Libby Copeland is the person that is dumb but smart. She is dumbfounded to learn that Monica Lewinsky has received a master’s degree in Social Psychology from the London School of Economics. Lewinsky’s thesis was “In Search of the Impartial Juror: An Exploration of the Third Person Effect and Pre-Trial Publicity.”
There are moments that make you question your fundamental assumptions about the world. One of them took place a few days ago, when news emerged that Monica Lewinsky had just graduated from the London School of Economics.
She did not!!
Lewinsky, 33, is known more for her audacious coquetry than for her intellectual heft, and the notion of her earning a master of science degree in social psychology at the prestigious London university is jarring, akin to finding a rip in the time-space continuum, or discovering that Kim Jong Il is a natural blond.
What a crock of bullshit!! Did Ms. Copeland watch Lewinsky’s deposition before the House Manager’s torquemadic inquisition? Doesn’t she remember how Ms. Lewinsky ran loops around the slow-witted Rep. Bryant? If anyone came away from l’affair Lewinsky thinking Monica was dumb, then they are themselves dumb.
This is just one more example of how women are treated with a double standard. For Ms. Copeland it is simply unthinkable that a woman could be simultaneously smart and sexually attracted to the most powerful man in the world. I’m beginning to wonder whether it is possible to be simultaneously smart and write for the Washington Post.
is a shrew! The only difference between her and Monica is that one possesses poise and true self esteem (and that one isn’t Libby) while the other does not. Monica blew the leader of the free world once and Libby blew ummmm er who knows and who cares because she chose to blow people who weren’t very publicly significant. Libby, what an old trout you are and I hardly know you!
Dang Tracy…
I’m beginning to wonder whether it is possible to be simultaneously smart and write for the Washington Post.
Can a WaPo reporter chew gum and write at the same time?
Things like Copeland’s comments make me understand why Ms. Lewinsky is looking for work in England.
10 years ago? (I’m talking about the affair, not the Inquisition…errr, “impeachment”.) That would make Lewinsky 23 when it occurred. Who among us didn’t change a lot between 23 and 33? I’m sure that this Copeland chick (using the derogatory term on purpose) did a lot of stuff in her 20’s that she wouldn’t want to be common knowledge now.
In her own way, Monica Lewinsky is as powerful as, say, Hillary Clinton; she knows what she wants and goes out and gets it. She’s no dumb bimbo…
but I do remember having the impression that she was intelligent and that her father was a doctor.
monica is dumber than a bucket of kale. i’ve met her, i have a friend that graduated with her from LSE, and she is stupid. catastrophically, pitifully stupid.
mind you, my friend who graduated with her is also pretty stupid. which brings me to my second point: people really overestimate LSE. first of all, it’s pretty inane to think of the school as a monolith. that social psych department appears to be a dumping ground for all manner of empty-headedness. second of all, the most important criterion for people to get in to LSE is ability to pay. no joke. if you can pay that tuition, that puts you way ahead of britons who might want to go. LSE seems to be the school of choice for middle eastern royalty.
so don’t go patting yourself on the back for having exposed this woman’s idiocy. she was right, for the wrong reasons.
Even if you did get the impression that she wasn’t the brightest bulb in the box of pencils during the Clinton years, does WaPo’s columnist assume people can never, ever change? I mean, that stuff with Clinton was now 6-10 years ago. Does Copeland believe that people can’t get smarter over a period of half a decade? Does she believe that our mental abiliti4es freeze in our early and mid 20s? Does she not believe in education at all?
“I’m beginning to wonder whether it is possible to be simultaneously smart and write for the Washington Post.”
You forgot to add HONEST to your question, and for the 3 female writers of the Post that I am familiar with, the answer is a resounding NO. I don’t know if these writers have brains, but I do know by their writing that they lack integrity and honesty.
Debra Howell: She can BS all she wants about the Abramhoff column, but she is either stupid(Not to tread her own paper), or as the column shows, lacks the honesty and integrity to admit a mistake( kinda sounds like our King)
Sue Schmidt: Repug talking points in the form of an informatory column. All points are one sided, taken from Repug BS, with no contradictions in the article.
Again, stupidity or lack of integrity to follow journalistic standards when writing articles.
And our newest entry, Libby Copeland. Off her article, I would like to ask her 1 question?
“After listing to our faux-king speak, can she honestly think that he is any smarter than Lewinsky. I mean, George has created a new language( Georgisms replacing Malapropisms), but what else has he really done besides trying to destroy everything American(Bill of Rights, etc) to our citizens.
To be fair, the male writers on the Washington Post-Times can right-wing whore at least as much as the women. Although why Starr’s steno clerk still has a job is amazing . . .
To be fair is correct. I mentioned the 3 women writers that I knew right off. There obviously are more male Wash Po reporters with the same unprofessional policies of the 3 females I mentioned, just by knowing what a male dominated profession this is.
The reign of George can be described as a period that the “free press” acted more like Pravda, than the informative and investigative papers of a free society. The press has abdicated it’s responsibility to report the news accurately and investigate those that hold the power!
Doug Feith has degrees from Harvard and Georgetown. But that doesn’t surprise me.
What does surprise me is just how consistently moronic you gotta be to write for the WP. Where do they find these eighth raters?