I'm not sure what the derivation is, but I think I like "ip-ed" as a neologism for Dowd columns.

not sure if this is a recent change - but here's the text as it reads on the website now:

...that he’d make the White House the Black House.

Actually, the elegant and disciplined Obama, who is not descended from the central African-American experience but who has nonetheless embraced it and been embraced by it, has the chance to make the White House pristine again.

the word "opposite" is not found there... behold ezra's power to change the woring in the NY Times

Well, as any good Cultural Studies grad student can tell you, part of the problem is that "black" is so overdetermined that it's simply impossible to use the term innocently.

Hell, I've heard Obama himself talk about (paraphrasing) "coming out of the darkness" of the last eight years. Does that mean he's a self-loathing black man? Pretty sure it doesn't.

Everyone predicted this.
There can be no criticism of Obama because anything said will be tortured until it has a racial component.

It's an effective way to suppress criticism of this new president. Thank GOD I am self employed and enjoy the freedom to tell the PC crowd to shove it up their pee-hole.

There are columnists I do and don't read, but Maureen Dowd is really the only one I despise as an ongoing slander of whatever profession it is that she is in.

Dowd's column is far from inoffensive--and no, I'm not talking about this silly "Black House" stuff.

She equates Bill Clinton's receiving of a blow job with George Bush's trashing of the Constitution--as if both presidents "trashed" the office equally. There's really no comparing the two. One engaged in a normal and very common human activity (yeah, he cheated on his wife, bfd), and the other is arguably a war criminal.

Everyone predicted this.
There can be no criticism of Obama because anything said will be tortured until it has a racial component.
...
Posted by: El Viajero

As always, what a surprise, this is stupid. The editorial is praising Obama, and neither Ezra nor anyone else here said otherwise. El Viajero/Fred Jones/Robert Zimmerman/whatever, I don't think most regulars could never take you seriously, but you'd have better luck with newcomers and visitors if you demonstrate awareness of what the post and comments actually say.

Different bloggers seem to have different Dowd quotes from today to fixate on. Atrios mentioned the lap metaphor which really did seem somewhat kinky. You've focused on the racial implications.

I was stopped by -

"I grew up here, and I love all the monuments filled with the capital’s ghosts. I hate the thought that terrorists might target them again."

That seems like a line straight from the Bush-Cheney "Democrats are soft on terrorism!" meme. Apparently Dowd never considered the possibility that there might be a terrorist strike while Bush was in the White House - even though there was the biggest one ever while, as Bush likes to put it, on his watch.

And as Atrios often brings up when the theme of 'no terror strikes since 9/11' is pushed, there was the anthrax reign of terror. There were others too. A plane flown into a building in Florida, I think it was. Someone trying to bring a backpack with explosives into a major college football game. Also, there was the Virginia sniper (a pair of perps) that terrorized the area for a few weeks. That hidden sniper assault never seems to be mentioned. Maybe because there was no link found to Bin Laden. But why should that be some basis of distinction? Bush's White House has vegans investigated on the basis of terror but a couple of murderers using rifles to randomly kill people in a horrific terror scenario are not worth a second thought.

Politicalfootball, I'm sure the derivation of "ip-ed" is that the "i" key is next to the "o" key - and this is even more of a problem if Ezra was posting from a touch screen, such as his iphone - certainly for me with my touchscreen, this makes i/o transpositions common.

ip-ed: short for insipid editorial?

I honestly don't know why anyone reads MD. She pastes together wisecracks and gossip as if they were a substitute for analytical insight.

I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but:

El Viajero, in the past you went on record saying that it is unpatriotic to criticize the president.

So go ahead and get all your criticisms of Obama out before January 20... Because after that... You wouldn't want to be unpatriotic, would you?