mph and driving 75mph -- the former is reckless driving (misdemeanor or even felony; jail and loss of license are on the table) and speeding (more like a fine and a few points on your license, and it drops off your record after a few years).
1
Pat, You know that the Tweeden photo was staged right? and that Tweeden was a willing participant, right?
4
I hear you talking lady. Nice to think we are at a crossroads re:building some sort of institutional intolerance for sexual harassment and aggression. But Er, Ms. Dowd, has anyone informed the GOP of this seminal change over? What, with our fearless leader in the White House showing the way of how to avoid and minimize capability for acting the fool around women, by first publicly questioning the veracity of ones accusers, and then lawyering up ones self up to the point were no one knows which way is up (Hello Bill Cosby). As well noting an extremely strong possibility that the GOP will ,in fact, seat an alleged pedophile, into the Senate as a GOP Senator from Alabama.
So, now after the unceremoniously jettisoning of one of our most vocal, progressive and effective Democratic Senators, Al Franken, for comparatively minor instances of alleged harassment , is it any wonder that many supporters of the Democrat Party are wondering if the leadership of the Democrat Party are (once again) more interested in conducting their own peculiar version of the Cultural Revolution within their own Party, rather then focusing on keeping their eyes on the prize, and winning a seat at the table- via the all important 2018 Mid Term elections? It is enough to make one wonder who is in charge of the Party of such hard ball leaders as FDR, JFK, RFK, LBJ and Bill Clinton (all who were, BTW, also not spotless in their personal lives, but exquisitely effective progressive leaders)
0
12
The word "alleged" means just that for both Franken and Moore.
Why sacrifice the presumption of innocence on the twin alters of political correctness and political advantage?
2
Good column. Gillibrand is right... if you're asking if he grabbed this instead of said or did that you're asking the wrong question. At this moment in history, it's wise to remember what the sages said about King David. When he made decisions with his heart, he failed. When he used his God-given wisdom, he succeeded.
Everyone wants to know "where is the line?" It begins and ends with decency, integrity and wise choices.
3
Let's see, if I had asked a man for a picture at the state fair, and his hand had maybe slipped down to my rear for a second (or maybe someone in the crowd had pushed against my rear or taken advantage of my inattention to grab my rear), but I found out this man could be a huge factor in saving the nation's public education, the environment, lots of women who were raped in the military, children on Indian reservations, our Supreme Court, our democracy, and maybe our world, what would I do? Hm...thinking...thinking...
4
The French Revolution was irrevocably stained by the brutal liquidation of the aristocracy during the Reign of Terror, which ultimately brought more than 16,000 death sentences. Robespierre claimed "Terror is only justice prompt, severe and inflexible." But no movement that reveals such indiscriminate brutality and lack of humanity can permanently succeed. The French Revolution finally collapsed in on itself for lack of a compass and its catastrophic course will forever taint France's claims of Liberté, Unité, Égalité.
The excesses of the #MeToo reign of terror also call into question the coherency, meaning and human cost of the current revolution and will almost certainly ultimately result in a massive loss for feminism and its elites of much of the momentum and prestige they formerly enjoyed.
9
Sorry, Ms. Dowd, but we seem to be ignoring that these are "accusations" of minor substance and none have been substantiated. We are condemning our own "law makers" in spite of the 'due process' that should be available to all accused politicians be they Democrat or Republican. What does that say about the American democratic process that gives a common person the privilege to be considered innocent until proven guilty. And let's just consider the possibility that removing Franken from the field of contenders for President, leaving a clear opening for a woman to run. Just saying.
10
Cultural change comes in fits and starts. At first women were happy just to be let into the club, now they want to be treated as equals, as they should. We should look back at the time before women were let into the club, and at today when women are still not treated as equals, as points on that long arcing curve of history bending towards justice. Cultural change is not easy. Progress is not easy, especially when you have one half of the country, the conservatives, fighting against it.
1
The moral high ground is the only long term path to changing the nation. Ask FDR. The precipitating events will only come from the winding road of unknown future catastrophe. But it is as certain as the sun.
2
Um...FDR? What the man did in his personal life would have had him ousted from office in this climate. FDR is a great example of how NOT to judge officials’ suitability for office based on personal behavior. The man’s own daughter facilitated his extramarital affair. His wife is now considered a lesbian icon. But all would be happy to vilify him today.
We are witnessing a moral panic, with a heaping load of nonsense. Trump is a horror story for hundreds of reasons that are every bit as important as his assaults on women, many, many of which are far more dangerous to the planet.
3
The Democrats treatment of Al Franken was deplorable. Their huge mistake when they jettisoned one of their own will make them no friends on the republican side and will lose them many friends on the Democratic and Independent side. My hope is that many candidates will elect to run as Independents. I wish there were an organized Independent Party so I wouldn’t have to support the democrats or the republicans.
20
I regularly pick up and discard the little piles of mess my dog leaves all around my fenced-in yard. Those small, essentially harmless, piles are unsightly, and my wife hates accidentally stepping them. While I'm at it, I also pick up and discard even the smallest bits and pieces of paper and other debris that have blown in from the neighborhood, harmless as they may be. My yard, and my home by extension, look better for it.
Those bits of paper and debris don't get stuck to my shoes, nor do they smell bad. But if I want my place to look its best, and also set an example for my neighbors, I feel it's best to treat all detritus the same. Be gone, bye bye.
5
If they were biodegradable matter that would enrich the earth, would you treat them the same as hazardous waste?
1
"The Emporer Wears No Clothes" ---- it is staggering to those that are continually blinded by the role of the Clintons. They are certainly not alone but have assuredly acted in a major role
2
Maybe, if we look past the details, what is really happening is that the Democratic party is finally casting aside the Clintons.
4
Almost as if people waited until both Clintons were finally out of office for good!
BOTH parties are complicit in responding to alleged sex harassment claims depending on stakes. Does it matter that Franken's replacement will be a Democrat? Does it matter when Conyers will be succeeded by another Conyers? Let's see the Democratic reaction when faced with losing the seat.
4
I contributed to Al Franken’s senate campaigns and would contribute (even more) if he runs again.
13
But, we also need to find a BALANCE here, because one is supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty." We don't need women – or, men – to be using sex as a weapon.
I am reminded of the story, decades ago, of the homely high school girl who suddenly started accusing popular athletes in her school of statutory rape. For a time, she had terrible power, because the mere fact that she was accusing these boys meant that her allegations were implicitly taken to be true. It finally turned out that none of it was true: the girl had never yet had sex with anyone at all. But by the time it was all over, she, merely the unpopular girl, had had well more than her fifteen minutes of infamy.
We should of course have zero tolerance for sexual abuse in any context whatsoever. But, neither should a person's career be ruined merely in the court of public opinion.
11
Many liberal commenters here are excoriating Ms. Dowd for excoriating the Clintons. I, however, as a liberal, welcome this overdue reckoning of the unscrupulous Clintons. Nothing Dowd states in this column about the Clintons is false. Bill was indeed a predator. Hillary was indeed the enforcer, pressuring Bill's accusers into silence. For now, I don't care if Republicans are worse (and they are, I'm not going to deny that). I will not fall into the trap of playing "whataboutism", which seems to be in vogue on both sides of the aisle. How about we focus on cleaning up the mess within our own party? Because if one thing is clear to me now, it's that the Democrats will continue to lose if we continue to be hypocrites about the values we say we represent. Al Franken was a great senator. Bill Clinton was an effective president. But I want to work towards a future in which women can finally work without the threat of being creeped on. And if we're to call ourselves the party of women's rights, then we need to stop excusing those who clearly violate women's rights.
5
Franken is right to resign.
And the Clintons should resign from public life for the good of the Democratic Party.
6
Unlike too many of your readers here on this thread, I'm with you Ms. Dowd.
Larry Eisenberg- '....knifing Hillary'? Reeeeally Larry??
It is these kinds of blindly self-serving comments from the left, of which I myself am a progressive, that have made me rethink the future and viability of the Democratic base. They still have not pulled off their isolationist life-preservers and faced the fact that they put an extremely flawed and hugely hypocritical candidate up for vote- and - unsurprisingly, LOST. And, lost big, when you consider the moron we'll have to listen to for the next four.
And, this is why I no longer trust the Democrats, of which I used to proudly call myself. They've become nothing but a bunch of elitist sour-pusses who have no idea how to self-examine, living in their bubbles of self-righteous perfection. They've become nearly as terminally hateful as their GOP counterparts. And that- is dangerously sad. Politically.
4
"...all-white members of the Judiciary Committee..."
Why is it relevant that they were "all-white"? Why couldn't they have made the same assumption if Thomas and Hill had been white?
4
Wow, I really thought I was going to be reading an article by Maureen Dowd that I totally agreed with. And then she needed to bring Hillary Clinton into the conversation. Well I for one am tired of hearing about what Hillary Clinton did or did not do. She is not even part of this discussion. She is old news! I REPEAT, OLD NEWS! Why could your article not be about the real elephant which is a Republican Party funding and endorsing a said child molester and a groper of women. FRANKS is out but what will happen when Moore is elected?
When you invoke the name of Hillary Clinton you play right into Donald Trump’s hands. That is exactly what he is looking for. Distract, distract, distract!
14
Love the idea that women and minorities will automatically BE ELECTED, regardless of qualifications to any Kennedy, er Clinton, er democratic seat that empties of its less than gentlemanly occupant.
3
Here we go again. There's more ink in this column about the Clintons and the faux pas of the Democrats than about the questionable behavior of Mr. Trump who is in the Oval Office or Mr. Moore who will likely be seated in the Senate. Ms. Dowd, will your next column be about Benghazi? Please try to stay grounded in the present.
18
.The horror must be to be stuck in a party that is 1) corrupt beyond salvation (both are) & 2) to be held hostage by a small but well organized minority that is radical, and lives on a hatred of a large demographic of the voting population, since that per centage of support the party loses its margins of victory.
The Dems.
The organized and well funded hate- men squad has them by the ...well. We see here the Stalin style purge, men accused are unpersoned, not merely blown out of career, but of memory, by accusations (and I ask you, how soon are volunteers, or bought and paid, accusers of inappropriate touch, suggestion to come against all those women Senators, all women on the Boards? It is an obvious counter move, after all...do not hunker, ATTACK BACK).
This all unleashed in the forelorn hope of gaining a deep red seat (which GOPs will win, with the help for those holding their nose knowing Moore will keep the Dem out, never serve, and be replaced by the Bama Goper Guv.)
The chaos unleashed can be turned, by Trump, or Pence if Trump "in-moored" in 2019, to make all US politics break down to Man's Party v. Woman's, which is the one way the GOP gets back minority votes (the males) and can etch in stone the class war win they have written in water now.
A dead end scenario for Dems (Progressives & the US)...
2
You would think that Dowd and Trump have something big in common, a weird, overwhelming obsession with the Clintons. My thought, in some way they feel they were excluded from the cool kids club, and life is just one big high school class reunion. Apparently, in Gillibrand and Dowd's world, there is never a situation where a female might fling themselves at a man in power. Callista Gingrich, for instance, but she married the guy. Franken was roadkill and I am really done with Dowd and Gillibrand and her posse.
20
In a strange and twisted way we have Donald Trump to thank for the sudden awakening to the treatment of women by powerful man. Trump’s victory of pushed Hillary and Bill off the stage. Their value to the left plummeted to just about zero.
Does anyone think that the Times would have published its expose about Weinstein if Hillary was in the oval office?
The embarrassment to Hillary and the First Gentleman would have been too much for Times readers. The dwindling of the Times readership would have accelerated. And all those holiday invitations to tony Upper West Side cocktail parties would have evaporated.
4
Sister Maureen, you were supposed to speak out about your own "Me Too" horror(s). Dim, witty, beautiful, plain, each of us has demeaning stories to unveil. Case in point, my darkest, most disturbing memory, happened in 1st grade when the janitor lured me and two girlfriends into his wetmop den offering leftover cookies and punch from a PTA meeting; then proceeded to show us two books of Nazi atrocity photographs as he preached Bible verses we didn't understand. The horror of this man's crossed-wires predatory demented slavering still simmers beneath my surface, more horrible than any garden variety grope or thrust.
5
Dowd mentions Clinton's "inamorata" and "girlfriends" along with "prey" but when I think of Bill Clinton the word "rape" is primary.
Perhaps Weinstein was a more prodigious abuser than Hillary's husband but of all the accounts of abuse I've read no single event was more convincing and more harrowing than Juanita Broaddrick's account of a violent rape by Bill Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney General and she was one of his (yes) volunteers.
At least Dowd did not refer to him, as too many have done, as a "hound dog," which suggests misbehavior not abuse, so for that we should be grateful
2
Another anti-Clinton rant, Maureen? Did you make a pass at Bill in days gone by and get rejected?
12
al franken should take back his promise to resign in the coming weeks. in the service of our constitutional democracy his case needs to be publicly examined by the ethics committee, and he should resign or not based on the outcome of that hearing. to paraphrase another commenter on nyt, "the democrats brought a knife to a gun fight, and then proceeded to stab themselves with it."
give the man some due process. set a precedent for how to deal with other sexual deviants in government who might not be so open to an ethics committee investigation. anyone who believes that this knee-jerk, irrational and unjust reaction will have any effect on the way republicans do business is delusional.
i applaud the ethical symbolism of the democrat's intent, but their strategic thinking is pretty, pretty weak. weak not only politically, but also, and much more importantly, in terms of justice among humans, as well as the absolute necessity of a public and transparent examination of this very important and complicated issue in an official forum.
13
I need a babysitter for my 14 year old daughter.
Whom to chose? Harvey Weinstein? Bill Clinton? Roy Moore?
Sen. Gillenbrand is right. Zero tolerance. (It's also good politics; a lot of the voters are female, and they don't like being groped).
4
I'm still struggling with this. Not all "sexual misconduct" is equal, and when is it appropriate to destroy someone's career. So, we decide to let the voters decide when it comes to the presidency, and they decided lechery was okay, as was having total disrespect for women and women's rights. The same is applying to Roy Moore. Looks like the voters are leaning towards being okay with a pervert and predator. Al Franken, in my opinion, should have been censored, and then allow the voters to decide if he ran for re-election. Seems like the Democrats eat their own. Going high just doesn't seem to bring good outcomes for them. Perhaps it says more about how far this country has fallen, and continues to fall.
13
So Maureen hates Hillary. What else is new. Next she'll be telling us she really voted for Trump.
13
Insightful perhaps but limited.In my mind you think differently of people like Monica Lewinski. Actually - I feel for her and always did. What you leave out is the out-of-whack reaction of Newt Gingrich's Republican congress. Do not forget that Newt was married to his high school math teacher and went on to marry two more times. As he lead the impeachment process, he was entangled with a woman on his staff who, I think, is wife number 3. I think she is now serving as the US Ambassador to the Vatican - thanks to our current president Trump. Lovely - perhaps Newt found "religion and virtue" converting to the Catholic Church and the forgiveness of his "sins". After Newt had to leave the Congress there was a sequence of resignations of men who were called to take his place for similar extra-marital entanglements. Now - we haven't even gotten into the men who served in Congress for use and abuse of under-age males. But, let's not get history and facts in the way. You should know better - and, you remind of Trump who likes to toss Twitter bombs at HRC when ever and wherever he can. When I think about JFK - a young school girl when he was murdered then growing up to know about his sexual behavior - as a nice Catholic girl then woman - I learned not to judge and blame. I am not too proud of some of the things I have done either in my life. The harm here - as you imply - is assigning blame - Weinstein, Hillary, Bill, whatever. I HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED ANITA HILL. Let's leave it at that.
5
About Amy Chozik tweet's, since this columnist offered it up approvingly -- if only Times political reporters were as knowledgeable about public policy as they are about the character and innermost thoughts of politicians. As a respondent to that very tweet noted, the Times offered far more coverage of the emails than actual policy. You know, "policy" -- the terrible stuff Trump's doing now.
And you really do have to love that "partly", as in "losing partly". So confident, and yet so cautious. I'm right, unless maybe I'm wrong.
It must be wonderful to have the luxury of observing politics if it were a spectator sport.
2
Does anyone think that Pelosi did not trade Franken for access?
1
Missing from today's drumbeat reportage is the gaggle of women who pursue men of means for stuff.
How many women throw themselves at men with money for money? And how does it not get confusing at times -- these mixed signals.
Men are pretty honest--they want sex. Some women less so --they want stuff --and will feign attraction -- and sexual interest (and sex) -- to get it.
Maybe the wonderful women who used their journalistic talents to expose Weinstein will use these same talents to expose why Weinstein's gorgeous wife is with him, why Melania is with Trump, and why Hillary stayed with Bill (hint: power, prestige, presidency) and so forth.
Some guys are creeps and predators (and much of this is plainly not acceptable), but guys are human -- and don't rich/powerful guys see a lot of women throwing their bodies towards the pearls?
The story is more complicated.
Like life.
7
Roadkill is what 62 million voters scraped up off the pavement and shoveled into the Oval Office 13 months ago. "Something finally snapped with women" during the nasty 2016 campaign but they took to the ramparts to support the GOP nominee. Why, because he was a Republican? He is the missile come out of the night who threatens to destroy not only North Korea but also America. If Roy Moore wins Tuesday night, the Republican party may claim outrage but privately they'll be thrilled to retain a red Senate seat. That's more important than a 30 odd year bogus claim of sexual harassment. Hillary Clinton is finished, Ms. Dowd. She's not running for anything anymore.
8
On the other hand, McConnell may send Moore's case to the Senate Ethics Committee where he will be declared unfit to serve or something like that and he'll be forced to go back to Alabama. McConnell will do this to gain favorable opinion from potential voters in 2018 and beyond.
2
Sometimes you need a scorecard to tell the players. Here’s a start:
Alan Simpson – bad guy
Clarance Thomas – bad guy
Donald Trump – bad guy
Roy Moore – bad guy
Harvey Weinstein – bad guy
Bill Clinton – bad guy
. . .
Al Franken – good guy
Franken gave himself up so the Dems could call for the resignations of the actual bad guys. Let’s hope he stays in the game. Maybe Minnesota will appoint a place holder until the 2018 elections and Franken can run again. Or perhaps try for something bigger in 2020.
12
Kudos to Maureen Down for writing about the irony of Hillary Clinton campaigning as a feminist. Agreed, too that Amy Chozick's tweet summed this up. I'd add this to her tweet: ...to help her defeat an alleged sex abuser from whom she also solicited $ and whose wedding (to a third wife) she attended. with her alleged sex abuser husband. By the way, didn't see any other former Presidents at the Trump wedding.
1
Maureen, what's all the clucking about? This country is heading toward a new Dark Age with the help of your brother's evil party. Women will somehow be put back into the kitchen and the nursery gradually and subtly, just like the GOP is grabbing control of this country and turning it into a theocracy stealthily.
The American people will wake up when it's too late; the nightmare will happen after they wake up from the sleep of denial.
3
I don't know what hurts women more, ancient frat boy antics from Al Franken, or life and career crushing back room deviousness from Bill and Hill.
Well, actually I do.
Ms. Gillibrand may have dumped her old patrons, but not before she learned their M.O.
5
Having lived through it, I don't recall Hillary Clinton engaging "in smear campaigns against Bill’s girlfriends and prey." She is reported to have said some things privately, though Bill "ministering" to a young woman hardly constitutes a smear. Likewise, while the Lena Dunham warnings to the Hillary campaign were significant, the Tina Brown episode in 2008 sounds like little more than Tina Brown trying to stay relevant. Overall, Ms Dowd yet again trivializes an important topic by reducing it to her favorite hobbyhorse.
12
Democrats are fooling themselves with their child like innocence that sacrificing their own members while they”hold to a higher standard” hoping it will win them seats. Republicans play to win while democrats play to their sanctimonious political correctness. Nobody cares and the democrats get their smug little smiles while waking up on Election Day as the minority again. Dummies.
11
"...opening up a lot of seats for women and minorities and a younger generation..."
Or rather seats for conservative young men grounded in common sense, equality of justice for all, and opposed to the idea of pidgeonholing everyone based on their "identity."
4
Since her self-centered protection of her sleazeball husband I have never voted for Hillary Clinton, except when she ran against Mr. Trump, far worse. She was never a real champion of women's rights only of her own need for power. In fact, one could make a case that she's the poster child for sexual harassment and abuse, not what she did herself but for her adamant protection of Mr. Clinton's behavior to further her own ambition. Leader of the free world seducing a 21-year-old intern and she thinks it's honorable to protect him? That's not my definition of being on the side of women's rights.
I also believe that had she divorced her husband she would be president today since she would not be saddled with his chronically bad behavior. It makes her his enabler. Ironically, it was reported that she advised her top aide Huma Abedine to stick by her sleazy now-ex husband to avoid a scandal during her campaign for president. If so, it backfired since it was the investigation into his repeat-offender pornography that put her emails front and center just before the election.
My point is that it's not the abusers that are the problem as much as it's those who go to great lengths to protect them in order to protect their power and position and ambition. Maybe now teenage girls won't have to wait forty years to talk about a predator. Men ask why did it take so long for so many women to come forward? Because of those that played hardball to cover it up.
1
I feel like I'm back in the presidential election and you're still attacking Hillary. You weren't so fast to stop playing footsie with Trump.
10
Maureen, this moment in our history is not about Hillary, Bill, Al, Harvey, Roy, or any one particular man. They should all fall from power if they abused anyone. You know as well as I, this moment is about women taking themselves seriously, and about men beginning to see women as equals, not as objects and toys. We surely have many many miles to go, but it is (finally) starting. Don't continue to smear the defeated Clintons, it distracts from the issue, which is:
WOMEN ARE EQUAL TO MEN, WOMEN ARE NOT SEX OBJECTS, WOMEN'S RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS!
3
With foolish zeal, the new "morally pure" Democrat Party is ushering in (probably unintentionally, considering all their past misfires) a new McCarthyism where every transgression is a capital offense that deserves the death penalty.
Lives are now being destroyed throughout our society through anonymous and unsubstantiated allegations. The list is long - and getting longer - of men's lives being upended and destroyed without benefit of investigation and even a modicum of due process.
During the Terror of the French Revolution there was no regard for facts or details when one was accused of being a Monarchist - the guillotine was the sentence whether the accused was the pompous let-them-eat-cake Marie Antoinette or the lowly servant of the rich who happened to wear knickers. The Monarchy had to go, and the ends justified the means. Period.
Senator Gillibrand, eager to espouse the new faux morality, like earlier Jacobins, is all too eager to scream "off with his head," regardless of the cost.
My morality question to the Dems, et al.: is it more appropriate to demand the resignation of a cad in public office or one who votes for a war when he/she knows it is based on a lie?
When I have a leak in my basement I hire a plumber who I think knows how to fix it. I do not ask whether he is a lout - he has a job to do.
Senator Franken was a fine Senator who has been executed by the new morality police, and we are worse off for it, not better.
16
I think Maureen Dowd's last words will be that her death is all the Clintons' fault - even if she's 93!! In Bill Clinton's time, sexual harassment was more widespread and primarily dismissed. It was ALWAYS the woman's fault - the way she dressed, if she smiled, if she (heaven forbid) flirted. Today is different. Although I wish Al Franken hadn't had to resign, I think about all the young women who had to leave jobs to avoid some man -often the boss - or was fired for not "putting out." A few male careers are little enough to pay for their past transgressions. Its going to be messy for awhile, but the winners will be our kids or grandkids. Yes people can flirt, fall in love, and have messy love lives, even on the job. But learn what NO means, and learn to accept it graciously. And if you're having to force people to have sex with you, its your fault, not theirs. Fix yourself, or learn to pay. It will be cheaper in the long run for everybody.
"Although I wish Al Franken hadn't had to resign, I think about all the young women who had to leave jobs to avoid some man - often the boss - or was fired for not 'putting out'. A few male careers are little enough to pay for their past transgressions."
A few *guilty people's* careers -- men's or women's -- are little enough to pay for *their own individual* transgressions.
Fixed that for you.
1
Right on Maureen. Rough justice , bad timing for poor Al Franken. However, the days of sexual predation in high places is coming to an end. Gillibrand must now make life difficult for the boss at the restaurant, and all the other places where women are assaulted in more humble circumstances. More women legislators will surely help.
1
"Republicans play to win, and they play rough". So Democrats force the resignation of one of their best fighters against Republican untruths... leaving themselves weaker.
Sexual harassment should never be tolerated. But it is necessary to separate gross actions Franken took when he was a raunchy comedian from real evil, like sexually pursuing a minor, or using one's office to procure sexual favors. These are simply different orders of magnitude, and deserve different punishments.
Instead, in their efforts to look pure, Democratic senators have created a situation where Republicans ... remember, they play tough... will cause false accusations against other politicians. Will the Democrats say that all of these accusations must be believed without any due process?
There is still time to get real. We should ask Franken not to resign, to go through an ethics committee review. We should demand that the ethics committee promptly come up with guidelines for distinguishing degrees of dishonor. And we should then hold all politicians accountable to these same guidelines.
10
Alas, we are nearly all guilty of avoiding and excusing.
Maybe as I heard from my father recently when talking about #metoo movement and Anita Hill. Maybe the Senate didn’t want to take the accusations of Anita Hill seriously because of their own past sexual encounters or harassment of female employees and/or colleagues.
1
To an extent, I understand Hillary's denial about her husband -- the father of her only child -- much as I understand the denial of Julie Nixon Eisenhower about her father's treachery. It does not excuse Hillary's tolerance for Weinstein or, previously, Trump. But none of that "tolerance" equates to the actual rape of a child, followed by threats that if the child-victim told anyone, her family would be killed.
2
Spot on, Maureen! And ignore the liberal elites in the Comments section from the East Coast who still don't get it. We liberals in the Midwest, those with some common sense, are sick and tired of the hypocrisy on both sides and support Gillenbrand in her efforts to rid the party of the misogynist behavior that has been rampant for too many years.
And can we finally acknowledge the Rosa Parks like role played by Anita Hill back in 1991? I was in awe of her back then and am in greater awe of her today. She spoke truth to a room full of old white men who had no clue what women experienced in the workplace back then, or even today, and yet, she did not demure from her calling to speak to women's plight in the workplace. Bravo, Anita, bravo.
1
We must hold politicians on both sides accountable, to the same standards, regarding sexual harassment and abuse. It’s a ‘bipartisan’ offender. We must find a way to give considerable weight to the voices of women — without losing due process. That being said, how can the *many* voices of aggrieved women and girls (!) be ignored with regard to sexual predators Trump and Moore?! I don’t believe either should be anywhere near elected office, for a myriad of reasons.
1
On the other hand, the "judge and jury," "guilty until proved innocent" tactics of Democratic women senators could turn off independent voters who don't like their take-no-prisoners attitude.
I wish Franken would run for his vacated seat in 2018 using the GOP mantra of "let the voters decide."
With two MN senate seats on the ballot in the same year, and with MN barely won by Hillary by 42,000 votes out of 2.6 million cast, the voters may decide they like divided government and the Dems would lose a seat that should not have been contested.
And Dowd, before she went off the rails about Hillary again, gives the perfect reason why Joe Biden should NOT be the 2020 Democratic nominee.
Imagine what Gillibrand would do to HIM as the former chairman of the committee of those old white guys who crucified Hill.
2
Even Down can't put a new spin on these recent events. Democrats are constantly seeking perfection in their policies and people, while Republicans just want to win. Democrats want to govern honorably and truthfully. Republicans just want to win. Democrats throw one of their very best national figures under the bus. Republicans just want to win.
Democrats want to aggressively purge from their ranks those who persist in any kind of sexual harassment or abuse, so that they can rule with high moral purpose. Republicans just win, and would elect a rabies-infected cur if it were necessary.
The general public, myself included, are growing increasingly angry, frustrated and sad at the ongoing spectacle of these two parties existing in silos of craven calculation, when a simple "what's best for the country" would do just fine.
6
Yes, yes, yes! So very true! One of your best op-eds ever!
1
"There were many women who wanted to save Franken and who complained to the Furies in the Senate, 'Why are we killing our own when we’re getting Roy Moore?'"
Yes, why indeed? If the "Democratic strategy" of taking this moral high ground was to shame the Republicans, it won't work. Because you can't shame the shameless.
5
I don't get it. Hillary Clinton lost. She is not president, not in office, not in power. Years ago, she attempted to defend her husband and may be accused of complicity by throwing Bill's "prey" under the bus, but why focus on that now? If you want to attack the Democrats current complicity do some research as see if anyone in the Franken or Conyers camp is guilty. Last I heard they have both been quit due to pressure from their colleagues. Using years old news about Hillary as the backbone for current Democratic sexual harassment complicity and enabling sounds more like Fox News than New York Times. No mention of Pence, Ryan, McConnell and their support for admitted groper and abuser Donald Trump? No mention of Melania's absurd "bullying" cause after she defends her husband's "locker room" about grabbing women. There is a certain hypocrisy of omission in this column when current names, people in actual power, are left out while the majority focus is on Hillary Clinton.
13
Back in the day, a co-worker stuck a "WE BELIEVE YOU ANITA" bumper sticker on her file cabinet. Maybe it's not too late to go for Clarence!
2
"There is rough justice....before people work out the hierarchy of sins and due process."
And here I thought I was a beneficiary of 2000 years of biblical teaching and 1000 years of jurisprudence. Silly me.
4
3,000.
OK my fellow Democrats -- get ready for another dressing Tuesday. Sure it was a nice self slap on the back to say "when they go low, we go high." Sure right off the cliff. This self flagellation, or mental cutting behavior, of asking people like Franken to resign is not going to inspire a new generation of moral high ground thought troops. It will only clear the corps and plow the field for sowing a more cynical GOP. This comment will likely go straight to the NYT dustbin, but the course correction will now have to come from the GOP, not the Democrats. We have simply taken ourselves out of the equation. We are becoming more and more irrelevant with each cut to the forearm. Where are you Jeff Flake, John McCain, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins? You voted for your tax cut. Still in the GOP fold. Now -- how about starting to show some leadership?
2
'It has been a rough spell for men whose primal fear is women coming out of the night like missiles.'
Women have long had a fear of men coming out of the night like missiles. I suppose that's also primal.
Franken should run next year for the seat he is presently vacating. Let the voters of Minnesota decide.
They may be more forgiving, and less self-serving, than Kirsten Gillibrand.
5
Women/girl abusing raccoons have been running wild in the Congress and Senate for a long time. The trap is now set, trapping any rodent. Those whom peep up skirts are being enclosed with those whom crawl up legs and more. They did not campaign on those issues. Punish them similarly until they have the guts to revise their rules in full glare of publicity.
It is unfortunate that some legislators are held to a higher standard and forced to resign, while the "predator-in-chief" is allowed to remain in office. We will see if the "child-molester" Senator is allowed to remain in office, if elected. This will show whether the "leaders" of the Grand "Old" Party have the courage to stand up to these thugs.
One of the good things to come out of these difficult times is that it will most likely result in more women being elected to office. The younger generation will not put up with this "good-old boy" network. Until the proportion of women to men is approximately equal is Congress, we will not have true equality.
When a society has been based on an evil lie, that blacks are 3/5 of a human or women are a form of property, it takes a lot to rebuild the foundation of an existing house. Franken wasn’t allowed any form of due process and was sacrificed to the “greater good” for less than pure motives. If the result is women can look to one party as the one who supports their rights, in the future it will help the Democrats, women and American society. It took many years for the Republicans to win the south using racism or to become the party of fear and misogyny.
1
wow Maureen, thought you were going to buoy us with some understanding, some hope by dissecting the problem, perhaps a mourning word for Franken shifting quickly to spear Trump and his chump buddy Moore, but NO. You spear Hillary instead. What the heck Maureen. Having seen Hillary with 1,000 others in Rhinebeck on Tuesday night, a group of us were teary eyed in the cold waiting to shake the hand and say, "you are our hero". Recognizing you don't stand with us or with HER, is fine, but honestly, why with an enemy at our gate you need to return to gutting her on a regular basis is beyond me. It keeps you in our eyes on the wrong side of the gate with regard to women. Hard to ignore the poke at Gillibrand here too. I suggest you and Kevin are much more in tune than you say. Touting Trump by hurting Hill is a strange strange direction to choose.
8
In the infamous Monica-Bill scandal, as I understand it, Monica was the aggressor and she paid dearly for her foolish behavior. For this Bill was impeached but not removed from office and Hillary chose to stick with him, no doubt due to her political ambitions.
Though I voted for Hillary, I held my nose while doing so as I didn't think any else had a chance of winning against THE Grand Old Tea Party.
Hillary made her Faustian bargain and, in voting for her, I made my own.
That "Mephisto" won the election is something I could not forsee.
And that the current deluge of sex scandals has evolved into a witch hunt as in the forced resignation of Al Franken, it did not start out that way.
And the worst proven sex offender remains in the Oval Office!
3
What do you do, Maureen, to protect women? I've never seen a column from you that champions women's rights. Noam Chomsky once said that you were little more than a glorified gossip columnist. In my opinion, you aren't even very good at that.
If you can't contribute to the cause, any cause for that matter, you need to go on down the road.
6
Really?
Ms. Dowd supported Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton.
5
What a great tweet/quote from Amy Chozick at the end of this OP/ED.
1
"For all the furor surrounding [the Clarence Thomas sexual abuse] hearings, male politicians did not learn anything about sexual harassment."
Nor have you Ms. Dowd. So, Democrats have made mistakes and want to right their mistakes. Instead of applauding their contrition and lessons learned, you choose to shame them, condemn their efforts, and by omission, celebrate the Republican Party of Sexual Abuse, Christian Hypocrisy, and Alternative Facts.
You Ms. Dowd are a bigger part of the problem than simply not being helpful; you undermine the good and elevate the bad. That may be good for your position at the Times, but you have shown yourself to be as shameless as Trump in your arrogance and self-serving life.
8
What in the world did Hillary ever do to you, Maureen? You are so like humpty trumpy with your unrelenting hatred of the her...I would really love to hear the back story on it!
5
The Trump and Republican reign of terror is responsible for the rot of American values, ideals and destruction of life for the non-one per cent. And, as Rome burns, you, Ms. Dowd persist on attack of Hillary Clinton. Obviously, you are much closer to your Brother's repugnant politics than you know. Perhaps your next piece could focus on that which is relevant.
7
Need I remind my fellow-Times readers (and fellow-Democrats) that Hillary Clinton lost the election because of ALL of this baggage. I think Ms. Dowd's point is not to bash the Clintons but to ask us to look in the mirror. Hypocrisy doesn't serve us well.
118
Never forget that Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million votes, a huge margin.
1
Oh, I agree plenty enough, but why does this reek of just another ad naueum excuse to bash the “so yesterday” Clntons yet again? (May they, indeed, be gone once and for all.) When will we see such an in depth, detailed analysis and excoriation of Trump, Moore, et al. Why doesn’t Dowd interview some of El Trumpo’s accusers, and give them the credibility they deserve?
If the "us" is the Republicans than you are spot on.
1
thank you Maureen for putting forward the awfulness of the Hillary campaign in taking dirty money from what became accused sexual predators.even after being warned about Weinstein's proclivities. I never liked her standing up for her husband's disgusting behaviors with various women either. so much for a feminist woman.
6
Why are you bringing up Bill & Hillary? What does this have to do with anything. They aren't running and it is irrelevant today. I feel like you are a cat chasing her own tail here. What is the point? We need to stand up for some of thee guys-- like Franken. So far, he hasn't committed a crime.
20
I realize it's early in the morning, but it's time to wake up.
1
But you stood up for Clinton, and the result was a fair and accurate call of hypocrisy followed by a yawn when Trump was called out. Principles matter. If you betray them, you can't stand on them.
1
Could we just bypass the foils and learn our lesson another way?
2
North Korea, Hillary Clinton. Al Franken, Hillary Clinton. Alan Simpson, Hillary Clinton. Clarence Thomas, Hillary Clinton. Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton. Harvey Weinstein, Hillary Clinton. Donald J. Trump, Hillary Clinton. OK. OK. We get it. She is responsible for the sad state of affairs in this country. But from your view, she has always been responsible for what’s wrong in this country. All you do is report the facts from your objective perspective. What would we do without your wise commentary to set us straight? I guess when Hillary Clinton finally shuts herself up in Chappaqua and never makes another public appearance maybe things will get better. This will be especially true since we will have the leadership and insight of her successor Kirsten Gillibrand to show us the way forward.
17
And yet, Hillary was not a sexual abuser. She opposed one in the 2016 election and declined to divorce one. This continuous campaign to sully Hillary for the sins of the men around her is too much.
37
Uh...does Maureen have an editor or does she just whip this stuff up while drinking her midnight martinis and then it simply gets published the next morning? Another article about Hillary Clinton. Are you serious? So, the lesson the reader takes away is Harvey, Clarence, Roy Moore -- kind of pervy, how unfortunate. But, Bill and Hillary -- enemies of civilization! What a novel approach from Maureen. Can I get paid a six figure salary to keep recycling the same observation in the NYT for 30 years?
36
On Monday, the editors of the Times published (on PAGE 2 in space usually dedicated to contents and summaries) an explanation of the history of its op ed, and roles and editorial treatment of opinion piece authors. It is astonishing that readers and commenters cannot distinguish an OPINION PIECE from an “article” in the Times. The OPINION PIECES appear on the OPINION pages. Maureen Dowd does not write “articles” in the Times. Anymore. For decades.
1
The Democrats eat their own.
The Republicans protect their own.
Guess who gets to run the country?
26
Hillary's faux feminism isn't the only issue, she sanctimoniously highlighted how Trump would not release his taxes, ignoring the bad optics of her refusal to release the transcripts of her speeches to Wall Street.
Hillary was already worth millions why she gave those speeches to Wall Street wasn't because of the money, it was because those were truly her core constituents. Sex crimes against women in the military? Senator Clinton was Missing In Action as a senator; it took her replacement, Senator Gillibrand to lead that charge. Hillary has always been part of this cabal of conservative Democrats who feigned progressiveness yet only delivered lip service. Hopefully the DNC has cleared out their Clinton-Brazile-Wasserman mafia.
Highly doubtful. Just think, the DNC is still confused about whether it should return Harvey Weinstein's donations. Does not bode well for the next election, DNC. So force, Franken out but you don't return all of Weinstein's money? Talk about a perfect case of disunity of effort. Wow. Just wow.
8
Al Franken was more guilty of assclownery than harassment. If assclownery is a reason to resign or be forced from the U.S. Senate that will soon be a very empty chamber.
34
It’s apparent that Democrats have forced Franken to fall on the sexual misconduct sword, so that in the 2018 midterm election cycle, “the party that protects women” can focus its energies on the self-confessed sexual predator in the Oval Office and “the accused pervert and pedophile Roy Moore,” should he win Tuesday’s election to the Senate.
But then finding some convoluted logic to blame Hillary for the sexual misconduct of men around her “from Bill to Harvey to Trump to Anthony Weiner” is classic Dowd and distracts from the Democrats’ larger goal – to get Republicans to “break their silence” on the elephant that resides in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. More importantly, we will need a Democratic Congress, i.e., divided government, to rein in an increasingly unpopular president.
16
Thought that Big Bill should have been impeached in ‘98. Almost all my liberal friends disagreed. I never fell for the Good Old Boy’s “I feel your pain” routine, and when he triangulated himself in ‘96 I voted for Nader. If Al Gore had become president in ‘98, there e would have been no Iraq War. The feminists who jammed Hillary down the throats of progressives in 2016 have a lot to answer for. A start would be Pelosi retiring, or is she Dem House Leader for life?
5
Back for another exciting episode of 'Attack the Clintons'. Please give it a rest. The election is over and there will be no more Clintons running for anything.
In the meantime, the P-grabber and Thief continues to naw away at women's rights, LGBT rights, the environment, tax fairness, and generally take us down a dark path. Can you please choose another family to attack? And I don't mean the Obama's who compared to Clinton or Trump looks like a saint on women's rights...
20
So that whole fear as missile going off - it’s embarrassingly phallic, don’t you think? And as for something finally snapped with women, maybe. Maybe there is a new movement at the moment, and maybe it will have a lasting effect. But -- plenty of women have been fighting back for a very very long time. Many have been prepared to fight back daily if need be, and do this by barking back at the unwanted behaviors, without fear of the often angry retorts from wounded, rejected men. Such women get labelled frigid, the b word, crazy, we might even lose jobs or chose divorce over the Bills of the world (or Jacks or Martin Luthers). We don’t talk about the Darryl Hannahs enough, who saw it coming and brought other soldiers to the fight, who spoke out immediately and publicly and directly to the perp, at whatever cost. These voices have been there all along, too, not as me/too but more as no/way. So I don’t agree that we’ve only just stepped up now, or that women have accepted abuse all along. There have always been plenty out there saying no and not waiting for some party to protect them.
2
Mall Santa's beware! Someday those photos could come back and bite poor Santa. So what if you paid for a photo on Santa's lap? None of those traumatic and haunting photos were Franken's idea, either.
3
"Take away that shiny bauble....go and lock the doors." Ms. Dowd, summoning the exact same sentiment expressed by Oliver Cromwell dismissing the "Rump" Parliament 1653.
Disinfectant and sunshine.
The USA has arrived at a juncture where every form of evil has a public relations team, ready to proclaim to all who will listen that any flaw is actually a virtue. Gun deaths? More guns. Climate change? More coal. Moral turpitude? More Moore.
Meanwhile, erstwhile liberals such as Maureen Dowd commit mass seppuku, tearing out our innards in order to impress the unblinking masses that can only bleat MAGA as their environment is poisoned and their social safety nets are trimmed away.
The electorate, with the attention span of a gnat on meth, will not put 2 + 2 together in 2019 when GOP leadership moans about our bloated deficit; what on Earth can we do? Wait! There are these programs used by Mitt Romney's takers called Social Security and Medicare ... Do we dare? Under the circumstances, what other choice do we have?
So, at the end of a week during which our Republican overlords have canted the economic landscape in favor of their Citizens United donors, perpetrating lasting damage to not only Franklin Roosevelt's America but also that proclaimed in Christian bromides, we liberals, like kittens following a laser pointer, are lost in a hyperactive purge, spasmodically proclaiming our moral excellence for felling our predators as theirs are elevated into the Senate and the White House.
It's tough when the choice is between a party with no heart supported by those with no brain and one that has no guts supported by those with no spine.
15
Bingo. Absolutely. Bingo.
You don't become roadkill unless you venture onto the road. Franken ventured onto the road. WHAM! No one's fault but his. Just because the crow flew off in time doesn't make Bambi any less dead.
2
How about a in-depth report on Trump's behavior. That would take courage and some hard work. Hillary has made mistakes but doesn't deserve your constant haranguing.
10
We are turning a page, one from dishonoring women as a matter of course, to a just revenge of past abuses of power, in this case non-consensual sexual encounters, men harming physical and emotionally their victims...and getting away with it; this was a loose culture of 'everything goes', uncontrolled freedom (license) to do as we pleased, believing our own set of fantasies to be true and rightful to be exercised at will. No more...unless we consider the millions of folks (mostly women) highly vulnerable to exploitation in their homes and work, the poor, holding a job with a non-living wage, subject to under-the-radar control of supervisors and even C.E.O.'s, well aware of their stronghold on power and it's potential abuse. It is true we cannot compare the sexual 'pecadilloes' of Al Franken, who admitted his graft and apologized for it, with the unscrupulous sexual predators named Donald Trump and Roy Moore, blaming their victims for lying instead. That we are living a paradigm, true, so Franken must go; but so must Trump and Moore, conspicuous misogynists and abusers of the power we, stupidly, conferred on them. Under false pretenses, these thugs did and do lie repeatedly, charlatans in our midst, bigots happy to convince us that their malevolent fantasies are the gospel truth.
1
We sacrificed Senator Al. Let's make it worth it: let's look at Presidents Clinton's and Trump's and Senator Roy's -- oh, and while we're at it, Clarence Thomas', too.
Perhaps there was no 'high tech lynching,' after all. Just Anita Hill, sacrificed on the altar of Patriarchy. Perhaps Supreme Court Justice Thomas would patriotically call for an Ethics investigation, on himself, like Senator Franken did. I'd support that. I'd love to see that one, finally! get sorted out...
7
Well said. I do wonder about Franken, I liked that guy, he was effective.
I also hope this is one more nail in the coffins of both religion, which is nothing but a con game, as is the Republican Party. Now don't get me wrong, the Democratic Party is either a con game or run by idiots, their faux support for the working class and true support for corporations these last 40 years is what got us Trump.
Now will Trump voters realize they have been conned? Who knows.
If the gerrymandering Supreme Court case goes the wrong way I'm cashing out and going somewhere else. And lastly if we don't reverse Citizens United none of this matters.
Men behaving badly? It's nice to get that fixed, but we have bigger fish to fry.
5
This piece was going so well. You, Maureen, who must have dealt first hand with the larger issues of sexism and abusive behavior to women in Washington politics. But you ended up addressing it all through your Hillary lens. You could have given us so much more.
6
No, her Clinton hate is all she's got. It's been her money maker for years.
2
As long as Donald Trumps campaign to " Make America Grope Again" continues full throttle into the highest levels of government, punishing men like Al Franken makes no sense. Until American understands that winning has nothing to do with being right, we will continue to award everything that is wrong with power and authority over the moral standards of our country just because it won.
4
Yes...men can be pigs. That is a fact of life since the beginning of time. That men can behave so badly might be a factor of nature that should have fallen by the way with evolution, but it persists.
How long that "secret" slush fund existed for the Boys to tap into to pay off the charges against them is a good question and one that I want to see answered. How was that voted in? Did the lady legislators have a vote on it or was it kept secret from them also........DID THE CONGRESSWOMEN KNOW? That might just be an interesting question.
7
Maureen, I doubt that Bill or Hillary will be running for elected office again
Will you stop being obsessed about them
At least , you are not going after Obama any more , we must be thankful for small miracles
I think what most of us will remember about you was your silence on the Birther issue and your recommendation to Obama to learn to schmooze with Mitch McConnell . You never uttered a harsh word about Mitch even though he has done more than anyone in history to tarnish the Senate
So why don't you go schmooze with him and then go schmooze with your good friend and TV host , Charlie Rose
8
The Democratic Party is self destructing on the sexual abuse scandals. Bill and Hilary once again are called out for their complicity and deceit. Ms. Dowd offers some hope in the slinking away of certain politicians opening up possibilities for others historically left out of power. Not to worry about Trump though, his day of reckoning is fast approaching. The Clinton's have no credibility just their well stocked 'panic room', the Clinton Foundation.
3
I for one am glad Franken is history. Wow, he is championed ( er.. championed himself) for ... doing his job? Since when is demanding truth at a hearing so special that only an Al Franken can do it, and whomever replaces him will 'pale' aside his historic championing of women? Yuk. He was hired for a job... ignored his constituents last year when they supported Bernie He patronizingly voted for Hillary because he was 'championing' his White House prospects as well. In my book you cannot champion yourself... wait for the Oscars, get over your missed paychecks, and be happy you'll still get your pension starting.... tomorrow?
At least the ex-comedian, Franken could always say he was just joking!
I don't blame you for being so tough on Hillary, as a liberal she certainly could do better. But we know in the end, all the insiders; Elephants, Donkeys anyone or anything at the DC watering holes don't really care about the rest of us, including Alex and Alexa. Trump is just the most brazen of them all.
Sex, drugs, rock and roll and politics will live forever!
3
Amy Chozick's tweet summed up brilliantly the irony of Hillary Clinton as feminist-in-chief. I am personally fed up with excuses made for abusers like Bill Clinton on account of his politics advancing women. I remember, as a print journalist, interviewing a revered (by feminists) Congresswoman for her liberal positions. Yet when I watched her shrilling at staff members in the middle of an airport terminal I thought to myself, 'Oh, this is the big civil libertarian who has no idea how to be civil.' Psychosis as politics.
Democrats don't own the moral high ground, but at least their party doesn't actively support molesters and pedophiles as does the RNC. The Republican Party has clearly demonstrated that an election win is more important to them than disavowing a sexual predator, whether he's a senatorial candidate from Alabama or the President of the United States. And to put the icing on the cake, the GOP bills itself as the party of family and Christian values and moral purity. The sheer hypocrisy is staggering.
6
As long as the Orange One sits in the White House, utterly and absolutely everything that is said on the subject of sexual transgression is ultimately pointless. If the person who (purportedly) represents this great nation can speak offhandedly about abusing women and nothing is done, then shut up. We've descended into the Great Dismal Swamp, and I'm not talking geography.
3
I'm sorry--at last count women constituted 54% of the population.
Yet today, we have all 3 branches of the federal government and 29 State legislatures under full Republican control! How did this happen....think about it?
To all the women who didn't bother to vote...
To all the women who voted for Jill Stein....
To all the women who voted for Trump, because....you know...they just couldn't vote for Hilary....
Thanks for nothing!
So glad you're coming out I force now.
The hashtag campaign is really energizing, and those pink knit caps look so cute.
And so glad women candidates are coming out in force to run for office.
I foresee a great electoral sweep in 2018, with a flurry of legislation to undo the damage of the past 24 months.
And all these legislative efforts to improve the environment, workplace safety, consumer rights, voting access, and most importantly women's rights will be systematically struck down by Trumps radical right wing Federal judiciary for decades to come.
Decades....
Hashtag: TOO LATE
7
Missiles and false accusations abound. But the liberal left is finding out that liberal Hollywood, and liberal politicos are all fair game now. Kinda makes it hard to know where this is going.
1
It appears the democrats have hoisted themselves on their own petard.
5
Oh, Ms Dowd, you were off to such a good start when focusing on an amoral president and alleged pedophile who will probably be the next senator from Alabama. But then your piece slowly and conclusively lost credibility when it targeted the Clintons. That's over, finished, moot. We have much bigger concerns now not only with a debauched, power hungry narcissist but also with a GOP Congress who will distract from, avoid, or abet sexual misconduct within its ranks so long as they enrich themselves and their donors.
You are a woman, I am a woman. It is time for us to step up to the plate and join the thousands who want to end sexual harassment and assault. But our efforts are useless if we dwell on past individuals. Our task is to make Mr. Trump (and his ilk) accountable and make him pay the penalty for mistreatment of us as well as all other human beings who cross his path. Just think of the example we are setting for our kids if we continue to allow the indecency spewing from the Oval Office.
6
Grandma is flatulent, but it is the dog that gets blamed. Democrats (of which I am one) are desperate to do something, anything, to stand up, in effigy, to Trump's primitive, destructive aggression towards them and everything they believe. This does not change the fact that Franken, and others more markedly, behaved unacceptably and even criminally towards women. Different categories of primitive emotion, but these days it is all about primitive emotion. Trump is a grandiose, sadistic narcissist and his supporters revel in his triumph over their former tormentors, the Obama-era Democrats. Really all of what he does is driven by his need to feel his power, and to denigrate others through its use. Democrats ( like me) feel helpless; we have to do something, not just sit and watch, and part of that energy goes into principled effort like the #metoo drive. Meanwhile the greater concern has to do with the much more serious threats to our democratic process that Trump poses. As Dowd points out, the Republicans only want to win, and they obviously will undermine if not destroy our democracy in pretending to be able to roll back the clock for their duped constituents, while providing tax cuts for the billionaires who have so obviously purchased them. These are frightening times.
You can do better, Maureen. The issue is sexual predators, not Hillary Clinton. Let’s start with current affairs, our Predator in Chief and his party of pedophile enablers. They are setting the new moral low ground for the future.
5
Maureen, you're right. But you're going to get pilloried for daring to mention the flaws of Bill and Hillary.
Al Franken is "good on women's rights" only on paper, and not on one sleeping in an airplane. He was horribly "bad on women's rights" at that moment, sleeping or not. You, of all the progressive pundits, ought to know that.
Trump may have been worse and women who have not come forward to do their "j'accuse" on him and make it stick. Although she never actually "accused" Bill Clinton of abuse, Monica's friend did. And they had the stained goods to prove it. Other women arose to tell their stories of abuse too. But all that happened was a lot of progressive ahemmings and boys will be boys, wink-wink responses.
Had that incident been properly dealt with at the Clarece Thomas hearings, or at the other abusive incidents provided by both parties, we wouldn't be seeing all this "roadkill." We have ourselves to blame for letting it all sit on the road and stink.
1
There was a time when I was at college in the late 1980s that my Irish mother would cut out your column and send it to me in Oneonta NY. We would often mention how brilliant you were. Your obsession with the Clintons is holding your creativity hostage. Please try to understand most people are completely over it.
4
Has Maureen Dowd ever penned a column including a topic about any female wherein she hasn't eviscerated Hillary Clinton? Aside from constantly and predictably demonstrating her obsession with the Clintons, which rivals Donald Trump's, she has devolved into the new Sally Quinn, known as Poison Sally before gaining the respectability that marriage to Ben Bradley conferred on her. It's beyond evident that this redhead is, at her roots, green with envy.
5
You forgot Benghazi and the e-mails.
8
I thought that for once I could read Maureen Dowd without her trashing Hillary. And again, I was wrong. Her obsession with Hillary destroys any message she wants to convey, and again, I will ignore her columns when they appear.
4
(Oh fiddle-de-de, Maureen.)
We are living in a time of political expediency, thus I say:
Dear Sen. Franken,
Do NOT resign.
Your seat must NOT fall to the GOP in the election.
Democrats - 23 Senate seats up in 2018. Your seat adds one more.
Republicans - 8 Senate seats up in 2018.
If GOP wins enough they could have a filibuster-proof supermajority.
The GOP and operatives probably dug up the innocuous picture of Franken, threw the bait at Democratic leaders, and the spineless leadership jumped on it.
Get a grip leaders, your stupidity slip is showing.
Your strategic/tactical capabilities are sorely lacking - at least in this instance.
Sen. Franken's future should have been left up to the voters in Minnesota - not to you sanctimonious chest beaters.
Al Franken's silly frat type gesture/picture is almost saintly compared to the likes of Trump, Moore, O'Reilly, Weinstein, and many other serial harassers.
I've been a strong Democrat since the days of the Reagan/Bush Administration bankrupting the country.
I may re-register as an Independent voter.
I'm tired of the Democratic leadership taking a knife to a gun fight.
I supported Bill Clinton when he strongly stated he would NOT resign the presidency when he was being taken through the impeachment process.
I hope Al Franken will run again for the seat he has been foolishly forced to abandon.
The decision should be up to voters in MN as to whatever the future may hold for him and for them.
My check will be in the mail.
39
Senator Franken penned over 150 bill and not a single one was ever signed into law....not even with President Obama in office.
His presence was only to be the "bump in the road" and nothing else. His vile comments and rambling questions from his seat on a panel were hateful and designed to entrap.
He shouldn't be missed by the Progressive Party as nearly anyone will do a better job.
24
Charliehorse8,
150 written bills, that's a lot of bills. What you don't note is that the majority of bills in Congress do not become law. Strong questioning is required to bet to the truth during committee hearings. Or should the Congressmen just rubber stamp the nominees, like Jeff Sessions, et al?
5
Basically, he was a pretty typical member of Congress.
2
Absolutely correct:
Big dog William Jefferson (Bill) Clinton partly caused her loss—
With the background of decades of abuse and harassment which she enabled.
6
Down and Trump can't get past the Clintons.
11
If you read the WSJ comments section, no matter what the topic is (such as a fairly technical science discovery), forum trolls turn it into a slam against Democrats, Obama, etc.
This article reminds me of that. It begins with some interesting analysis and then descends into the usual Dowd troll against Hillary Clinton.
29
Do you think the Bancroft's thought this might happen when they sold the paper to Murdoch?
1
...not to mention HRC going after her husband's victim. Shame.
2
So it’s all Hillary’s fault?
Dowd’s Clinton Derangement Syndrome is in need of some extensive, full-on treatment.
23
So we're finding out what we've always known, there are a lot pigs in the government--to variable degrees. I'm a woman who has suffered more than my fair share of abuse and harassment--especially in advertising in the 80's and 90's.
But what concerns me most is the Democrats using sex-related incidents as an opportunity to rid themselves of their most left-leaning members. Anthony Weiner was the last holdout for the public option in Obamacare. Eliot Spitzer, "the Sheriff of Wall Street," was on to the impending financial crisis before it happened and afterwards wanted to go after the people who created it, using New York's fair lending practice laws nationwide. John Conyers fought for Civil Rights his whole life. And now Al Franken, who Kirsten Gillibrand clearly did not want to face on a primary ballot.
I'm sure there are more pigs in the Wall Street wing of the Democratic party, but their transgressions will never see the light of day.
12
Yes, and the mainstream media does the same.
Chris hedges (Iraq War), Ed Schultz (trade deals), Dylan Ratigan (big business and government corruption) etc. etc.
No wonder they also want to shut down RT.
Yes! It think it is fitting for the Republicans to be known forthwith as the party of the Grand Old Gropers.
7
The Dems have been played. Again.
11
Maureen Dowd seems stuck in her emotional attachment to the Clintons & tries vainly to minimize their duplicitous intent, and actions over the decades. Dowd, for instance, would Never Approach dealing with "The Boys on The Tracks" scandal out of the Clintons' governance back in Arkansas. Dowd is still firmly attached to the crowd which deeply wants women to continue their traditional weakness, fear, and voicelessness, this by means of Dowd's utilizing these women "coming out" of the shadows and finally saying something about these ugly sexual abuses. It's a curtain! A curtain which shrouds the fact that women are still held in strict subservience by means of never being able to defend themselves under powerful duress! Once I finally saw through the genial-sounding criminality of my CA demo compatriots out here in CA, and joined with my old enemies, the republicans, I discovered women who were powerful, hard-working, and who really mean business! Including the issue addressed by hard-working immigrant, and accomplished student leader: Ms. Okafor a few days ago in this NYT, meaning the Constitutional right to "Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness", meaning to live a fulfilled life of Free Intellectual Inquiry, (something my former party despises). Real women are Not Afraid of the Second Amendment, and, indeed, are forthrightly accepting their uplifted status of being unafraid when most women still remain cowed, & skittering to get behind their locked doors.
2
As always, Dowd speaks TRUTH to POWER.
Still spending you time trashing Hillary for things you provide no evidence of? Sad pathetic cat lady
9
Mo, you show your families GOP leanings when you write. Al Simpson gets a great health care package and financial benefits from his job in the senate and yet he claims that people who paid into S.S are scamming the system.
The fact is that the woman who started firing complaints at Franken was set up by Roger Stone and the media and other women jumped on board and he wasn't given a chance to go before the ethics committee. Just like the Colorado baker is being supported/ funded by a right wing PAC. Rome is burning and very troubling permanent changes will be made by the GOP to damage the country and Dowd is talking about Hillary? What does she care? She's set for life...
10
You have to ask why, when everyone suddenly awakens from trance and does some version of the right thing around sexual abuse, the Teflon Don marches on, untouched by the sudden explosive social rage. Is this an eternal moment when the world stands still?
2
your clinton and obama bashing has caused, and will continue to cause, a lot of pain and suffering, for a lot of our fellow citizens. and for what? a few sharp lines in a column? it's gratuitous, what you do, and you need to be held accountable.
9
If Moore gets in, then Franken will not resign. If Moore does not get in, then Franken will resign. That's why Franken postponed his resignation for two weeks, and admitted that he has done nothing significantly wrong.
The reasoning goes like this: Why should I resign from the Senate for being a jerk with women, when Moore molested a minor and trolled the mall looking for under age girls?
Makes sense, right?
7
Makes sense for a Democrat, yes.
Moore wins Franken stays in? Smart. Works for me
2
"That’s no way to be the party that protects women" and trashes good, albeit human, men. Look, the Republicans are evil, the Democrats fools. As people have allowed this brouhaha over essentially nothing to smear Sen. Franken, we need wonder no more about the lack of good, especially male, candidates.
5
More like a hit and run on Franken, though the accusers did leave their names, for a bump on the fender.
I just do not see the equivalency with Franken vs Moore, Weinstein, Weiner, and others.
The Dems just had to have the moral high ground, and for what, are they going after Trump for his indiscretions, don't hold your breath.
7
I think Franken might have made it past the innuendo had he not posed so jerkily before his photo faking a breast squeeze of his camouflage bullet vested colleague.
You can't make a Senator resign. Turns out, Franken is, among other apparent deficiencies, spineless. The Clintons are old, bad news, as is Pelosi. The Democrats need fresh leadership. I nominate Bill Gates, Jr. Any seconds?
Dowd is right about the hypocrisies of the Republicans and democrats when they shield their own sexual predators. Conveniently,she failed to mention that the Obamas were complicit when it came to Weinstein who Michelle Obama called "A wonderful person at a White house event and whom the former President Obama embraced at a fundraiser for his foundation on April.
She also, failed to mention that although her own paper recently suspended the alleged sexual abuser Glen Thrush, apparently he is back on their payroll co-authoring a above the fold article tonight. I guess hypocrisy really does "extend to the family" to paraphrase Michael Corleone.
This credit may have been added after you read the piece, but at the moment the article you mention closes with this statement: "Glenn Thrush contributed to this article before he was suspended pending the result of an investigation into allegations of inappropriate behavior."
1
Thanks for the clarification. I read it online prior to the statement being added.
Of course if Hillary didn't put up with any of it, if she didn't actively cover for it, she would never have got as far as she did, she would never have been a Senator, she would never have been Secretary of State, she would never have been a candidate for President of the United States - just like (and I'm just guessing) Marilyn Monroe would never have been an star actress, and Katie Couric would never have been a top television reporter, and countless others wouldn't have been able to keep their receptionist jobs, their executive secretary jobs, their lawyer jobs, their doctor jobs, and probably even their NYT columnist jobs at some point.
That was the price.
Maybe that'll change, but then again maybe it won't.
Remember there are some who make it on pure talent, but for that vast majority it is on brute force. The nature of man is one of taking, exploiting, stealing, cheating, raping, assaulting, racism, murdering and yes, child molesting.
And Donald Trump is the epitome, with child molester Roy Moore in tow and all the other Republicans cheering them on. And judging from the result of elections, that's apparently exactly what the people want, including women themselves.
Disheartening.
3
Hillary has always been for Hillary, no more, no less. & the Dems in general, are so obviously anxious to get the 'women's vote', that if I vote for them, I feel like I've been suckered.
2
By this time, the Clinton's should be old news. Come 2018 we should not be listening anymore.
2
So far on this issue the dirty GOP is winning isn't it?
3
I am so done with your bashing of Hillary Clinton Maureen -- you and Trump are exactly alike (you may be a little smarter) -- let it go, yes, Hillary Clinton loved a man who was an abuser and maybe worse and she took money from an abuser and likely worse. Earth to Maureen, she lost -- all your negative columns bashing her worked - can we move on and prepare for the nuclear war that your "boy" Trump is taking us in. Growing up I would never have believed that a vile person like Donald Trump would be the end of the United States --I still can't believe it and then I read your column and we're still talking about Hillary and I know how terrified you and the rest of us are, but blaming Hillary for this mess, rather than the Russians and a lot of very dumb deplorables, is a serious mistake and misses the point and if ever there was a time that we need to be on point, it is now.
15
Sung to Al Franken courtesy of Democrats and Blueberry Hill:
I found roadkill
on Capitol Hill
on Capitol Hill
where I found you,
The Mood stood still
on Capitol Hill
Angst lingered until
Als' dreams fell through
1
Do you honestly mean to say that out of all the bad actors in this avalanche of abuse, the real bad guy is....Hillary?
8
As usual for Dowd, HRC is the cause of all the scandals going on. she climbs this moralistic high ground, stabs this woman so many times that it does not hurt anymore. Ms. Dowd, being hard on HRC does not make you a great or fierce journalist. Its people like you that got us Trump. And you don't even know when to stop your crusade against Hillary and train your journalist guns at the right target. Trump and the Republican party. consistently. if you want to save feminism that is.
8
Thanks, Maureen, for hitting the Clinton sex abuser "nail on the head." Hillary did not have very clean hands (ala Lady Macbeth) when it came to sex abuse. However, you do a disservice to Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who has made women's issues with rape and sexual misconduct, especially in the military where it's rampant, a major issue when you say, "But Democrats in Congress want to use Trump and Moore as foils to stamp themselves as the party that sticks up for women." It was clear that Sen. Gillibrand acted to rally the Democratic women of the Senate to say, "Enough is enough!" without the backing of her New York colleague and Senate Minority Leader, Chuck (of Chuck & Nancy) Schumer. Ms. Gillibrand and her six women colleagues finally forced her Democratic colleagues to draw the bright, scarlet moral line keeping the party out of the cesspool of predators and pedophiles embraced by the self-confessed sexual abuser president and his party by firmly saying that when a woman repeatedly says "No!" even to unwanted, inappropriate "wet kisses and random squeezes" and a humiliating photo by a 55-year old man, it means, NO!! Clearly, the Democratic Party has moved beyond Bill & Hillary, and hopefully you and the rest of America will join them before we're all engulfed in the swamp of debauchery and depravity.
1
While physical sexual predation is unequivocally unacceptable - there are surely degrees of offense when it comes to describing wrongful behavior. Physical violence versus lewd sexual banter do not both belong on the gallows as remedy...unacceptable and offensive as they both are. Trump, for example, should have been knocked out of the Presidential race for his Access Hollywood comments - but his loathsome comments are not on the scale of the accusations against, say, Harvey Weinstein or Judge Roy Moore. I wholeheartedly support the '#MeToo' movement, as it empowers those who have been subject to uninvited, unwelcome sexual approaches, but my concern is that for it to have impact, it has to be tempered by degree of severity - in other words a measured response, because if it's not, the perpetrators (and their lawyers) will entangle the movement with adversarial opinion and water down the real and important changes #MeToo has the capacity to make. Social ostracism is unfortunately no match for money or power - and so remedy has to be sought through thoughtful and enforceable legislation...along the lines of hate speech.
1
Gail Collin's column today on the same subject is much better than this hack job on Hillary. This is the moment not last year. The republican voters yawn over a serial and bragging abuser was not Hillary's fault. I am done reading Maureen's work if it is more Clinton ranting. I thought this one would be different and I feel tricked. ENOUGH! It is just plain dumb.
5
Dismissing Franken's trangressions as mere "wet kisses and random squeezes" demeans and trivializes the distress and shame he imposed on unwilling women. Your several Anita Hill smears fail to recognize that sometimes there are pubic hairs on Coke cans.
This woman is a raving lunatic, but she is correct about Hillary. However, she loved her earlier. Now that Hillary is of no use to the Dimms, they have thrown her under the bus. You, Maureen Dowdy, are no different.
Ho-hum. Another poison pen column against the Clintons. Maybe these columns should be written in red ink.
And the column started out so promisingly as a comment on the Sexism on the Hill.
Does Ms. Dowd think that the real and imagined sins of the Clintons somehow excuse the real sins of others?
Is the point to show hypocrisy? There are hypocrites in Washington? Really? Who could imagine such a thing?
Past support of the Clintons forever bars present redemption? The Original Sin can never be forgiven?
It is a shame that so much prime media space is wasted on a vendetta.
12
Hillary ... 'ended up losing partly b/c of an alleged sexual abuser.' Maureen, so now you think she lost because she wasn't enough of a champion for women? Because she chose to stand behind her charismatic husband and the father of her child? Not Comey? Not Putin? Not Roger Ailes and Fox? Not Jason Chaffetz and endless Benghazi hearings?
Since time immemorial women have had to go along to get along. It's much, much worse than dancing backwards in high heels while Fred Astaire gets all the credit. Their only other option has been to shield themselves behind powerful men, who hopefully weren't creeps or philanders or abusers themselves.
Perhaps we've turned a major corner, but history says women's progress is one step forward and then, 'hey, where's my coffee, sweetie?'
270
The endless Hilary-bashing is just another way to blame the victim. How many 20thc presidents had extramarital relationships? It's easier to count those who DIDN't. There is no way a woman could rise to a position of power without "going alpng" with some less-than-perfect consort. While we're at it, let's kick Eleanor Roosevelt for not outing Franklin on his amours and disability.
3
Not Comey.
Takeaway?
Admit to nothing and slander your accusers and get to stay.
Be contrite and you're toast.
If you're not lying you're not trying.
368
All this Franken witch hunt demonstrates is that the party of the Democrats is more than simply a finger wagging politically correct creature; this we all knew before. That being a good part of why Trump was elected.
But heretofore when it ran amok stifling free speech, demonizing those who didn’t agree they could say the problem was not with the Democrats themselves but rather in the way their values were interpreted by misguided members.
Now we know that they will jettison friend and foe alike in their pursuit of purity on every issue.
They haven’t started up rounding up little boys for dipping little girls pig tails into ink wells as yet but that is surely coming.
And the Lady MacBeth’s whom we must assume are pure as snow because we are now never permitted to look into womens backgrounds will forever be the injured party, all innocent and sweetness and light.
Who is next to be Gillebranded?
141
I'm still miffed that a majority of women were stupid enough to vote for Trump. What were they thinking. Maybe a Stockholm Syndrome thing. Since my birth in 1945 America has suffered some karmic comeuppance. Maybe because we killed so many Vietnamese in a hubristic conflict then compounded that with turning the Middle East into a blood bath for no good reason. We have hit bottom with Trump. We have always been an oligarchy and I couldn't see it till now.
14
One has to wonder what Bill and Hillary (+ Barack/Michellea) did to Maureen Dowd to feed this obsession.
The "war of the sexes" is ageless: going after a woman who rolls with the punches and tries to get on is not the answer.
Franken is one of the better advocates for women. People can grow up and redeem themselves, and we didn't need to lose such a powerful voice. Kirsten Gillibrand's self-promotion is disturbing, if we are talking about hypocrisy. I'm glad she's embracing women's rights, but people are going to take a much closer look at her self-dealing after this.
I'm with Socrates on this one: "Another pathological Dowdian descent into Hillary Hatred, the kind that animated millions of men AND women into swearing they could 'never vote for that woman'." I'm not fond of Hillary, but it appears that very few people took the trouble to get to know her and what she stands for, just embraced the quarter century of Republican trolling, enhanced by Russian trolls. Russia is delighted with all the divisiveness. I am forced into defending her because I hate hypocrisy, and the bigger hypocrisy comes from the HillaryHaters and a singleminded focus on Bill's uncontrolled libido and complex actions with women, almost if not all of whic were consensual.
My opinions are influenced by the experience of a dear friend who was falsely accused by a teenage privileged female student and whose career and life were almost ruined.
Women need to embrace ideals higher than "hair and makeup".
22
So Hillary by accepting campaign funds from Weinstein somehow enabled a "rapist", although Weinstein has not be charged with rape, how does Maureen's gushing columns about Trump before his "election" not enable his rape of the entire nation? "Republicans play to win, and they play rough" is the reason that the Clintons had to meet their challenge with their own "vileness". Are not women demanding to be empowered equally? Why does the Democratic Party need to "protect women"? If Hillary is not up to your standards of being a feminist, you certainly are as "Neanderthal" as the GOP you pretend to despise. Your glass house is way too fragile for you to be throwing stones in this bloodbath of misogyny.
25
I think this is about an older story, when Hillary was a young lawyer just starting out and was more or less forced to defend a rapist. Then there's Broadribb, a case of still not proven. Hillary did her best, and Bill betrayed her repeatedly; it took her a long time to realize some of the stories were true, so it's more a case of blaming the victim. It's possible we will never know what the truth of the Broadribb story is, but I'm dubious.
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/06/clintons-1975-rape-case/
"Hillary Clinton did not volunteer to be the defendant's lawyer, she did not laugh about the case's outcome, she did not assert that the complainant "made up the rape story," she did not claim she knew the defendant to be guilty, and she did not "free" the defendant."
https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/
7
A year from now there will be little publicity when women go public and so offenders will survive. When is the last time a police shooting of an unarmed black man was front page news?
10
Al Franken...Wrong place, right time. Collateral damage. No one in their right mind ( and no one will be in their right mind until cooler heads prevail in a few months) wanted to see Al lumped in with Weinstein, Spacey the rest of the list. The Democrats didn't have to rally around Al to save him. They could have just shut up and let the ethics investigation go forward. Instead, they let Kirsten Gillibrand turn him into Frankenstein and he had to go...
26
The barbarians are at the gate, yet the Democrat's response is to sacrifice its own soldiers. Change the history books because the South really won the Civil War.
13
You do understand that Hillary lost the election
10
Yes, Maureen can't let it go, though. And, strictly speaking, Hillary won by nearly 3 million votes.
9
Taking a longer view, one could assert that actually Bill lost the election or the possibility of a win back in the Oval Office with Titanic-ly poor choices. Democrats have been swinging with broken bats since that time. Hard to hit a home run.
Maureen Dowd makes some good points, but can't resist kicking Hillary in the head a couple more times.
18
Thanks Mo, you have again said what others forget or gloss over.
Isn’t it time for you or another Journalist to take a careful look at the Clinton Foundation?
4
I wish she would. She'd find, as others before her have, that the Clinton Foundation helps hundreds of millions around the world, and that they leverage power and wealth the help the less fortunate.
Here, for example, for Puerto Rico to transform to clean energy, with Branfman and Amory Lovins:
"How to Keep the Lights On After a Hurricane"
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/23/opinion/hurricane-puerto-rico-electri...
9
Maureen, you're just as pathologically fixated on Hillary as Fox News and the faux executive we stand up for when the band plays 'Hail to the Chief.'
The likes of you, Gillibrand, and the thirty or more other Senators who railroaded Al Franken out of Senate and torpedoed Hillary Clinton's presidential aspirations, are the same ones who effectively endorsed the not-so-lovely and talented Donald J. Trump.
What you and your coven of hyperbolic harridans will never acknowledge is that an IMPERFECT Hillary Clinton was light years better than a megalomaniacal narcissist with anti-American proclivities.
And now, your sorority of pseudo-feminists destroy another imperfect supporter of women's issues, in the name of "taking the high road.:" Good golly, even the Daughters of the American Revolution can see through that ruse.
Here's a title for your next screed: "How to Eat Your Own."
19
So rape is now called "retrograde treatment of women" when it is committed by a Democrat you otherwise like on the issues? Please!
Enough shallow glib snark, Maureen. Your posture as a hypocrisy-buster is getting tired. When a Democrat ‘plays to win’ - takes money from any donor or stands by her man (who was attacked by politic?? enemies ???relentlessly- contributing to skepticism that all female accusers were legit...let alone that he was a predator/abuser vs fool)- you pike on.
We have sooo much bigger fish to fry than relitigating Bill or scolding Hillary for her loyalty. Major travesties are brooding with a drunk at the wheel. Why not add wit & insight rather than abuse your power?
18
Bill really should have resigned. He would have had to in this day and age. Then we would not have Hillary to scold. Did you really write 'scold'??
Isn't that a bit misogynistic? A little hypocritical no?
Sorry, Maureen, the Democratic party has defended my rights as a woman way more decisively than you have, not to mention the Dowds' Republican party. Ok, so there are some slobs in my party. I know I know. But give us a call when you criticize your buddy Donald Trump's sexual aberrations as much as you do Bill Clinton's. BTW, Hillary lost, and Bill's an old man who's out of the picture. You really need to get relevant in Trumpolini's America.
24
Bill and Hillary threw Monica under the bus. For political expediency. The lights came on, finally and thankfully; the roaches are scurrying but still seems there are sacred roaches. The next generation is forewarned. I am betting on them doing better. Thanks Maureen, glad to share this with friends.
When do we get past Bill and Hillary?
3
A useful response to the Republicans' refusal to acknowledge that Moore is a child molester are to corporations who support the RNC with donations. Supporting the RNC is to support pedophilia. Not a nice image for most companies. Some might even say its bad for business.
Check out the campaign run by the Daily KOS. Sign the petition to corporations: Dump RNC because it's helping to elect a child sex predator
7
Yes, Maureen, Hillary did not have very clean hands (ala Lady Macbeth) when it came to sex abuse another reason why so many women didn't vote for her. However, you do a disservice to Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who has made women's issues with rape and sexual misconduct, especially in the military where it's rampant, a major issue when you say, "But Democrats in Congress want to use Trump and Moore as foils to stamp themselves as the party that sticks up for women." It was clear that Sen. Gillibrand acted to rally the Democratic women of the Senate to say, "Enough is enough!" without the backing of her New York colleague and Senate Minority Leader, Chuck (of Chuck & Nancy) Schumer. Ms. Gillibrand and the six Democratic women senators finally forced their male colleagues to draw the bright, scarlet moral line keeping the party out of the cesspool of predators and pedophiles embraced by the self-confessed sexual abuser president and his party by firmly saying that when a woman repeatedly says "No!" even to unwanted, inappropriate "wet kisses and random squeezes" and a humiliating photo by a 55-year old man about to grab your breasts, it means, NO!! Clearly, the Democratic Party has now moved beyond Bill & Hillary, and hopefully you and the rest of America will join them before we're all engulfed in the Republican swamp of debauchery and depravity of Donald Trump, Roy Moore, Joe Barton, and Blake Farenthold.
6
Dear Ms. Dowd,
You should share the intimate knowledge you have of your "friend,"Leon Weiseltier. You used to quote him frequently. I believe he abused a few women,as it has been reported in this paper, when he worked at the New Republic. Please enlighten us. Thank you.
11
Reading your column reminds me of your many damaging anti-Clinton and anti-Gore columns of years past. According to you, the deplorable behavior that women are finally feeling free to reveal is all Hillary's fault. I stopped reading you for years in the past, and it is time to stop again.
9
It's time for the NY Times to recognize that Dowd is pushing Republican propaganda, not simply expressing alternative viewpoints. As a liberl progressive, I appreciate that Conservative columnists like Thomas Edsall, Bret Stephens and even Ross Douthat present far more enlightened defenses of their positions that Dowd's continuous, ridiculous attacks on Obama and the Clintons, none of who hold ANY office, while ignoring the maniac occupying the White House, whose insane transgressions, Dowd downplayed all through the election cycle.
Time to move Dowd out and someone new in who won't waste column space!
5
Thanks for reminding us of Anita Hill---what would it take for a Clarence Thomas resignation?
13
Or a Bill Clinton resignation???
Gillibrand's jettisoning of H. Clinton makes me think of "All About Eve."
I hope Gillibrand actually believes in something besides herself.
9
GOP to Franken: I've found my Kill, on Capitol Hill, on Capitol Hill,
When I found you..
5
Even though you hate Hillary Clinton with a passion, you must still admit she would have been a better president than Trump. No doubt you blame Clinton for Trump's win, and not somebody more culpable, like Putin. Have you gotten over your crush on Trump yet?
16
Does anyone have a legitimate license to be sexually aggressive with someone, women, men, harassment, inappropriate touching, inappropriate kissing,
because he votes for women's rights?
Sounds like bad logic to me, and a total hypocrisy.
How could you be good on women's rights when you are touching them inappropriately and they are complaining against you?
The logic and ethics here is absurd.
4
“Most of the all-male, all-white members of the Judiciary Committee privately — and mistakenly — assumed that Thomas and Hill had had some sort of work romance that soured.”
This completely elides the role of the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, one Joe Biden, knew that there were women who “Thecould and were ready to, corroborate Hill’s refused to call them, or even to admit to their existence.
I know Dowd dotes on Joe, and loathes all things Clinton, but, come on, Biden let Thomas on to the court by his failure to run thorough hearings.
And in cleaning out som accumulated papers, I stumbled upon the Times Magazine cover story from 2015 about “The Women of Hollywood Stand Up,” by a certain Maureen Dowd. Anything you’d like to reconsider in the intervening 2+ years?
5
Random squeeze?
I do not think a woman including yourself would welcome a random squeeze! It is wrong and should absolutely not be minimized. Shame on you.
"Bill’s girlfriends and prey."
prey?
Any woman you initiates expression of sexual interest with explicit visual communication is prey if a man accepts her offer?
Give me a brake.
You are degrading the brave women who stood up and spoke up against real assaults. Monica was NOT prey by any stretch of the imagination. The only reason the stain was on her dress and on her underwear was because Bill refused to go "all the way" by giving in to her valiant efforts to "trap" him.
Calling Monica prey is a Trumpian lie and you should be ashamed.
5
There is no doubt that the liberal world has changed very quickly
And while liberals are busy self-immolating, our Southern Christian conservatives continue to do what they managed to do ante-bellum--chug along pointing fingers and creating a world based on their own made-up morals.
Christian AND a pedophile? Elect him!
You and Donald Trump are going to talk about Bill and Hillary for the rest of your lives but the world has moved past that now.
The disparate reactions we are seeing is evidence that the Civil War never really ended and the faults that existed still exist. Slavery seemed fine to the Red states then, pedophilia preferable to a Democrat now. A certain slippery morality has always been the hallmark of our Red state friends.
The will of the majority is the legitimacy of our rule of law. When, as now, the majority is thwarted, the results are predictable.
6
Alright, then. Hillary must resign. Then we should impeach her. And for good measure, let's set her fabled emails on fire and burn her at the stake. I am down with all that. But what do we do with self serving exploiters of #MeToo like Gillibrand and Kamala Harris and how can we get Al Franken back in the senate?
14
Seven full paragraphs devoted to Bill and Hillary....one (half, with Moore) devoted to your buddy trump. Maybe this is a set-up piece to some hard hitting reporting on The Donald. I, forgone, cannot wait for you to call for his resignation rather than just calling him a Pig.
6
Al Franken.
What a wimp
Folds like a cheap suit.
The Democratic Party has hit a new low.
Let's round up 32 senators and kick him out.
Without ANY due process.
Look at the Republicans.
Roy Moore, an accused child molester, is about to get elected.
It's all about the big picture.
The weak kneed Dems, meantime...
What a piece of garbage party.
The party that let Don Trump ascend to the presidency....
What a pathetic, pathetic bunch of sops.
Hey, I'm loving these molesters getting called out.
I'm the biggest feminist there is. Women have had the short end of it for centuries.
But this is a witch hunt.
How about some due process.
Let he or SHE in the US Congress who is without sin cast the first stone.
If I were defending Al Franken the first thing I'd do is pull up the donor lists of Gillibrand and the other pious phonies.
Where are the fighters in the Democratic Party.
They are so, so pathetic.
The U.S. Congress is moralizing about how Al Franken and others should live their lives.
The U.S. Congress.
That bastion of morality and integrity.
That shining beacon of courage and dignity.
Riiiiight.
11
Why not let congress eat its own? It's one way to drain the swamp!
3
Amazingly, when Maureen writes an anti-Trump screed there are already hundreds of comments when I log on early Sunday morning. Is everyone out shopping? Or is it the subject?
Anyway, with as many missile strikes hitting men these days it is incredible that the unemployment rate has not spiked way past the 4.2% it is.
At this point there should be bread lines and apple sellers outside corporate offices nationwide with men in expensive suits and designer sunglasses trying to get on the dole.
Maureen, you must have a story as well, no?
"Democrats often lose out because Republicans play to win, and they play rough." I thought maybe you were on to something here Mo, demonstrating in your inimitable snarky style a useful way to look at the current mosaic of sexual misdeeds and issues, all the while illustrating once again the organic difference between the shameless immorality of the modern Republican establishment ("rotted at its core" as per David Brooks) and the hand wringing liberalism tendencies of the Dems. The reasonable, meet you half way Democratic frog versus the Republican scorpion! But no, you march a bit of the way, and then you are again distracted as you so often are by the Clinton pitchfork you once again can't resist wielding. The current situation must wait its turn Democrats. There is still a price of self-flagellation which must be met!
2
"A ditsy, predatory White House intern who might have lied under oath for a job at Revlon" who was, "“too tubby to be in the high school ‘in’ crowd.”
That is how this columnist, in this very column, described one of Bill Clinton's prey, who is now described as being, "treated as collateral damage, smeared and pushed aside so that the careers of powerful men could be preserved." Who, exactly, treated her as collateral damage? Is it okay if we preserve Bill Clinton? Donald Trump? Al Franken? Roy Moore? If we let our political persuasion answer this question, then the question is bound to fall into irrelevancy. This columnist does her presumed cause harm.
4
Could you reprint a column , Ms. Dowd, that you wrote condemning Mitt Romney, John McCain, or Al Gore, that was written one year after their election
losses? I guess Hillary is a special case for you.
9
I love you, Maureen!!! You've got it all just right!! Brava! Brava!
Oh , Dowd this column was about Al Franken with his photograph and all about wet kisses and random squeeze ?
But you just lost your trend of thought process like your bud trump`s slurred speeches and made it about sticking to Hillary Clinton who in spite of more than three million more votes, lost to trump.
3
Although a simplification, we might think of Democrats as being pro-woman, and Republicans as being pro-(white) male. So rather than being symbolized by the Donkey and the Elephant, we might think of the two parties as the Chicks and the Pigs.
The #MeToo movement is a battle between the Chicks and the Pigs. In this battle, Franken’s fate has shown that a basically decent man can admit his mistakes, apologize, and then lose his job. Moore, on the other hand, has been accused of far more serious things. These two responses to sexual allegations, mildly offensive in one case criminal in the other, are diametrically opposed. The fate of the #Metoo movement hangs on the balance of Tuesday’s election. If Moore loses, the differences between Franken’s approach and Moore’s will be decided. When faced with accusations, whether you admit and apologize or stubbornly deny, you will be punished. The Chicks will have won. On the other hand, If Moore wins, it means that the best strategy of anyone accused of sexual misconduct will be to deny.
If Moore wins, other women considering speaking out will understand that one’s chances of a favorable outcome are greater if one speaks out against the male Chicks rather than the Pigs. Moreover, male politicians of all stripes will understand that one gains nothing by being forthcoming about one’s failures, and start denying. Thus a Moore victory will signal the end of the #MeToo movement with a net gain for the Pigs.
5
I am wondering if there is some special clause in Dowd's contract that requires her to draw a link to Hillary Clinton no matter the issue. Wildfires in CA, 2020 census troubles, shortage of flu vaccines, in grown toenails.. there's always a line! Yeesh!
7
Oh good grief Maureen. Just another wasted column to air your hatred of Hillary Clinton. She lost, and she is never going to be a viable political candidate again. Can you not just leave her alone? You used a column about the ongoing sexual predator scandal to skewer Ms. Clinton. Going after a woman and trying to discredit her when it is your husband who is a philanderer, says nothing about Hillary Clinton as a feminist, and perhaps everything about a woman wronged. Can you not even give her that consideration? That her anger was not just about how it all would play politically? She really is a human, capable of feelings. Being a feminist does not mean you give other women a "buy" when they have done something wrong. Bill was at fault for the affair with Lewinsky, and so was the young, naive Monica Lewinsky. She wasn't a teenager as are the women Roy Moore allegedly pursued.
This column started out making a good point about years of bottled up anger against sexual predators women have had to endure that is erupting, then quickly segued into yet another cheap shot against Hillary Clinton. Enough already!
6
Hey -- any plans to mention your buddy and frequent source Leon Weiselter?
1
I'm writing the first part of this comment prior to reading Ms. Dowd's "views" on the sexual whirlwind engulfing her hunting grounds:
IT'S ALL HILLARY CLINTON'S FAULT - if only Hillary Clinton had or hadn't done x, y, and z, the scourge of sexual harassment and sexual abuse throughout the land, throughout the world, would have ended in 1992: powerful white men would have crumbled at her words of condemnation and slunk off in droves, never again to wield their power to subject women to all manner of injustices; and so powerful would her words have been, an awe-struck Phyllis Schlafly would have dropped to her knees begging to be allowed to join the Democratic Party.
....
Now I have read it: I've won the bet with my dog, I get ice cream, he doesn't.
2
As I recall Dowd, for a good bit of time, served as an active inabler of Ol’ Bonespur, using her column on several occasions to say in essence, give him a chance, he’s not as bad as he seems, while slamming HRC time and again as being a thousand times worse than she seemed. Wnen it comes to sexual predators you sure know how to pick ‘em....Thanks Mo, we reaped what you helped sow.
6
There's one thing Trump and Dowd have in common. Neither can let go of their obsession with Hillary.
4
Op-ed pieces are a lot of the reason why so many voted abandoned the progressive agenda to vote for the likes of Donald Trump.
It is because out-of-touch elitists like Maureen Dowd thinks the most “important” thing we need discuss is her unhealthy obsession about Hillary Clinton.
Well Maureen, let me give you a bit of enlightmemt from the hinterlands.
People in my neck of the woods don’t give a hoot whether Hillary Clinton stood by her man, because we have more important things to worry about, like getting and keeping a living wage job, having affordable heathcare, wondering how badly we are going to get hosed on the GOP tax bill and other things that New York City elitists, like those op-ed writers on the New York Times, always seem to deem so unimportant and beneath them to discuss.
5
It used to be amusing how these columns waited until the last couple of paragraphs to describe things of actual note/newsworthiness.
Now it's just sad.
Maureen Dowd is correct, however, this is just another venue for her to attack
Hillary Clinton. Dowd has been obsessed with the Clintons for years and never
misses a chance to stick the knife in again. In the name of rights for women,
of course, for she is politically correct if nothing else. (Very little else, actually).
1
OK, I tried to read a Dowd column. Yet she is still trashing Sec. Clinton over events long past, so she still has her hobby horse. Goodbye, again.
3
Yes, of course, with this journalist it always comes back to Hillary and relitigating the 90s. It’s all Hillary’s fault. Even Trump’s sex crimes are her fault somehow. Pathetic. Move on already.
3
The obsessive hatred expressed by Dowd for Hillary Clinton finds a parallel in the genuine and manipulated obsessive hatred that Trump and the Republicans have expressed toward Clinton. And Moore who molested young women, or Trump who was accused by some 20 women of assault or rape, bother Dowd approximately as much as they bother Trump's evangelical base. Which is not at all. We know what Trump and his base get from this toxic mess of dishonesty and lies. What about Dowd? Sometimes it seems that Dowd is hardly able to write a column if it does not savage Clinton. Does Dowd know that Clinton is not president? Dowd has fraternized for decades with men many of whom we are now learning were monsters. She even savaged Gwyneth Paltrow after Paltrow came forward and accused Weinstein. What gives? Something's up here.
30
Robert, obsessive or not, you should realize not everyone is in love with the Clintons.
1
Thanks, Peter, for your reply. The Clintons are far from perfect, and I am not in love with them. Bill Clinton's misbehavior was a no-win situation for Hillary. The rightwing demonization of Hillary Clinton began when she served on the Congressional Watergate committee. I believe the hatred folks have for her is disproportionate and irrational and largely, like the rightwing attacks, dishonest.
Petey tonei wrote:
"Robert, obsessive or not, you should realize not everyone is in love with the Clintons."
1
This column, which starts out discussing an important instance of abuse of power in the form of sexual harassment by a sitting justice on the Supreme Court, devolves, once again, into Dowd's ongoing, irrational obsession with the Clintons. I long ago stopped reading Dowd for that reason, and this column sadly validates that stance.
27
"I long ago stopped reading Dowd..."
Sounds to me like you read every word of today's column.
I did, for the first time in a very long time, and I regret it.
3
It is amazing to me that Maureen Dowd has such venom for Hillary Clinton. Regardless of the topic and article, it is always the Clintons fault. I have vowed not to read Dowd’s column because she is so damaging in her caustic perspective. When I do read I am reminded to keep my vow.
19
I. too, swore off Dowd for the same reason, and dropped in today to see whether anything had changed. Not a chance. Next thing you know, climate change will be Hillary's fault. Maureen Dowd seems to have run up against every columnist's worst nightmare: she has nothing left to say. This time, I wont be back.
4
God, Ms. Dowd. You’re just like trump. You absolutely cannot let the Clintons go.
24
Leave it to Maureen to turn this entire sexual harassment movement we're facing into an opportunity to go after the Clintons yet again. Get over it, Maureen. Hillary lost.
13
Yet again, Maureen Dowd turns an issue that has NOTHING to do with Bill and Hillary Clinton into another one of her rants and raves about....the Clintons.
ENOUGH ALREADY! Bill Clinton hasn't been President for 17 years. Hillary never will be!
Either drop this sick, Trump-esque vendetta, or go write for the Washington Times, the New York Post, or Faux Noise! Will you EVER write something meaningful again?
20
So, it's back to the Clintons, once again. This column started out reasonably, but Dowd just hast to ride her anti-Clinton hobbyhorse yet again.
12
Maureen, Hillary should be President!
6
Dowd quoting Chozick: "... alleged ... alleged ... alleged .... alleged ..."
Dowd: "That’s no way to be the party that protects women."
That's no way to be the party that defends due process and the rule of law.
2017-12-09 21:58:02 UTC
1
Ms Maureen,Some how you missed the biggist fish of all.the lion of the senate,in his nascar jumpsuit at the chappaquidick bridge.Are any of the living Boiler room girls coming forword.
As it has been non-stop for 25 years now with Maureen Dowd, the entire point of the column was simply to launch yet another personal attack on Bill and Hillary Clinton. Talk about "missiles coming out of the night"!
What is it with Dowd's sick, pathological obsession with the Clintons and why do the NYT's editors continue to indulge her by giving her valuable op-ed column space to vent her spleen in this way?
As the Media Matters watchdog site has noted, Dowd has written well over 200 columns critical of Hillary Clinton. Why can't (or won't) she let go of her Hillary hatred? Dowd's issues with Hillary are clearly personal and well beyond any kind of rational or sober analysis or anything having to do with meaningful policy issues.
Maybe it is time to have a 25th amendment-style psychological evaluation procedure for media columnists when they starting losing their grip on reality like this.
25
Dowd continues to disappoint. She objectifies Franken to get another dig at the Clintons. More than a little abuse there, in my opinion.
10
Right most of the time doesn't work if the wrong is at the worst moment. You make great quotes but then your observations don't hold water because you just don't like the Clintons. The dam broke because a women who was the best qualified was not elected. You have problems with Hillary but she would have been better for us all and most women know that and are mad about it. That's why they marched the day after the inauguration and have become the Trojan Women today.
It's not only men who have propagated the binary lady on the nightstand either angel or slut. Every Native American woman before Columbus was more free than today's women but they were demeaned as drudges because the worked and owned everything. (Today they are raped in Canada although they dress less sexually than your average women in the US or Canada. ) Native women were also not sexually afraid to enforce what they didn't want. But they were given spinning wheels by the American Society and told to sit inside while the men took over their fields and property. That Patriarchal Myth was the myth of your Western Civilization and still is the story of your religions. That is also the myth that is going down the tubes at the moment. What was it like in Ireland for women before the Catholics got there and condemned them to the cottage? Wasn't Ireland the warm-up for the New World?
3
Last time I checked my Irish history --- it was a long history of oppression by the Brittish Monarchy. They fed their cattle before they would attempt to alleviate hunger ion that impoverished island.
There is quite a lot of documentation from the time prior to the settling of the New World and then in the strategy for Settler Colonialism that refers to the processes being used first on the pre-Catholic and later the Catholic Irish. I think you can probably just google it. It's a long history. REH
Dear Maureen,
Your columns on the Clintons are so full of hate and disdain as to almost be parody. Mrs. Clinton stuck by her husband most likely because she was lied to (by him) and loved him. So what. She played rough. So what. She was also a brilliant politician with more experience than anyone and having a woman as President - indeed any woman President - would have been a better choice over the monster we got. Are you a Republican? Because frankly, you sound more like one of the good old white boys every time you write about women, especially Hillary. Get over it and start helping.
20
Donald Trump is a "monster" and HRC is a "brilliant politician". Picture yourself on a boat on a river with tangerine trees and marmalade skies...
I truly am sick of listening to Maureen Dowd attacking Clinton. Is she trying to jusify voting for Trump, a man who wants to give jail time to women who get an abortion.
Maureen I give up, I am so sick of you that I will no longer read your columns. I think you need a good shrink you will never be classified as a first rate writer. You do have talent, but all talent requires knowledge, something that alludes you.
Thanks again for voting for a white supremist that is already responsible for so much misery and even death to people who have been attacked by alt right since they now have permission to do so.
17
and a column ostensibly about the current reckoning for the treatment of women is, of course, all about the clintons.
so utterly predictable. there's a reason dowd has been reduced to one column a week.
10
I assumed perhaps we might read from Maureen something about the Democratic value of due process of law; instead, we have another mean girl attack on Hillary. Sad.
12
Anyone remember the old Marty Feldman routine of the twin brothers who felt each other's pleasures and pains? It ends with them stabbing each other to death. They must have been Democrats.
2
No but that is a great analogy!
It’s rich that in Dowd world it all comes down to the Clinton’s once again no matter what the issue.
It’s even richer that Dowd, the Times chief op ed Clinton attacker, quotes Amy Chozick, the Times Chief page 1 Clinton attacker.
I am surprised though that Chozik’s tweet didn’t somehow work in a mention of those pesky Clinton emails which she referred to ad nauseum in virtually every article she wrote while covering Clinton’s campaign for the Times.
7
Time for some introspection, Maureen. You used your voice in these op-ed pages to not only give Donald Trump free advertising, but you lopsidedly blamed Hillary Clinton for harassment of women, and even defended his smear of Megyn Kelley having 'blood coming out of her wherever' as not being the crude reference it was.
You have made abundantly clear your distaste for Hillary Clinton. We know that you will use her as a punching bag for any given problem. How about taking a look in the mirror and seeing how you have contributed to the cesspool of misogyny.
10
If my husband had girlfriends I'd smear them too and then some, and there are only three accusers of Bill that I know of: Broderick, who denied three times under oath that she was raped by him; Jones, who had something consensual going on with him until she decided it was more lucrative to redefine it as sexual assault, and Wiley, who was unmasked as a liar by Linda Tripp and who outrageously accused the Clintons of murder. So tell me Maureen: Who was Bill's prey?
13
In addition: Those three appearing with kittygrabber-in-Chief didn't exactly improve their credibility with me...
3
So glad to see you are back to your Hillary bashing!!!!!! I thought you had finally realized how instrumental you were in Trump "winning" the election. Maybe you should turn your attention to your role in that and finally apologizing for your obsession with putting her down. She is not Bill Clinton she is Hillary and is allowed to be her own person.
11
I have to wonder if the Queen of Snark will ever find it possible to write a column that does not become yet another pretext to bash Hillary Clinton.
Give it a break. Find a new bone to gnaw.
13
Agreed. Soon as HRC stops rattling her bones begging for yet even more attention and money we'll be moving happily along, Mo' too I'm sure.
We have a pedophile being elected to office, a sexual deviant in the White House, and as a Times editorial pointed out today, the environment under siege from a Koch inspired administration, among other calamities 45 has created or fueled. And all Maureen can choke out in a column this morning is another diatribe about the Clintons? This is bordering on pathological.
I used to look forward to your columns, but between an occasional visit from your Alt-Right brother and your growing anachronism of a news sense, sprinkled with an apparent erosion of your sardonic wit, count me out!
12
Who else is more than tired of Ms Dowd's insecurity about the meaning of her Pulitzer? There appears to be no hope of this tragic obsession ending; let's at least call it for what it is. This is indeed Ms Dowd's 'Groundhog day'.
11
Maureen Dowd nails it again.
As long as the Clinton cabal has any sway in the Democratic Party they will never have the moral high ground on almost any issue and they will keep losing elections.
From sexual assault, warmongering, deregulation, "free" trade, consolidation of telecommunications etc. etc. to prison and justice reform, the Clintons, both Bill and Hillary, have lost the moral high ground for the Democratic Party.
Nowhere else was this more evident than in the Al Franken disaster.
They could have swiped the floor with Roy Moore, but not as long as serial sexual predator Bill and his equally revolting enabler Hillary is around and opening their mouths at the most inopportune moments.
How can anybody take Democrats seriously on the issue of sexual misconduct with those two jokester still calling the shots?
Even über-apparatchik Kirsten Gillibrand realized that and ditched her former patrons like a used diaper.
However, Hillary didn't end up "losing partly b/c of an alleged sexual abuser".
She did that all by herself, unlike the other 'victories' she enjoyed riding the coattails of her ethically challenged husband.
5
Hillary Clinton would have been an infinitely better president than the con man in the White House today and Maureen knows it. But supporting Democrats does not pay for Maureen.
One has to believe that Maureen is just burnishing her status as a Democrat hater to maintain her persona as a counterpoint to liberal thought in the NY Times. She used to be funny, but that was long ago. Now she writes as if she was a ghost columnist for the New York Post. Attacking Bill and Hillary Clinton in the context of what is going on today in the Republican party is blatant proof of what her real agenda is. Slander is a sin, Maureen. Time to go back to confession.
7
@ USS Johnston
Ridiculous.
Maureen is exactly right. The Clintons spearheaded the decay of the Democratic Party to a point where the party is now so morally bankrupt they can't even beat a moronic genitalia-grabbing reality TV show snake oil salesman from NY, much less come up with any meaningful legislation proposals or defeat one of the worst tax bills in history. They even eat their own now because they are so void of any authenticity.
All they have is "I'm against Him" and "Russia! Russia! Russia!".
Truly pathetic.
I hope they put up a Booker/Gillibrand or Booker/Harris or similar loser ticket in 2020 so we can finally bury the dead corpse that is the Democratic Party.
Let's not forget that it is because of Hillary's hubris and unbridled, coattail-riding ambition that we have Trumpelstiltskin in the White House now.
The Republicans have become the party of doing bad things. The Democrats have become the party of justifying those things while explaining why their voters can’t have good ones.
"Thank You, Maureen" would be more appropriate. I hope she sets her eyes on the equally disappointing Barry the Nobel Droner Obama next.
When it comes to the Clintons, Ms. Dowd makes Captain Ahab look well adjusted.
8
Here is a different viewpoint. Dowd quotes Amy Chozick, on interminable book leave. But Dowd has deeply influenced Chozick. In fact, Chozick used an anonymously sourced Dowd column (“What Would Beau Do”) to provide an anonymous source for the lead article on the Sunday Front Page of the same day:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/us/politics/joe-biden-white-house-201...
Dowd has always doted on Joe Biden, and loathed all things Clinton. What Dowd has (willfully, I’d wager) left out of the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill story is that there were women ready and willing to testify to corroborate Anita Hill’s story, but Joe Biden singlehandedly prevented that from happening.
As for Chozick’s lead article about Biden being ready to challenge Clinton for the nomination, as Dowd’s column told it, to fulfill Beau Biden’s dying wish, it was debunked within a week.
5
Had to concentrate most of your "irony" on Hillary didn't you? Still i like your line about missiles firing up in the middle of the night. But lets go for the biggest sexual predator who sits in what could be called our most holy of all places in our country, the Oval Office. There he sits with a smirk on his face, tweeting away while glorifying in the fact I've abused hundreds of women and i got a way with it. A missile needs to land on that Oval Office desk announcing, "YOUR NEXT."
1
I think that this will be the last Maureen Dowd column that I read. The last one I read was from her brother, vomitus on the printed page. Now she is taking more swipes at the Clintons. I think perhaps Ms. Dowd needs help. I don't need the aggravation of reading her columns.
8
You can always count on MoDo to pander and repeat the DNC talking points.
1
Only Maureen Dowd and the Times could make centuries of efforts to subjugate women Hillary Clinton's fault. Talk about de compensation! She really does inhabit an alternate reality.
7
Oh, Mo. We've missed your poison pen. So glad you can still turn the ugliness of your pal, Trump, and the vileness of Roy Moore into a Hillary bashing. I was worried that you were getting soft in your old age. Silly me. You've still got it in you.
5
Maureen can be counted on to write the same column about the Clintons, over and over and over again. It's time the Times moved on.
7
Maureen, you're so transparent. And "awful on women."
It's blindingly obvious that you planned out this whole article with one goal, and one goal only. You found a way to go after Hillary yet again.
What does it feel like, Maureen, to be so obsessed?
17
"Awful on Women"? JohnB, do you realize that more than half the women in this country did not want her as president because of her complicity with Bill on his mistreatment of young women? Hillary continued that mistreatment by ruining that same young women's reputation.
2
Good Lord, Maureen Dowd. Will you never give up the Clinton obsession? You're as bad as Trump. Hillary lost. Bill is an old man. Focus your wrath in places where it can help.
21
It's awesome that Maureen does not give up on the Clintons. Hurray for her.
2
Soon as the Clintons step off the stage Mo' will likely move on. Until then no sympathy for those two attention mongering devils.
Somehow with you Maureen Dowd, even though I like your perspectives on most issues, I somehow knew in the end it would all come down to Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton, while the Sexual Predator in Chief who had between 12 and 16 woman accuse him of Sexual Assault and the Child Molester and Pedophile he's supporting seem to only get a cursory mention.
11
Setting the record straight:
The Anita Hill contorted effort and attempt to lynching Justice Clarence Thomas FAILED because of two things:
a) Her last-minute allegations couldn't even be proven.
b) 12 women came out to defend the moral character of black-man Justice Thomas.
These days the DEMS resurrected this formula: but this time they are doing it kamikaze-like. They have the #Metoo women in place of liar Ms. Hill and a few straw men (a decrepit dude abut to retire and a clown) instead of black-man Justice Thomas - but willing to fall on the sword.
Let me remind you: these #Metoo women were passionately engaged in bringing SEXUAL PREDATOR Bill Clinton into the White House less than 33 weeks ago.
NEWS FLASH to the DEMS: The emperor (YOU) stills walks naked, despite the newly fabricated 'imaginary decency mantle' you think you are wrapped in.
AND
WE CAN SEE YOU!
2
Beautifully said. Maureen 'Dowdy' should be jealous of your ability to explain to the masses what is, and has been, going on in the US. When Bill and Hillary were of use to them, the Dimms were happy to have them. Now, they serve no purpose.
1
Once again Maureen Dowd has to fling arrows at the Clintons. She and Trump continue to bring up Hillary. Was Clinton simply having affairs to gratify his libido? Weinstein and Moore are guilty of much more. The Democratic leadership especially Schumer, are jelly fish. They threw Franken under the bus. Could the editors inform Ms Dowd to come up with new material. I hope her right wing brother is happy with the unstable commander in chief.
9
Whatever the moral crime, to Dowd it’s “always about the Clintons.” Gillibrand exploited sexual harassment and #metoo to - she thought, big mistake - position herself at Al Franken’s expense, while Dowd exploits sexual harassment and #metoo for yet another attack on Bill and Hillary Clinton.
The Clintons’ respective failings have been many times litigated in a public forum, and are now merely fodder for conspiracy loons- and the Clintons’s political enemies, among whom is Maureen Dowd.
It’s no longer about them, Maureen - it’s about you.
10
There are enough examples in history of "calculating" women, who did not need a penis to seize or maintain power. There is no reason to assume that a Washington filled to the brim with females would be any different than an episode of "The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills". Kirsten Gillibrand is the cynical creation of the Clintons and Chuck Schumer. Apparently, she now sees this as her moment, the time to strut on that national stage, and coincidentally, just in time for 2020! You can almost smell the wheels turning in her brain as she changes gears. Yes, Al Franken was roadkill.
7
Humans are very good at rationalizing the terrible things they do, and reading the tortured rationalizations of columnists trying to explain the injustice done to Al Franken has been sad. Women want to believe we are in the middle of a revolution when we are really in the middle of a hysteria where the amount of harassment is being grossly exaggerated, and people are being encouraged to tell wild tales of depravity which we are all supposed to swallow because women never lie. Women lie all the time. I don’t believe Franken’s accusers and I don’t believe Lena Dunham either.
Once again feminists have successfully hoodwinked and bullied the nation into buying into the fantasy that women are angels and men are devils.
Men will always pursue women in ways women find offensive and they will sometimes go over the line. The relationship between the sexes is not political, it is biological and cultural. For centuries women have painted their faces and dressed elaborately to attract men who are expected to aggressively pursue them. No one is talking about changing the gender roles we learn to play from birth. That would mean that women would have to take responsibility and women and men would have to change, and it is easier to play the victim and demonize men.
Simpson was right, it is wrong and unjust to wait twenty years and then pop up to destroy a man’s career. Women are getting away with it now, but it won’t last. Victorianism disguised as feminism won’t last long either.
6
The twenty years? Yes, a long time, but let's be clear, Anita Hill spoke up because she thought it objectionable that a sexual harasser would end up on the Supreme Court. I worked in engineering. Plenty of sexual harassment. I shrugged it off. If one of the bozos I worked with had a law degree as well as an engineering degree and was somehow selected as a candidate to SCOTUS, I'd be speaking up twenty years after the fact, no problem. As it happens, I prefer my elected and appointed officials to be of higher character than the idiot sitting next to me doing stress calculations.
So, get off your high horse, Mr. Greco. Sure, women lie, men lie, we all lie. So what? Does that make bad behavior okay? Here's how I see it--if women were not discriminated against, or forced to have sex, or threatened with retaliation in the work place, I'd be willing to bet we'd be okay with being chased around the desk all day long. Why? Because the playing field would be level, and maybe we'd even chase you around the desk a little. But, the playing field is not even. Women are still kept at a disadvantage. I thought it might become even at some point after I began my career over forty years ago, but it hasn't. So, now, we've got the bulldozers out and we're going to make it even once and for all. It's not going to be pretty.
1
Hillary's Faustian bargain. A good critique of the hypocritical response of Hillary on women' s rights. She tore into Bill's female accusers in an attempt to maintain power. The Republicans are responding the same way now to uphold Trump and Moore. Power over honesty and values. It's an old story. Hillary did not choose well in this high stakes crucible she found herself in at that time. I agree with you Maureen. Hillary's choice tells us something about her. And this plays into the unease the electorate had in 2016 - Can we really trust her?
4
Franken can always run again. Serve your time and possibly redeem yourself. His exit is important, for it sets up his reentry.
8
Clarence Thomas was confirmed on the votes of Democratic senators from the South who believed that they could not survive if they alienated their black constituents by voting against a black man to sit on the Supreme Court.
Al Franken has been forced to resign because today's Democratic Party wants to portray itself as the protector of women.
Identity politics constitutes the most serious threat to the government of the United States since the issue of slavery in the mid-Nineteenth Century.
11
And most of the Democrats going against Franken, including Gillibrand, backed Hillary from the getgo stopping anyone else from running and that meant squeezing out Bernie in the process, and plenty of them, including Gillibrand now expect us to line up behind them now for the next election. I don't have that short a memory.
11
Senator Gillibrand has 2 sons. One can not help but wonder what would happen if they are accused of something and they are deprived of due process. What goes around comes around.
10
All politicians play to win. Bork led to Thomas. Saving Clinton at all costs gave us the moment when the Access Hollywood recording fell flat. Harry Reid lifted the supermajority in the Senate. We would not have such a deeply divided country if only one party turns its cheek.
1
I still believe that Bill and Hillary had an open marriage and when he got caught, she had to play the injured party to maintain power. She had her share of dalliances too. That's what equality looks like in Washington.
2
yup leftover from the hippie era.
1
I'd like to see the removal from Congress of all members who've committed the same or greater mistakes/misdeeds as Franken did before they were on the public payroll. Would there be anybody male (or in some cases, perhaps, female) left?
6
at the rate things are going, all the men in congress are going tom resign anyway, and government will be left to the women.
a consummation devoutly to be wished.
3
Yes, the Democrats have been hypocritical. But Maureen makes too light of the vast differences between the prices Democrats have paid and the free passes given to Republicans. Bill Clinton was subjected to an impeachment process that featured public humiliation and denunciation of Hillary that never really ended, and Al Franken has resigned. Meanwhile, Clarence Thomas sits on the Supreme Court, Donald Trump is in the White House, and Roy Moore appears headed for the Senate.
Double standard? Yes, and in large part because our nation's pundits, Maureen Dowd included, have always held Democrats to a higher moral mark than they have Republicans.
24
And don't forget the impossible-to-embarrass Newt Gingrich who wanders the halls of the Vatican with his third wife, the one he had the affair with while tormenting Bill Clinton, who Trump had the nerve to appoint as our ambassador to the Vatican. If I'd been the political arm of Rome, I would have asked for a different representative--someone less obviously a sinner and someone not such an epitome of hypocrisy.
6
Is the franken shunning the first move of the 2020 sanders' campaign?
2
If Al Franken was a Republican, do you think he would be resigning ?
I for one don't think so. He'd be pulling a Newt Gingrich number, no doubt about it.
15
I blame the Clintons for paving the way for Trump and those of us who voted for him enabling Trump voters to justify their vote.
1
cad (1833): a man who acts with deliberate disregard for another's feelings or rights.
Al Franken knows that he is a cad, that he is not innocent.
He has announced that he will resign in the near future, but his resignation is not yet official.
If he were a fighter, he would step back up to the Senate podium and say, "After further review, I will resign the day after Donald Trump resigns."
16
Maureen there is a lot of hysteria about men out there now. Being accused does not necessarily mean you did something, Billy Bush came on TV recently and said he thought Trump had been grandstanding. Bragging to make people laugh does not translate into actually doing something either. Many of Trumps accusers were opportunist. One worked for the Clinton foundation and another ones brother said he did not know why she lied.
Real predators do not talk about what they do.
No one is guilty until proven otherwise.
Our media has gone off the rails and the country suffers because they do not pay attention to real news. I grew up with a family of boys and worked with men most of my life. There were always lechers and fools but most men are good and decent.
2
Strangely absent from all the comments about these "abominable" men, from Clarence Thomas to Donald Trump via Bill Clinton and Al Franken is any mention of George H. W. Bush who, it seems, loved to pinch women's bottoms and simultaneously make lewd - and very unfunny - jokes about them . Why does PaPa Bush get a pass from making passes ?
My point is that, whilst I strongly object to both Al Franken's and Bush's behavior, conflating their actions with those of Trump, Moore and Conyers , for example, seems to condemn the pickpocket to the same sentence as the armed robber .
As to Ms. Gillibrand's leadership, I would feel much more comfortable with it if I did not suspect that it represents the first salvo in her presidential campaign, based on her "courageous" advocacy for women, an issue which most of the pundits assert Secretary Clinton failed to advance in spite of her lifelong such advocacy .
Such, sadly, is the cesspool of current politics with which we are compelled to contend .
11
Ms. Dowd reveal an essential truth. Harassment and abuse by those in Congress is a political football. What matters most is the well-being of the party. What matters least is the well-being of the women who claim harassment and abuse.
134
And what also matters least is the well being of average citizens, their financial security and safety. We the People come in last, after a dependent congress satisfies the big donors who support our politics----in health care, taxes, govt protections, public services, education, and gun laws, etc.
The sex abuse we see is just a facet of the attitude of entitlement by the powerful, who have gotten away with it for years, and are now excused by the gullible rationalizers.
Thank you, Maureen. You said it nicely. Yes, we will miss some of those who have been felled, but there are many, many intelligent, responsible people that will be able eventually to fill those empty seats. All of the men who have been accused need help, but few will probably seek it. Their behavior cannot be accepted in any form. It is up to us to educate the public about the problem, how to go about and find help, learn to say something, etc.,etc. Hopefully we are entering into a new age of caring and enlightenment about victims and their abusers.
3
Democrats are losing the War of False Equivalency and are eating their own to show how empathetic they are.
This is NOT the way to survive, much less pursue an politico-social agenda.
102
HapinOregon - You are so right: The Dems have proposed no counter measures to the abominable Republican tax bill - measures to help address the current obscene income inequality, nor did they use their chance to hold the Rs up for highway robbery when they let the government funding bill extension pass. No dukes up for the Dems, no enthusiasm for the upcoming elections except that they are not Trump. This is just not good enough. Here's hoping for some real turnover in the ranks, and for alternate funding (such as Bernie was able to raise) so that Congress will no longer be "bought".
1
Instead of urging Sen. Al Franken to resign, it would have been better for the Senate to censure him, as it did in the case of Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin back in 1954. Censure would have drawn the "line in the sand" that Sen. Gillibrand wanted, without the loss of a valuable Democratic member of the Senate.
107
What about Conyers? You got to be fair and even to white black Jewish Christian anybody!!no one yet know how to scale sexual harassment abuse and molestation from zero to ten!
2
Here's the key difference: the hypocrisy of the Democrats is much more damaging to the country than that of the Republicans.
18
What you should have said is that hypocrisy is more consequential to Democrats than Republicans. The perv party, aka GOP is just fine with hypocrisy. How any Republican can call out abortion when lives are ruined by the like of Moore is beyond me.
26
The question may be as you remarked, "How can Republican can call out abortion when lives are ruined by the like of Moore is beyond me."
Lives being ruined by the exposure of sexual improprieties is justice for many while abortion is the actual loss of a life. Death.....
1
The question should not be: Which party is perfect? The question should be: Which party is better? But, then, I attended a college with the motto MELIORA. Still. is there any doubt as to the answer?
10
So why DID Anita Hill follow the man she spoke so angrily about as he left one position for another? If she hated him, why continue to work in his new location?
THAT is why few independents gave her any credibility.
10
A perfect illustration of blaming the victim. You also neglect to point out that there were other women who were prepared to testify to Thomas's lewd behavior, when Biden closed the hearings.
It is also the case that many blacks were conflicted by the spectacle of a black woman accusing a black male of sexual harassment. Perhaps they were they hoping that in Thomas they might get another Thurgood Marshall? At best, that was a forlorn expectation for a judge whose career is the antithesis of Marshall's. There's plenty of blame to go around for Thomas's election to the court.
4
Good grief, have you not heard or learned nothing from the onslaught of revelations by the women who have been affected by sexual harassment and abuse and the massive roadblocks and resistance by men in powerful positions? Are you not aware of what thousands of women have had to put up with in order to keep the jobs they love? In spite of the cultural atmosphere during the hearings so many years ago, Anita Hill feared Thomas would be confirmed as a Justice of the Supreme Court for which she felt he was unfit because of his pervasive attitude towards women. Talk about courage!
1
I watched those hearings. Anita Hill was very creditable and I was astounded when the Senate confirmed Thomas.
4
Is there a more sensible way that we can allow a public servant to be 'punished' for past sins but still let them serve? Otherwise we are shooting ourselves in the foot whilst promoting an unhealthy, unhelpful culture of fear and irredeemable shame.
20
We don't need to let the sexual predators 'continue to serve.. That's the point. The are as replaceable as those women whom their offensive behavior belittled.
Basically, well stated: "There is rough justice in this initial barrage of j’accuses, before people work out a hierarchy of sins and due process."
But, poorly executed approach because this 'rough justice' (hang'em all and let their god judge them) is mob rule. The Democrats' behavior is no better than Trump when it comes to ignoring rules of order when it fits their political agenda. This calculated disregard for rules (House & Senate Ethics Committee) is entirely populist, Trumpian and thoroughly undercuts our liberal democratic process or what's remaining of it.
Pelosi & Schumer are trying to appeal to the fringe of the Democratic party, those who were swayed to vote Trump in 2016. It won't work now as such populist nonsense failed in recent elections post-Trump.
One can make a circumstantial case that this mob rule by the Democrats is a smoke screen for their continuing failure to present unified coherent options to Trump & GOP bills for tax change, health care reform, budget, everything.
Pelosi & Schumer should resign.
22
One thing is certain. Pelosi knew about Conyers. That makes her as bad as Hillary. Both are enablers of terrible abusers. Pelosi should resign.
I think there's a missing piece of this puzzle about proper behavior in the workplace. The recent cases are all examples of harassment to one degree or another, and the reactions of women to them are fully justified. But at the same time, let's also remember that many successful romances have been incubated in the workplace.
What's lacking is some sense of an etiquette that might distinguish acceptable initiatives from unacceptable ones. If we take the attitude that any such initiative is unacceptable, that would be sad. I think of the poem "Maud Muller" about a never-initiated romance between a milkmaid and a country judge. Each of the parties fantasizes about the other, but thinks "(S)he would never want me". The poem ends with the words "Of all the sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest of all are 'It might have been'."
Emily Post,where are you when we need you?
8
I'd forgotten the poem; thank you for the reminder. Life's biggest regrets are often not what you did, but what you didn't do.
Romance is tough, workplace romance even tougher.
However, you don't need Emily Post to figure somethings out:e.g. if either party is already married, back off!
1
So what in general is the correct and inoffensive way to take the initiative? Even being married shouldn't be a hard and fast rule; for instance, in casual conversation someone might drop hints that their marriage is not a happy one for either party and divorce is in the air.
So now that we know how some, perhaps many men operate, will the women stand up as one and not sit down until all of the transgressors are removed from office and other positions where they use their power to abuse? if not all of us will be lost. Unless he is guilty of worse than wandering hands I don't like seeing Franken gone, but if women wdon't actually unite and call out the abusers the ax that will fall won't discriminate between the heads that roll.
These boys play rough, hold real physical governmental power and I fear they will like so many third world dictators reach a point where it will be used without shame. I don't trust these men. They lack courage.
2
Franken did not resign.
He pledged to "resign in the upcoming weeks" meaning once Moore is elected he will challenge Moore to match his resignation, if not - Franken will stay at Dems applaud.
32
Fine with me.i want Franken to show what will be tolerated by the GOP by going through the ethics hearing. Moore should be next.
13
Franken should wait to see if Moore is seated, should he win and then see if there is any investigation at all. I doubt it, and if there is, nothing will happen to him. He will still be a sitting senator. What Franken SHOULD have done is insisted that all the men whose names were on the list of having paid out OUR tax dollars to complainants be: 1) named along with their assault; 2) forced to pay back OUR tax dollars; and 3) forced to resign. Then Franken should resign.
2
I think Franken's forced resignation is a perfect example why the Democrats always lose the battle. Republicans have absolutely no shame. I hold no brief for what Senator Franken did, but, as you write, what he did is far far away from Trump and Moore. And yet, Democrats will now claim the high moral ground for his forced resignation. Republicans with laugh and sneer at that quaint notion and that the suckers once more took the bait.
60
What's the end game of what is increasingly looking like a hysteria to rid ourselves of abusive men in powerful positions? Where does this end up? Who, when a distant dawn proclaims a new day, will still be standing and untainted?
Truth be known, we are all injured somewhat by the force of sexuality in our lives. It could be the devastation of divorce, the shattered hopes for the well being and safety of children brought into the world with the best intentions but subjected to the endless battles between disappointed spouses. It could be the husband who finds himself alone and abandoned at an age when no ready recourse for companionship is available in his life. It could be the young woman who experiences aggressive behavior and has no idea how to deal with it on the job. If you read Nobel Prize playwright Eugene O'Neill, humanity is tied to the tragedies wrought by sexuality like slaves to chains.
I repeat, where is this going? Few historic figures would escape current scorn because, if the examples of LBJ and JFK are any indications, powerful men have always assumed they had special rights to pursue their desires and needs.
At some point, we are going to have to decide what kind of behavior is merely offensive, disagreeable or out of bounds and what sort should be career ending, banishment worthy. Until that time, we are in for a wild, wild ride and no one knows where it ends.
36
"one Democratic woman in Congress....believes that a lot more missile-fearing legislators will quietly slink away, opening up a lot of seats for women and minorities and a younger generation." Well, that's optimistic. It could also open up these seats to alt-right ultra-conservatives who will make Trump and Moore look like card-carrying members of NOW.
But let us not be negative. Roadkill and dismissal of due process, in the service of a larger partisan agenda -- it's so fashionable these days, I guess even the Democrats are signing on to it.
15
Dowd is right. This is an issue that transcends everyday politics. Men have had centuries of feminism now, and still view women as subhuman, as if the workplace is a private game preserve for men. I was stunned when so many women voters turned a blind eye to Clinton's predations and Hillary's shameful justification of them, saddened by how so many 21st century women are still so male-identified that they will turn their backs on each other; and now gladdened at how many women are standing up.
We are the majority. We will not wait another century to be treated as full citizens. We have the right to have dreams and ambitions that don't come at the price of molestation. Let us guarantee that this century's little girls can grow up to be treated as human beings, not objects to be accessed by entitled men at will. Unlike far too many of today's women, let's see to it that our daughters throw off the shackles of over-identification with men; don't train them to worry more about men's feelings and dreams than their own; teach them to speak up and out. For our daughters' sakes, refuse to be exploited. Expose these men. Clear a path for the next generation.
Don't feel sorry for these men. Fight that conditioning. They knew better. This isn't the dark ages. The only way this message is going to sink into men's skulls is if there are consequences. Those outraged squeals are confirmation of comprehension. It's been a long time coming.
10
We live in an Age of Patriarchy. The world would benefit greatly from an age of Equal Power Between The Sexes. Because Patriarchy has failed us all over the world, Patriarchy has failed us.
If we can't have Equality, I'll take an Age of Matriarchy. Because then we might save ourselves until we get to Equality. A slim chance, given our changing climate. I don't have much hope.
But one thing can happen immediately. Men can stop harassing women. That would be a great start. Especially former and current presidents.
6
There are a few matrilineal and matriarchal societies left in the world today. Worth examining to see if they have fewer sexual exploitation abuse and harassment compared to patriarchal societies. Even within patriarchy there seems to be a wide range, where women’s rights freedoms and status are concerned.
1
Can we please apply the retroactive zero tolerance rubric to Gillibrand ‘s actions as they relate to morals and ethics? Is vigorously supporting and defending the dwarfs of the Phillip Morris tobacco industry for many years an act of moral courage or a despicable use of professional expertise? It is reported that she was privy to the many lab experiments conducted in Europe that demonstrated the abominable results of tobacco use, but still she persisted. Indeed, does she accept donations from her tobacco buddies still?
Does anyone recall her misguided attempt to support Mattress Girl’s histrionics on the campus of Columbia University? Again, a rush to judgment with an ending reflecting a false accusation and a settlement in favor of the accused male student.
I am a woman who knows from 70 years of experience that there is quite enough legitimate suffering in this world, and each of us, male and female, is called upon to mitigate it. Sometimes we deliberately or inadvertently add to it and sometimes we simply act foolishly. But each of us must engage in self-reflection.
I feel Franken sincerely did so. Has Gillibrand engaged in the same type of soul searching? Her transgressions are much more serious.
This blatant and hypocritical positioning for a 2020 run for the presidency by Gillibrand on the back of someone such as Franken does not sit well with me. I doubt it will sit well with other voters either.
117
Anyone who does not understand that manipulation in and of the media to garner greater importance (or the perception of self-importance) in the cash game of "politics" is the primary motivation of all, ALL, those in Washington are just knee-jerking. No one has to abide being harassed. Standing up to harassment has always been risky business. Everyone touching this, perpetrators, victims (yes we are all treating them as victims) and accusers will pay a price for it. As voters, we get to decide who is motivated by goodness and who is working an angle. If you find ONE that is motivated by goodness, retain them. Otherwise just vote them all out and seek people to govern instead of politicians.
Franken has always seemed like a decent, caring person, a man of integrity. It is shameful that a group of his fellow senators formed a lynch mob to force his resignation thus avoiding any examination of what his wrongs were and what was his side of the story. His service to women and to the country earned him this right. Vigilantism is seldom justified and it definitely was not in this case. Raw political opportunism led by a crafty, scheming politician without a sliver of integrity. Such was not a surprise from Gillibrand, already with a well earned reputation as a hypocrite and sanctimonious scold. But what are we to think of her cohorts? What were Patty Murray, Maggie Hassan, Claire McCaskill, and the others thinking? For them to follow such a leader on a subject like this diminishes them and embarasses the office they hold. Gillibrand supposes that she is launching herself onto a higher career path. I sincerely hope she is mistaken.
6
After what I believe to be extensive reporting on the entire issue of sexual harassment, I hope to God that if Roy Moore is elected, Al Franken will rescind his resignation. I am a 72 y ear old woman who was sexually harassed 30 years ago and reported it. I didn't wait years and years so I could destroy a man's career. What is happening to Al Franken is just wrong. He apologized to the only person that I believe may have had it coming, the woman he did not grope on a USO tour OVER her flak jacket. Perhaps the Me Too# movement has forgotten the comedy mores in those years. I am not defending them. I am just saying that to rid the Senate of a thoughtful, hard-working, women's issues supporting man is a sacrifice that could cost us all dearly in the future.
92
It was not that long ago we had a truly honorable person in our highest office. He was a real family man, with a deep respect for his smart, confident wife and who made unequivocally clear that he wanted his daughters to have every opportunity offered to their male counterparts. And he used his political power to fight for women's rights.
Instead of just piling on the men who ever had any infraction - or at least were accused - we could given President Obama, and the progress he represented, their due, and work to elect more people with his values.
45
You know members
Of congress come from our communities. Maybe we need to pay more attention to those for whom we vote and demand respectable behavior or vote for someone else.
7
it doesn't matter where "rough justice" comes from it is still a betrayal of the rule of law and its application is a calculation (as amy schumer pointed out in her op ed at the start of all this) based on a career choice for many who let harvey be harvey, an insititional choice for the mangements like the met opea lot that supported jimmy, a choice to get even (instead of better) for some who have only their pain and rage, their patience worn out by the years of abuse and disrespect.
unless we're ok with the old HUAC guilt and destruction by whisper and innuendo, we need to get a grip and work rather toward the future than the past.
not to make excuses, but the films that shaped the boy-girl dynamics for generations are still shown and new ones, and tv, are, still trading in the same stock...examples of cultural go-along, also abound (profits from promises of a "younger, slimmer, wrinkle-free you" are soaring, especially with young women).
so what do do? we can't cut the films, replacing errol flynn is not so easy as it has been with other actors "in production"...so maybe some context adjustment (aka education)?
given the time it takes to strengthen laws and shift culture, how about starting with persistent cautions, signs in public, announcements at gatherings, meetings, classes, on trains and planes, etc., that any uninvited touch, gesture or word is a violation of policy and should be reported (staff or e-means at hand) forthwith...skip the carrot, wave the stick.
6
Although much too long delayed, I hope that the courageous and dignified Anita Hill will now finally achieve the status of believability and truth telling in the court of public opinion and, conversely, the manipulative, race-card playing Thomas will be shamed. Those long past Senate hearings were a textbook case of Congressional hypocrisy on full display in its vicious, cruel attempts to crush a relatively powerless woman, who simply attempted to do the right thing.
15
Gillibrand jettisoned the Clintons when they were no longer essential to her career. She is a shape shifting opportunist and will be lucky to be nominated for another Senate run, let alone a spot in the Presidential race. As she herself said, "Enough is enough."
32
I disagree. The Clintons are too entrenched in politics which is even remotely democrat. Rumor has it they even have moles within the meuller investigation. There is no secrecy that both Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch were Clinton operatives. There is a reason it’s called clinton machine and we are at a time and age we will do well to shed it cuz everything Clinton does not necessarily equate morality or ethics. Democrats have become too emotional about the Clintons as though their lives depended on defending this couple. This kind of blind loyalty is nothing short of hero worship and the same cultist behavior the clintonites accused Bernie supporters of. We have to shed this clinton cling, it’s like cling wrap that’s sticking to our skins. Eeks, most unsightly.
1
The Clintons are behind us and the Democratic Party can look to a future with less hypocrisy. Now it needs coherent messages that resonate with enough voters to capture the House, Senate and Presidency. That means letting the Party meander as needed in each state and hewing more to the center than the far left.
4
I can't really seem to muster the tears for Al Franken that i'm supposed to be shedding. No one is irreplacable, and who's to say that Minnesota won't replace him with a better Senator. Joe Barton seemed to have a better case to stay in office than Franken did, and he resigned with a lot less petulence and a lot more grace. And yeah, i certainly think that Trump and Moore should go, and so should Farenthold. It's not a zero sum game here, and it's a very big and deep swamp.
1
Thank you for another incisive piece on this issue.
An obsession with Hillary Clinton is one of Donald Trump's demons. The same obsession, from the opposite point of view, is a demon of too many Democrats and especially of feminists.
There is a chance now for much good to be done by Democrats and feminists in an America trashed by Donald Trump and his ilk. It won't be done by sitting Trump-like in solitary gloom, remote control in hand, watching and re-watching the final episode of "As the World Turns Around Hillary Clinton".
6
"she believes that a lot more missile-fearing legislators will quietly slink away, opening up a lot of seats for women and minorities and a younger generation"
So this is where identity politics has led to? How well did that work out in the last election? Is there any proof that it will work better in future ones?
Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump. Donald J Trump is President thanks to this insanity. It won’t open seats to women; it’ll open them to people like Donald Trump.
28
In my view, Franken is a watershed. How do officials elected by the citizens of one State have the right to force an official elected by the citizens of another State out of office because they feel uncomfortable in his presence. I have voted Democratic in every national election held over the past 45 years. I even voted for Hillary in the primaries and in the presidential election despite the misgivings I developed about her free trade views. But I will not vote for any Democratic public official who either pressured Franken to resign or who attempts in any way in the future to benefit from his resignation. Reading past comments in the NYT, its clear that more "Democratic women" oppose Franken's purge, than men do. I'm one man who is proud to openly share their outrage.
21
"Democrats in Congress want to use Trump and Moore as foils to stamp themselves as the party that sticks up for women." That's a naive assumption in the Franken road kill case. This is Washington we're talking about here.
What Senator Gillibrand and others in the Democratic party did to Al Franken - publicly call for his resignation over allegations that appear dicey at best - only makes sense from a Game of Thrones, opportunistic ascension politics point of view. No one thinking reasonably regarding Mr. Franken's alleged actions would be calling for anything more than a censure, especially before the completion of an ethics committee investigation.
The Republicans predictably sacrificed a comparative nobody to call it a wash in the kangaroo court of public opinion. Their strategy never changes much. It requires zero skill to predict.
At the end of the day, Gillibrand deftly eliminated her only serious competition for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020. Call it roadkill on the right path or whatever; that is what really happened. That's no way to be the party that protects women.
46
I do not believe that male voters will support female candidates after the current mess fades away. It WILL fade away as it always has, with fewer women, especially in the business world, being hired and/or promoted. If YOU were a male hirer, would YOU hire such a large possibility for incurring huge legal bills - females - if males are available. Why go looking for trouble, real or not? I do not claim that it is fair, but it does make sense for the bottom line: male is cheaper in the long run and they will not (mostly) accuse the boss of sexual harassment.
7
I fear that all of the back-and-forth about the sexual misconduct offenders among politicians and celebrities on the right and left will distract us from the lesson we should be learning from this. That lesson is that all of us men need to look at our own conduct, shed our perpetual adolescence, and treat women as professional peers rather than potential targets of conquest. For men watching these events on the news, it should prompt us all to stop and reflect on our own attitudes and behaviors, see how we ourselves fit into this, and become our better selves, so that our male children can grow up with a better model of behavior than the locker room culture in which we adult men journeyed through in our own collective adolescence.
5
No matter how hard we pay, play or pray there is a significant amount of the immoral in all of us. It simply seems to be an inescapable part of being human, and is something that we all have an opportunity to confront in ourselves.
Some of us regard this immoral capacity as an advantage that we can’t refuse and behave like opportunist magicians or predator bullies. Others wish to demonize these tendencies and expel them in an attempt to become purified and sanctimonious. But most of us seem to with at least a little discomfort and a good measure of hypocrisy do both.
What’s remarkable is how easily our personal narratives can be seduced into supporting an absolutist collective narrative that denies the vast gray areas of who and what we really are. We sell ourselves for chump change when we give up the struggle to discern the moral differences between Al Franken and Donald Trump.
When it comes to judging the behavior of others, those of us who can most of the time forego the temptations of behaving like con artists, bullies, or sanctimonious inquisitors are well advised to remember to let whoever has not sinned cast the first stone. We stand a better chance of surviving the idiotic noise, the chaos, and being truer to ourselves.
5
"So Al Franken, who is good on women’s rights, resigns for wet kisses and random squeezes while President Trump, who is awful on women’s rights, skips right past his braggadocio on groping."
Thank you for summarizing, as few of us can, the source of so much recent frustration.
Franken supported more than women's rights. He raised money for female candidates and worked, better than any Senator, for the core agenda of his party while many equivocated on it or even fled from it out of pure political cowardice.
I'm not understanding the anger at Senator Gillibrand. She made her feelings clear when she returned Franken's campaign funds and turned on the Clintons. She didn't craft the torches and distribute them to the mob.
The mob formed on its own. My anger - no, my red rage - is directed at them because, as you note, any notion of due process is absent here. It renders any future complaint by Democrats that our president does not respect the rule of law moot.
Moot as well is Franken's guilt or innocence under these circumstances. Besides, one does not have to be some demented Truther to question whether Franken fell to opposition dirty tricks. Republicans practice homicide; they go for the jugular. Democrats prefer either suicide or fratricide.
433
Gillibrand was lying when she said she returned Franken’s money. She re-gifted it to some other part of her office which she says was a proponent for women in the Military. Playing a lawyer’s shell game is not the same as returning the money. Perhaps Gillibrand may also someday get around to “returning “ the $5850 she took from Donald Trump.
4
Sexual abuse, harassment and misconduct know no political party. It is a social issue and that's the context within which this conduct should be discussed. So this article was a bit of a disappointment; it felt a bit glib, not deep enough for this very important matter. Move beyond the republican/democratic dichotomy - call it for what it is: bad and sometimes criminal behaviour that will not and cannot be tolerated.
200
MD does not know how to do anything but glib. She is a one string banjo incapable of thorough analysis.
2
Huh, Maureen Dowd sounding a bit glib? Whodda thunk it?
1
I have no doubt these congressmen and senators knew this kind of sexual abuse was prevalent. Powerful men with young attractive well developed female aids, what could go wrong did.
And they did not speak out then just as they are not doing now. The only time they do is when it looks like an opponent can be trapped. What Bill Clinton did in the White House was not illegal, lying about it under oath was.
But we can see just how cowardly these elected leaders of our society really are. Anita hill was not attacked for her testimony, she was attacked because she made public what those on the committee knew and did not want the public to know.
There were and still are a whole bunch of sanctimonious legislators who would be sleeping on the couch and talking to their lawyers about property settlements.
Now the gate has been opened, and women are losing their fear of being treated like Ms. Hill and others. The Weinstein flap broke the dam in Hollywood. The why and wherefore of who got what part will be subject to inquiry. The same for many legislators who work late frequently, and many wives will be suspicious. This will not lead to marital bliss.
Those men too cowardly to speak up will also be outed. you knew, you are are a moral coward. The public thinks of you as opportunists, and elf serving, and you have shown that is your nature.
29
I wondered how long it would be before Ms Dowd got itchy about the Clintons. If they didn't exist she would have to invent them.
262
Democrats won't understand their disaster until they face up to the ugly truths. Dowd is right about what she says here:
"they sound tinny hailing Hillary Clinton as a feminist icon when she participated in smear campaigns against Bill’s girlfriends and prey. Harvey Weinstein took a couple of vile pages out of the Clinton playbook, hiring private investigators to dig up dirt to discredit accusers and floating suggestions that the victims might be a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty."
Franken is part of the price of moving past what they did before. Now they are serious about it. Perhaps they could have drawn a different line concerning him if they had not already compromised themselves so badly.
51
I love it when Republicans, who backed and support and self confessed sexual assaulter, take it upon themselves to tell Democrats what they do or dol not understand. The Dowd screed, of long standing, has as much truth as one of 45's tweets and conflating the railroading of Sen Franken as the price of "moving on" is naive at best or just another stab from a member of party that can't come to grips with the fact that the initials GOP now stands for Grand Old Pederasts. Don't presume, and don't mansplain. Get your own house in order.
3
Dowd, guess you and Trump need reminding the election ended over a year ago. Clinton lost. Nobody cares about Clinton other than slacking pundits hoping Clinton still has some clickbait allure.
Clintons are dim bulbs. Bill for signing the two pieces of financial legislation that brought us the crash of 2008, for the wholesale gutting that resulted from his NAFTA, and for using the White House as his playboy mansion. Hillary for the stupid election campaigns she ran twice; including the down-right stupid mistakes during her Sec of State years that turned into endless fodder for the media.
Clintons have left port. They’re sailing off into the historical fog of has-beens and failures.
What’ll be the new power bases? What’s the path forward for organized labor? What’s the path forward for millennials? (You are aware that they are aware they’ve been deceived and cheated out of a fair start in the U.S. economy, right?)
What could the U.S. future look like? Have you visited Houston, TX? According to Houston Community College, serving all 6 million of us, 145 languages are spoken in this city. We work together and build together. It’s a breeze to pick up the ability to speak Spanish … and do you know how cool it feels to use that to engage in the life of two cultures and communities? It’s amazing and invigorating. How will women lead in this type of community?
Meantime, you offer up ... um ... tap-dancing on ghosts of the past.
101
True. So don't participate in trying to explain away how Trump won in every other way but what you just wrote here. Stop denying the reality, and that will allow better choices.
Find a non-Clinton candidate. Let go of the dream that the Big Dog can once again save the party from the meanies. Save it yourself, with a better candidate.
21
If the Clinton lost why can't Trump stop talking about her? He's the one that insists on invoking her name every time he tries to detract from his campaign's involvement with the Russians.
2
Mark Twain, when in doubt do the right thing, it will amaze your friends and stun your enemies. If Clinton, whose charged actions were far worse than Al Franken's had resigned, Al Gore would have been President and likely won the 2000 election. If Al Gore himself had followed the advice of the one man in America who needed to be listened to on voting rights, John Lewis, Gore would have demanded all the votes be counted, would have won Florida and been President. But the argument then was, you can't make it up now, the recount might take too long and America could not have been without a President elect for a period of time. Really, is there any sane person who believes that in 2017?
153
The argument you reference has never made any sense, because the constitution provides that if no person has a majority of the electors on the day specified in the constitution (early Dec.?) then the House of Representatives selects a president from the top three finishers. Each state gets one vote in the House. In fact at least one president has been selected by this method. It was really the Supreme Court in Gore v Bush which refused to let the House methodology play out. But I agree, if Gore had been president he would have beaten Bush without any theatrics..
36
This was Scalia at work; the George H.W. Bush appointee; he delivered then, and later with Citizens United wherein he was able to define corporations as "individuals" with the benefits of "free speech". The history behind that specious Decision is as tainted as was Scalia, a corporate shill. The Times later did a full count; Bush would have won. There is no reason to keep dragging this forward. And, there is no reason for Dowd to drag the Clintons into every incident, no matter how irrelevant. Franken's resignation and Clinton's impeachment threat are not the same. I can only speak for myself: I am sick to death of Monica Lewinsky, the stained dress, Karl Rove, and Maureen Dowd. Her columns are an unreadable re-hash of every anti-Clinton column she has written. Is it possible the Clinton's snubbed Dowd when they were in the WH? What did the Clintons do to Maureen to cause her to abandon all topics other than themselves? There must be a back story here; let's hear it. Otherwise, the Times and Dowd are hoping that another Clinton bashing will be click bait on a slow news day.
3
What is this with assuming Gore would have won? And have people forgotten he had his own sexual hijinks claim against him from a masseuse?
The vile playbook for dealing with accusations of sexual misconduct was not written by the Clintons any more than it was written by the Catholic Church. Its authors and developers are lost in history, and until very recently it was the standard playbook because it worked. The first chapter of the playbook covered the existence of a state of affairs in which it would never even occur to the abused to go public or try to do something, and most abusers never had to read any further because the society and culture handled the situation for them.
Fighters for ideals often have feet of clay. Lincoln freed the slaves but would have let them continue enslaved if that would have saved the Union. He had trouble conceiving that whites and blacks could live together in harmony, although after the war such situations arose throughout the South until they were destroyed, by the Klan and, if necessary, by white riots that destroyed cities where integration was working. Just as Lincoln gets credit for freeing the slaves, Hillary deserves some for her efforts for woman's rights.
140
I have no problem with MeToo if it is genuine; but I wonder people are entering into the histrionic phase yet. Regardless, the Dems' decision to commit false equivalency against one of their own is an exercise of fragility at best.
To wit, getting rid of Franken will not win them any brownie points. Otherwise, we would not have had Trump for president now. Worse, that shows how tired Dems' leadership are. Instead of Franken shaming Alabama, which is really quite a non sequitur, they lead to help Doug Jones to begin with.
To be clear, harassment is real and mustn't be tolerated. But the Dem leader are simply lousy in establishment the narrative. They might think they have show how impartial they are by booting Franken but they only encourage the Pence type to get in. Perhaps it's just me: but it is better to have an intelligent and compassionate standup comic than to brain-dead religious zealot.
231
I agree, the Dems are clueless. They are not going to take back the house or senate.
4
"It took far too long, but something finally snapped with women."
Just the opposite. As with most political change, it slowly accumulates until the weight of it breaks through the biggest challenges.
Women were able to do this now because of their slow steady progress up to now, which finally reached the critical mass to brake through this barrier.
That dam broke, and the rushing waters are sweeping away much that had been there far too long.
Women have arrived, a new milestone reached.
41
"Women have arrived, a new milestone reached." Blacks arrived after Ferguson. But they have since unarrived. Mark my words. Women will unarrive, too.
4
Women risk sliding back. They are not breaking through with witch hunts. This will end up in a backlash where many say so what!
4
I agree that the Clintons are hardly virtuous people, but spending multiple paragraphs pouncing on what was mostly just Bill's slimy consensual cheating is not equivalent, and dwelling on it was way out of line. Especially when we have Roy Moore and Donald Trump around. Whether Moore wins or loses the election, Donald will call him as soon as there's a vacancy on the Supreme Court.
There have always been more predators in the Republican Party too, such as
toilet stall stalker Larry Craig. They are similar to their Big Box church preacher constituency, except that Republicans buy silence, while the preachers just pray their sins away, while the suckers go for it.
Weinstein is another matter, a creepy bully who left stains on the movie industry for thirty years.
Plenty of us are glad to see rich and powerful men busted and then humiliated in public. Let's kick all of the gropers out, except... there might not be enough Senators left to form a quorum.
236
Juanita Broadrick was consensual? Willey? Please, sir.
1
Bill paid large sums to silence very credible RAPE allegations against him. His trick was to bite a hold onto his victim (s) upper lip, a force her into submission.
I'm sure you can find on youtube a clip of how one of his long time mistresses was showered with loud mockery and laughter by the MEDIA when coming forward early 90's.
Democrats better realized that this fake moral grandstanding is a dead end for them for a decade. Actually they should rather announce that "they will kill of the party because it's about time that the party of the KKK and Confederacy are finally put to rest." And give room to a new party.
If not they should at least try to explain what their heartfelt affection of Mitt Romney's healthcare Plan aka "Obamacare" is all about?
And if they "take it as a victory" that the GOP demonstrated how it might just be impossible to create a more rightwing healthcare plan then ACA that can come close to the record sums provided from the people to the heath insurance cartels.
1
If Democratic women are this riled up about Bill Clinton, imagine what they would do to a possible 2020 candidate Biden who chaired the hearings the skewed Anita Hill!
1
Lest we forget, the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman for those abysmal Clarence Thomas hearings was none other than Joe Biden. So, if nothing else, let's put that nonsensical chatter about him and 2020 to rest right now.
As for Sen. Gillibrand, it's never easy being the very first to stake out a highly principled position on a sensitive issue (a profile in courage, as JFK would have called it), but notice how quickly dozens of her colleagues with fewer vertebrae followed her lead. The word "lead" as in leadership, without which MeToo simply doesn't work.
87
Gillibrand was clearing the field of a well liked true progressive without ties to Wall Street. That is why she knee capped Al Franken.
18
I highly doubt that Biden would be disqualified from making a Presidential run in 2020 over a committee that he chaired almost 39 years ago.
1
Thank you. Sometimes I think I am the only American that remembers that shameful episode. I heard most of the hearings and I know Biden blocked the other women who had had similar experiences and could have corroborated Anita Hill's testimony (and let's not forget she was a Republican!!!! at the time). He may not have voted for Thomas, but he is largely responsible for his confirmation, a justice even the ABA could not support.
2
While Washington and Hollywood sort this out in their sordid ways, the rest of the workplaces are confronted with needing to develop more enlightened ways of doing business and creating a truly level playing field.
Sexual harassment is about power - and the power clearly needs to shift. Men have to be accountable and proactively appropriate in their behavior - and hold other men accountable as well. It's time we all grew up.
93
And the “growing up” means discovering the soul.
2
What bothers me looking back is how many times I got back on the Clinton train for some combination of "greater good" and "inevitability."
Now what I see was how sick so many of the passengers up in the first-class carriage were on the great Neoliberal Train. Policy concentrates wealth which confers status which makes everything okay in the world of Trickle Down Liberalism. Welcome to the fundraiser; the champagne is over there.
91
I got off at "I didn't inhale". No excuses.
Amen! ...and perhaps the clearest explanation to date of why the first women candidate for a major party was not swept into office by a surge of women voters. She has been an active enabler for decades.
48
"...the clearest explanation to date of why the first women candidate for a major party was not swept into office by a surge of women voters. She has been an active enabler for decades."
Not a clear explanation at all as to why women would vote for a man who brags about grabby them by the p _ _ _ y, who admitted to learing at under-age Miss Teen America contestants when they were in various stages of undress, who has been accused of raping a 13 year old in 1994, a suit that was filed and dropped.
Of course djt denies everything. Of course we believe him because he never lies. (sarcasm)
335
correction ~ leering, not learing.
20
Mary Ann -- That is not what happened. They did not vote for Trump. They just did not vote for Hillary. Hillary lost far more than Trump won. Voter turnout was down, and the people who put Obama over the top stayed away. It was an astonishing feat to lose to someone as bad as Trump. Deal with it. Get past denial and blame-the-voters. Democrats did this, by their own very bad choices.
27
There was one comment which stood out in the article by Atlantic Magazine columnist Tina Dupuy (and so far final accuser #8). It was a carefully crafted self reflective piece to justify to herself why she felt the need to go public. She shared one of her pet peeves: “I don’t let my husband touch me like that in public because I believe it diminishes me as a professional woman.“ That one sentence speaks volumes on her mental state, when it comes to setting personal physical boundaries and her interpretation of what defines a grope.
The press is giving accusers carte blanche in reporting what amounts to violations of their pet peeves. The late to the party me-too wannabees and Alt-right are shamelessly hijacking the safe “you have to believe the woman” window created by the courageous women who initially came forward.
177
Yes that one sentence speaks volumes, but it is not about a "pet peeve." She's right. Such behavior ought to be private. Doing it in public does demean a professional. It demeans that man too, but I suspect the woman even more so.
8
The fact that you believe it demeans the woman more is very telling. Think about it.
3
"Demeans" them? Only in the eyes of puritan hypocrites.
1
Franken's resignation is a tragedy, one we will all pay bitterly for. He was one of the most effective senators challenging Trump's regime, and we needed him in the Senate.
1261
"Trumps regime"? The Dems lost. It's called "democracy" and the winners take control of "the government" for their term. Get over it and try again. That's how the game is played long term.
How much you want to bet Roger Stone engineered it?
7
Sorry, but that sounds just like Trump supporting Roy Moore.
1
The media is not supposed to be a branch of government. Crimes should be prosecuted by courts. At a time when standards of behavior are changing, victims should make the judgment call on whether or not to prosecute. But should they instead use their anger as a media weapon, even when it diminishes their political power, as in the case of Senator Franken? Not for me to answer, but I wonder.
58
Washington needed to thin the herd and we’re probably just scratching the surface of the number of abusive lawmakers that will fall.
Now it’s time for our political leaders to work on providing better protection not only for politicians and high profile figures but more importantly for the many women subject to abuse in smaller companies without the wherewithal or ability to pursue claims against abusive employers and coworkers.
25
Is it possible that this "sexual abuse of women in the work place" is another media hype? No doubt, it existed and still does. However, does work place sexual abuse dominate the environment in every work place? I worked for a large corporation, approx. 2500 employees, East Coast. During the 22 years in corporate benefits administration, I can recall one obvious case, an older manager who patted an employee's fanny; he honestly admitted he thought she had a really nice fanny. He took early retirement; the woman he patted said he was annoying, not sexually threatening. We had a second case bogged down in an argument over whether a promotion was denied due to a complaint re sexual abuse. The promotion was denied due to incompetence; the employee was given a large severance package, which she took. This is one of those issues where facts are important. No one supports work place sexual abuse; however, none of us should support loose accusations of same. It is a serious charge worth bringing in a lawyer to interview the complainant and take a deposition. If a woman is willing to make a serious charge that she has been sexually abused, she should be protected and her charges made with an attorney present; there needs to be a legal record. Otherwise, these serious charges remain in the realm of office gossip. I hope the Times is not going to resurrect the old Confidential Magazine format.
1
Don’t you think that many instances of sexual abuse go unreported due to fear of retaliation and other reasons including perhaps a feeling that it is too late to matter.
Look at how many of the recent reports of harassment have just come to the forefront after decades of silence.
Just because there were few instances reported in your company doesn’t mean that there were many situations some of which may never surface.
4
So the Democrats are the party that sticks up for women? Where are they when we need their leadership on all that is going wrong with the country. The last time I checked, we women are tax payers too. At the same time that the Republicans were pushing through their tax bill, the only issue Gillibrand saw fit to hold forth on is that Al Franken should resign? At least Elizabeth Warren has her priorities straight. And as many others have indicated here, we don't need Trump to bring every issue back to the Clintons when columnists like Ms. Dowd can do the same.
567
I am beginning to think Gillibrand is just another opportunist with her sights on 2020. I have read before of her ambitious. Torpedoing Franken who many had begun to have serious thoughts about for 2020 was pretty convenient.
I am with the many many very feminist women who think this ganging up on Franken was a HUGE mistake.
And this is exactly why I no longer donate to Emily's List. Not one penny of mine is going to be supporting Gillibrand after this ugliness.
As for Schumer, we in PA have not forgotten what he did to Joe Sestak and we have not forgotten his well earned title of Mr. Carried Interest. What he says means nothing.
And why haven't the Dems sent out a mailing to every single senior about how this new tax bill requires huge cuts to Medicare and enables cutting Medicaid (which pays for most of long term care) and Social Security. Al Gore wanted us to put SS in a lock box, but lying Ralph Nader needed to puff up his ego so we have Bush II and the Supreme Court we have now, thanks to him, instead of SS in a lock box.
12
watch kirsten, she's a dino, a former conservative blue dog in upstate NY.
3
The Democrats can only pay lip service to the tax breaks because their billionaire buddies want the tax breaks, too.
2
“Republicans play to win, and they play rough.”
You’re 100% right and it’s about time for Democrats to figure this out as Donald Trump moves the country in a more authoritarian direction.
What will it take before Democrats can effectively articulate that Trump and Trumpism are an existential threat to our country? The entire spotlight on sexual harassment of women reveals that on the GOP side, men and women tend to think alike in dismissing and forgiving transgression by the likes of Trump, Moore and Clarence Thomas among others.
While Democrats proclaim that the resignation of Al Franken will be good for 2018 prospects because it seems to confront the issue of sexual harassment, the reality is that by this time next year will their message on sexual harassment induce enough voters to flip the key districts to gain a majority?
159
The loss of Senator Franken is a real loss for the Democratic Party. I hope that he uses his time off to find out how much support he still has in his home State. Who will replace him? As far as the tobacco rep, Gillibrand, she is not in same intellectual league as Franken; if she thinks this might be a launching pad for a Presidential run, she doesn't have the street creds, or the smarts to be President. We already have one unqualified man in the WH; we don't need an unqualified woman to follow. The current churn will bring up a lot of fish, not all of which are worth catching.
6
As a group of Democrats who are in our 60s, we agreed yesterday that the party has to toughen up if we're going to make any headway in 2018. We have to fight to win like the Republicans and stop wringing our hands about someone taking our offhand remarks personally. In 2020 we will need a very thick-skinned, charismatic, brilliant, smart-as-a-whip politician to run for President. Voters have to fall in love with the candidate. We loved Obama in 2008 and 2012 and he's still very much in our minds and hearts. Hillary is smart and thick skinned but who would have fallen in love with her? It was a mistake to run her only because she had been waiting.
7
That is why the recent words of EJ Dionne should be engraved on every Democrat's wall:
"Their progressive opponents, in turn, should never feel constrained in the future to limit their own ambitions out of deference to empty slogans about the superiority of bipartisanship."
4
" ROUGH JUSTICE "
Rough yes justice no . Accusations are charges not proof . It does not matter if you use the civil stander [ preponderance of the evidence ] or th criminal standard [ beyond a reasonable doubt ] our American system of justice requires a hearing in compliance with due process.
Al Franken asked for a hearing before the Senate Ethics Committee and his own party said no. He was told just leave. This was a victory for what principle.
492
Hope this is not too technical for you. Our "American System of Justice" applies to criminal matters (where crimes have likely been committed) and civil matters (money damages.) But there is no LEGAL requirement for "due process' here. Some may think there is a moral requirement, but obviously some others differ.
1
Phil,
If the " accusations " are true they would constitute assault, sexual assault [ crimes ] or if false constitute libel ,slander or other civil wrongs.In either case the accused is entitled to a trial or hearing where he/she can challenge the accuser and the proofs.This is our " American System of Justice " which was created to protect the falsely accused as well as prosecute the guilty. I learned this in my 8th grade civics class. I hope it is not to technical for you.
1
The Democratic base is apparently furious at the Franken roadkill. Phones must be ringing off the hook in Democratic offices on Capitol Hill. Maureen saw fit to mention it in passing. It surely deserved more than that.
Meanwhile, The Times reported, today, the pedophile accusations against Roy Moore are actually helping him in his race with the Democrat, Doug Jones. http://tinyurl.com/yd77adg5
These are two different kinds of backlash, but they were both utterly predictable. And their effect on 2018 are predictable, too. These are negatives the Democrats simply don’t need.
A reader posted in The Times, today, her hope that a woman will once again be the Democratic candidate for President in 2020.
If the Democrats don’t take back the House in 2018, I have little faith their will be a free and fair election in 2020.
Winning the House, and possibly the Senate, need to be our all-consuming priorities for the coming year. If we don’t focus like a laser on these goals, if we let any other issues, no matter how important, cloud our thinking, drain our energies, and hobble our ability to plan and act, we shall surely lose, and it will be game over for democracy. The monsters will rule, and they will rule absolutely.
Anyone who thinks that will be good for women, please raise your hands.
464
So....Vote Ivanka!? Back Coulter!? Or,do you (of course) mean liberal women? Of course. You'd vote for John Edwards over either of those 2. #libsarefunny
To Ron Cohen.
Well said and on the mark.
3
Ron,
You could have just said it’s all about winning so those ends justify any means!
The indelible images that remain for me of those 1991 hearings are 1) Clarence Thomas accusing his attackers as having formed a lynch mob to hang a black man, 2) Anita Hill, a black woman, facing down a Senate Judiciary Committee consisting entirely of old white men (and nobody had the grace to smile), and 3) that immortal SNL skit as send-up to the committee hearings (http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/cold-opening/n10108?snl=1 – check out a young Al Franken as a priceless Sen. Paul Simon. EVERYTHING that goes around, sooner or later, comes around.)
“Roadkill” isn’t the appropriate term for what’s happening: one is forced to consider Wile E. Coyote and what Trump wears on his head when offered that word. The better term is “collateral damage”.
We should be honest enough to despise the injustice of collateral damage, even when we acknowledge that women have every right to play a little catch-up with a flame-thrower. There are plenty of true predators out there who trade, or seek to trade, the benefits of power for sexual favors – or who simply assault in egregious manners without so much as a return back-scratch.
Al Franken and some others who haven’t done or are even accused of having done what Weinstein and Moore are accused of having done … are collateral damage. But these are real lives and careers that some minimize in the desire to impose a zero-tolerance policy. And it’s wrong that they be destroyed for what they did, or for what some claim they did.
378
Thanks for link---what a time capsule that skit is.
Agree 100% with your post. Lumping all together is wrong and Gillibrand et al to try to claim high ground when other side tunnels lower is not productive. Virtue signaling run amok won't help win elections.
Things hot now but we have to have discernment and value ethics investigations. The just -a-jerks should not be resigning while predators get elected.
5
Julie:
Kirsten Gillibrand has carved out sexual violence against women as her particular someday-presidential-candidate theme, starting with violence in the military years ago. It's certainly not an unworthy theme to adopt, but she needs to expand a bit -- she may be over-estimating the number of women who actually vote.
2
As far as SNL, maybe you didn't see the recent skit where Larry David was fantasizing about how he would hit on a woman in a concentration camp.
Enough of SNL.
This column is too smug. Maureen Dowd, you seem to be having a wake-up moment that's just a little too late, while managing also to miss your mark and irritate your audience.
The best point you make is the one about Republicans who "play to win, and they play rough."
But as with many of your columns, I have a hard time understanding what your real point of view is, other than to skew, skew, and skew again, largely against both Clintons.
I think it would have been nice had you perhaps opened up about your own experience, that surely accompanied a large part of your writing career, that has spanned multiple decades.
But then, it's always easier to critique the stands taken (or not taken) by others rather than let down your guard. But I suspect that if you would share your feelings, many of us would be less critical.
I know how I feel on all these issues, and have said so. But I'm not sure whether your toying with us, or just trying to be clever.
I'd also like to hear your predictions as to whether this is a seminal moment or not. Because, I'm not convinced that other than the Time Magazine cover, and some immediate forced resignations, that women have really changed things.
I'm waiting for a backlash, maybe because I've lived too long and know how people like to grumble when humbled, and that the power they exert in the workplace is likely to be undone as quickly as some hope.
What do you really think, Maureen?
610
We'll never know what she really thinks any more than we know what the miscreant-in-chief thinks.
4
I get the impression that Dowd crams Hillary into her columns for the same reason that Trump compulsively tweets: it's provocative and click-intensive. The more outrage engendered, the more successful the op-ed.
Amy Chozick is the same reporter who wrote that notorious front-page smear job faulting Hillary for Anthony Wiener's bad behavior. It was one of those many things that "cast a shadow" over the last crucial days of her campaign.
And Kirsten Gillibrand - this former conservative Blue Dog Dem once championed a wall against immigrants and unrestricted gun rights before she became an opportunistic overnight progressive who's taken more Wall Street money than any other current senator. Heckuva job, Kirsten, for instigating a liberal backlash against the #MeToo movement. You tried to portray Al Franken as the mean hog-tied boss from "9 to 5" and yourself as a Jane Fonda working gal heroine. But you're coming across more like a faux-feminist Roger Chillingworth who plastered a big scarlet "P" for predator on Al's scapegoated chest
The other Al (Simpson) is the one who should have been booted out of town decades ago. Instead, he was awarded a leadership position on the notorious Cat Food Commission during the previous administration. He called Social Security "a milk cow with 310 tits" and then ridiculed the older women who complained about his language. And he kept his job.
So much injustice and pain in this world, and all Dowd can do is add to the divisiveness.
1167
Don't forget Kirsten Gillibrand's work as a lawyer working on behalf of the tobacco industry. She doesn't like to talk about it, which is understandable. As the Times reported in March 2009, "Ms. Gillibrand represented [the law firm] Davis Polk on a high-level Philip Morris committee whose work included shielding certain documents from disclosure, according to several lawyers and industry observers. Serving on the panel placed her alongside some of the country’s top tobacco industry lawyers."
Guns and tobacco: two of the three legs holding up the sturdiest lobbying stool in DC. And true "progressive" that she is, Ms. Gillibrand was right there with them. Enough is enough, indeed.
449
Karen, the criminal perversion of Anthony Wiener did damage Hillary. It was too close to the election, and too close to her, and reminded too many of Bill, and it was not dealt with effectively (if it could have been is another issue). This was not his first fall, he was married to the ubiquitous woman at her elbow, and he did turn up with some of her missing e-mails on his lap top full of smut, all just days before the election. It was not Amy Chozick who made all that damaging.
23
Karen Garcia: Thanks for your excellent commentary: Everything I was thinking, but better stated and with more facts than I could have mustered.
One minor disagreement: I'm inclined to forgive Sen. Simpson his "milk cow" comment. Almost half a century ago I lived in farming country for a couple of years, and I heard older guys talk about cows using that term, without reference to human sexuality at all. No smirk, no sneer, etc. This seems unnatural to us now, and maybe Simpson should have been more aware in light of the setting and context, but I never thought his comment was meant the way it appears to us.
6
Maureen Dowd glides over Clarence Thomas, Donald Trump, and Roy Moore and devotes half her column to the (in many cases unproven) transgressions of Bill and Hillary. This must be her #TheClintonsToo moment.
Then again, it always is.
1199
You've got to understand, if Maureen is still around 50 years around, she'll still be writing about the Clintons. She's kind of like the folks at Fox News who think Hillary is president.
8
Maureen is still waiting for trump to show up at that 4 star restaurant in Paris so that she does not have to dine alone.
6
You want some proven fact about Bill and HIll?
Clinton Foundation has never been legally registered as a tax exempt charity OR filed required tax returns forms to IRS. EVER!!
10 billion dollars collected by Clintons for earthquake in Haiti went poof? where?
Clintons only accomplishment in Haiti was to rescue LARA SILSBY who was arrested attempting to steal - or KIDNAP if you wil - a large number of children that was not orphants or in need of any emergency efforts.
Clinton personally took action and got her released and returned to the US.
2 people who have accused CF of being involved in human trafficking in Haiti went to commit suicide. One days before he was to testify in US after travelling from Haiti.
MY question: WHAT DOES THESE FACT ACTUALLY MEAN?
Has never been answered
But let's all let the past be the past, ey?
Firstly, Mo, as this is your first piece since before T'giving, and the piece from your bro Kevin exulting that N. Korea could only 'hit blue states' so Kevin was fine with the way His Unhinged Unfitness was handling N. Korea, please do enlighten us as to how Kevin views things now, since N. Korea's post-T'giving missile test indicates Kevin is within range ?
Do we know if N. Korea's little despot read Kevin's piece in The Times, and was retorting ?
Secondly, regarding today's piece on Hillary, it seems a tad facile for you to be saying:
"Hillary campaigning as a feminist while being a key cog in Weinstein’s complicity machine"
based on Lena Dunham having told a Clinton aide something, since you don't report that the info was given to Hillary.
A few more facts are needed before we're willing to believe your hyperbolic use of complicity, never mind that we do agree some of Bill's accusers were likely smeared who shouldn't have been.
216
If you scratch a dog's tummy his rear leg will move. If you can see, hear, smell or think of the Clintons, Dowd's pen will instinctively scratch at them till they bleed. Not to get Pavlovian, but I suspect she salivates while doing so.
Someone I once worked for had a cat that would rub against you and purr till you started to pet it, and then a moment later would turn and bite your hand and not let go. I can only imagine how HRC feels every time Mo rubs and purrs.
9
Remember a Podesta aide disregarded the FBI's warning that they were a hacking target and the outcome of that.
And some of Bill Clinton's accusers lost in court or stated under oath that what they had accused Bill of was a lie.
5
A perfect example of avoiding the point of the article--the hypocrisy on the Left with respect to standing up for women--by talking about the writer.
1
I thought, for once, this might be a Dowd column I could share with friends. Alas, it turned into yet ANOTHER diatribe against Hillary Clinton.
Has it yet occurred to you, Maureen, that Hillary Clinton herself is one of the greatest victims in this whole chorus of misogyny? She subordinated her own talents and ambition and intellectual capabilities to her male partner's - something a great many women have done over history - and has been paying the price for it ever since.
This has far too often been the fate of superb women. Even Marie Curie was little recognized in her own time; her husband Pierre was assumed to be the more brilliant.
What might have been, if Bill had decided to use HIS capabilities to elect Hillary, rather than vice-versa... but those are not the times in which we live. We live in times where Maureen Dowd feels free to dump on THIS particular woman, whatever negative attributes she chooses.
And Trump skates free. "Boys will be boys!"
856
You dare mention the great Marie Sklodowska Curie with the sleazy Hillary Clinton? Shame, shame, shame.
7
Hillary a victim. ????
She was and is an enabler !
7
It is possible that Bill did not want his wife to be POTUS and perhaps purposely sabotaged her chances with the tarmac meeting with Lynch. He doesn't need to be back in DC as the First Gentleman. He's doing fine on his own and perhaps prefers less scrutiny. Hillary might be the Annie Oakley of DC. Poor Bill, "Anything you can do, I can do better" might have just finally irked him into action- or as you say- non action just to shut her up.
3