The Old Red Lady from the Old Gray Lady Chortles over the Political Battles between Hillary and Barack

Far from endorsing Barack Obama, Maureen Dowd, the Old Red Lady of the Old Gray Lady, aka the New York Times or, politically, the Walter Duranty Papers, puts out some fluff piece about some isolated spats in this war for delegates. In one of her perpetual Sunday articles, the dowdy Dowd seemingly portrays this titanic struggle as some parlor game set in the jungle with animals and tattoos. We can quote from her op-ed article Voting for a Smile^[1], which has nothing to do with smiles, and learn Hillary’s Iowa forces used bribery and threats to ‘influence’ voters in some anti-Barack manner. This is all so light and sweet, but falls well short of news. A little spat among liberals is not news.

Generally, we rely on the Times to present us with schooling on modern propaganda techniques, but in this instance we are introduced to some exotic, tangled sentences that have embedded near-racist mixed metaphors. The propaganda lesson is off for today, but we might learn much by reading this [underlines are mine for emphasis]:

“But that’s the way the tough cookie crumbled Thursday night. The Obama revolution arrived not on little cat feet in the Iowa snow but like a balmy promise, an effortlessly leaping lion hungry for something different, propelled by a visceral desire among Americans to feel American again.”[2]

Wow! Could we beg a translation for this?

Apparently, she does is not eligible for  the essential resources of a competent desk editor while on foreign assignment (anywhere beyond the Hudson River) and we are amused that snarled scripts like this surprisingly slither through the Times. There are no apparent censor marks here either given the cavalier theme of the article and the judicious use of racially sensitive words and allusions. This piece is (probably) harmless so who cares? Or is it? Upon a second reading, as difficult a task as that always is in the NYT,  and after slogging through the usual sausage-machine generated op-ed articles in the Times, we have to admit we missed some jewels.  The underlying tones inherent in this curious literary construction reference the jungle, hungry lions and meat-eating predators coupled with strange notions of some primordial military contest that, if written by Rush Limbaugh, would rate hundreds of pages of angry screeds by the stooges at mediamatters.org, a Hillary creation, gasps and howls from  numerous TV anchors, and stern condemnation speeches from Senators Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer[3].

We could pass this one off into the circular file or click the recycle bin icon until we read this [underlines are again mine]:

“Often unable to surf the electricity he sparked over the last year, Obama has now put on his laurel wreath and dropped his languid pose, tapping directly into what he calls the “fire burning” across the country — the dream of a cool, smart, elegant, reasonable, literary, witty, decent “West Wing” sort of president who won’t bankrupt us[4] or endanger us or co-opt our rights or put a black hood on the Constitution.”[5]

Black hoods, used for falconing and executions, are to be held politically separate from white hoods (and cross burnings) we might assume after reading this. Here we can envision a victorious Julius Caesar with wreath and toga, grand parades through downtown Rome showing Pompey’s loot, witch burnings in France or Salem, Mass, JFK tossing oranges to the press, and some authentic acts of honesty. I wonder what she means here. Is this a smoke screen or does she faintly skirt a direct endorsement of the Senator form Illinois? A potential charge of negative evidence prevents us from wondering if the first drafts of this piece incorporated the notion of the Magic Negro[6] that was eviscerated by a censor. But, Rush patented that one.

Others seem to be working in this theme as indicated in a recent article by Dana Milbank[7] abstracted from a current book: Homo Politicus: The Strange and Scary Tribes That Run Our Government [again, my emphasis]:

“In the 2008 race, Barack Obama is the shaman. He gained his magical gifts in 2004, when he transformed himself from an unknown Illinois state senator to a phenom who won a U.S. Senate seat in a landslide. It didn't hurt that his first opponent dropped out because of a sex scandal and his second opponent didn't live in the state.”

The Old Red Lady  openly rebukes Hillary for shoplifting Obama’s word ‘change’ and substituting her own credentials as one who is experienced and can stand up to the Republican attack  machine. And we thought Hillary greatly benefited from being a everlasting victim of the VRWC![8] Dowd mentions Hillary’s attempt to “… purloin more of the Obama message.” Dowd corrects this victimization notion with this historical nastygram aimed at Hillary.”

“What she doesn’t mention is that she knows how to fight off the Republican attack machine because she and her husband were so adept at revving it up.”

Ouch!

The article ends with some vague reference to some Robert Mitchum movie with letters of four words tattooed on his knuckles, some complicated knuckle wrestling and a marginal outcome. Is this a cipher?

The Old Red Lady appears to be either signaling Hillary to switch political gears and ape[9] Obama in personality, message and dress or to suggest that she is going to fail in New Hampshire and ought to just plagiarize his every communication word-for-word. She could try out a few authentic smiles and dump the plastic face image. Hillary’s ‘my experience’ rants are not effective, as Iowa proved. The political choice was clear in the Iowa contest with respect to the combatant’s time in office and such. Any search for truthfulness in the Clinton camp is fruitless so Hillary must transform quickly. She might  read her own polls. Hillary is known as the Avenger in Milbank’s new book. Bush1 and Bush2 are the heretics who attacked her friends, hubby,  and Al Gore and Bill Clinton’s slimed  images need to be avenged, but, strangely, the Bush Dynasty is over and done with. W cannot run. Obama is hardly a reasonable target for revenge. She can cite no positive experiences from trying to avenge Bill to date. Who is she running against? Probably herself.

We must be suspicious here as the NYT would never endorse any candidate that strayed far from the central tenets of Communism unless a disaster loomed large on the horizon. Obama has no known links with Communists. Perhaps, Senator Barack Obama is such a political behemoth. Can youth and truth derail an old, wrinkled Marxist political machine? Some of us think so.

In order to help Hillary navigate this tepid swamp, the New York Times must wax frenetic, take some political risks and grope for short term fixes to assist their Commissar as was predicted by this writer.[10] Stay tuned.

Things are just becoming interesting.

rycK comments: ryckki@gmail.com