Maureen Dowd, "Reigning Cats and Dogs": Or Hailing Fire and Brimstone?

Tweet

Telling us in her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Reigning Cats and Dogs" that "AFTER running as a man last time around, Hillary Clinton is now running as a woman," Maureen Dowd proceeds to quote Hillary as saying:

"I just think women in general are better listeners, are more collegial, more open to new ideas and how to make things work in a way that looks for win-win outcomes."

Better listeners and more collegial? I wonder if Hillary ever took the time to listen to and befriend Juanita Broaddrick, who tweeted on January 6, 2016:

"I was 35 years old when Bill Clinton, Ark. Attorney General raped me and Hillary tried to silence me. I am now 73....it never goes away."

Novel ideas? Yup, that homebrew server, operating out of a bathroom closet while Hillary was secretary of state, was certainly a doozy. It was so newfangled that the FBI recently expanded its criminal examination of the use of the server to a possible nexus between Clinton Foundation activities and State Department work.

Win-win outcomes? I suppose that's what was being offered to parties donating millions to the Clinton Foundation.

However, after deciding that Hillary is now running as a woman, Dowd goes on to say:

"It may be more relevant to ask if someone is a cat or a dog."

I know very little about cats, but regarding dogs, Groucho Marx once declared:

"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read."

Groucho could never have imagined the pitch-black inner workings of Hillary, who, neither cat nor dog (let's not insult those cuddly animals), is her own best friend.

A possible presidential contest between Hillary and Donald? Surely we've arrived in hell.

David Brooks, "Startling Adult Friendships": Do You Want to Go to Friendship Camp?

"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read."

- Groucho Marx

Care to spend next summer in a David Brooks friendship camp? I kid you not!

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Startling Adult Friendships," subtitled "There Are Social and Political Benefits to Having Friends," David Brooks contemplates "what I would do if I had $500 million to give away." Observing that friendships give rise to better judgment, better versions of ourselves and better behavior, Brooks "envision[s] a string of adult camps or retreat centers (my oldest friendships were formed at summer camp, so I think in those terms)." He concludes by explaining:

"The goal of these intensity retreats would be to spark bonds between disparate individuals who, in the outside world, would be completely unlikely to know each other. The benefits of that social bridging, while unplannable, would ripple out in ways long and far-reaching."

Great idea! Let's send President Obama to a friendship summer camp together with a member of the Tea Party and a knife-wielding ISIS killer. I wonder who would walk away sane? More to the point, who would walk away with his head?

Thanks, but I think I'll just read a book with (not inside) Arnold.