From the New York Times, Maureen Dowd writes An Open Letter to email@example.com
Because you assume that if it’s good for the Clintons, it’s good for the world, you’re always tangling up government policy with your own needs, desires, deceptions, marital bargains and gremlins.
Instead of raising us up by behaving like exemplary, sterling people, you bring us down to your own level, a place of blurred lines and fungible ethics and sleazy associates. Your family’s foundation gobbles tens of millions from Saudi Arabia and other repressive regimes, whose unspoken message is: “We’re going to give you money to go improve the world. Now leave us alone to go persecute women.”
That’s an uncomfortable echo of a Clintonian tradeoff, which goes: “We’re going to give you the first woman president who will improve the country. Now leave us alone to break any rules we please.”
This is not the first time Ms. Dowd has expressed her displeasure at the Clinton’s ethical vacuum. Is it possible for the Democratic heir apparent to go forward without the endorsement of the sacred NYT? Is it possible that Ms. Dowd and other Democrats who are not blind sycophants would still vote for Ms. Clinton over any Republican?