Chocolate Chiq.com
EPIC FAIL: MAUREEN DOWD (NYT) GOES IN ON DESIREE ROGERS AND TIGER WOODS
![]() |
I guess Maureen Dowd's editor didn't have time to review her latest column, The Lady and the Tiger. It was a nonsensical, catty, AND petty attempt to slam Desiree Rogers and Tiger Woods. The phrase to best describe the piece is simply "WTF?" I've read her column from time to time, mainly during the 2008 campaign season. While not especially deep and moving, she occasionally was entertaining. However, this week she definitely scraped the bottom of the barrel.
She accuses both Tiger and Desiree Rogers of being "perfectionist high-achievers brought low" who "mistakenly think the rules need not apply to them" and that they "broke the first rule of scandal: Don’t stonewall. Admit your mistake before others piece together the embarrassing facts." A bit dramatic, don't you think? Maureen did you forget you had a deadline and threw this together in a matter of minutes or were you really tired and wrote this with one eye closed and the other drifting towards REM?
Errahh, Tiger is an ATHELETE who cheated. Not a priest nor a Congressman, but a young, attractive, world-adored, MALE player of sport. Surprising? Kinda. Earth-shattering? No. Of course, he was wrong because he was married. However, the amount of disgust spewed in that article is over the top, calling Tiger a "golf diva" with a "puffed up ego" with his "string of buffed and puffed babes". Isn't that a bit much?
As far as the unforgivable sin that he committed by refusing to talk...he supplied a statement within A FEW DAYS. Actually, previous to statement, it had only been a week or so since the stories about his infidelity began to leak, so it's not as if he took a whole tour season to come clean. With all the hoopla and intense media focus, it is not surprising that the Woods would need more than an hour or two to decide how they would move forward.
And while there is no doubt that Desiree Rogers shares some responsibility for Crashergate, Dowd seems to be downright appalled that Ms. Rogers didn't conduct an apology tour, and that she is "sashaying around and posing in magazines as though she were the first lady." Errahh, she is the fashionable, popular SOCIAL SECRETARY for the fashionable, popular Obamas. Remember the election...it ushered the new Camelot and a snazzy, jazzy new Washington. Ms. Rogers is the epitome of the new vibe.
There has certainly been some discussion about whether Desiree should have appeared before Congress, however, there is little doubt that she was advised on which actions to take by her close, long time friends, THE PRESIDENT AND THE FIRST LADY. I really can't understand why Dowd, while complaining about the use of executive privilege by the White House, is trying to rip Desiree a new one and lay the bulk of the responsibility at her feet. As if Ms. Rogers would ignore the wishes of the First Couple and do her own thing.
I do recall hearing some complaints about the childish nature of Ms. Dowd's writing style, however, I am still shocked about nature of the personal attacks. Ms. Dowd, what did they ever do to you?!?! "It was the assertion of personal privilege by Tiger and Desiree that was so off-putting." Really? In what way compared to other politicians, celebrities, and numerous privileged persons who have been involved in scandals?
The New York Times obviously has some job openings and is in need of columnists. Maureen, before you write your next vicious drivel interesting commentary, could you put in a word for me. Thanks. XOXOXO


Reader Comments (4)
Maureen Dowd is an extremely gifted writer. She is always direct and to the point. You may not agree with her statements, but if you spend some time and analyze them, you will find that they are all directly on the mark. And I am sure that is why you are writing your article. Her words have hit you hard. She is the Mark Twain of our time!
Joseph,
The problem with this article is that there wasn't much there to analyze. She uses a lot of descriptive words to state the obvious--no genius there. What is interesting and the reason why I wrote the article is because Maureen was VERY petty, tried to make a connection where there wasn't one, and used personal attacks which were completely unprofessional. But then again, maybe I don't read her column enough to realize that is the norm for her.
Maureen Dowd has her moments. But this piece, to me, starts with a clever but tenuous premise and then instead of substantiating just buries it under a blizzard of snarky barbs and cutesy turns of phrase. "Puffed and buffed" is a pretty apt description of her writing style here, actually..
To me it reads like an essay from someone who values cleverness over insight. Mark Twain always kept those two in the right order.
Jay,
I think she sat down and said: I need to write something snarky and cute...well Tiger and Desiree are big news...how can I connect them...and when I can't make a cohesive argument, I'll just mask it by adding some vicious jabs...I don't like Desiree-she thinks she's cute...I can't believe Tiger had the nerve to cheat on her...popular, elite, privileged...yeah, I can make this work!
At least that is how it came across to me.