- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
While I feel for Amanda, (and Melissa) I can't help but feel that they (and the Edwards campaign) gave in far too easily.
Look, dirty campaigning and smear campaigning are a fact of political life, and it's neither a new phenomenon nor something that Republican's have a lock on. I don't say that to defend it (or Donohue, whose views I find abhorrent) but because I'm surprised at the surprise Amanda expressed over the level of vitriol. And while the content of the attacks may have taken a specific tact because she was female, I don't think the attacks would necessarily have been lessened had a liberal male blogger who had written some of the same things been selected for the position.
Look, Amanda, this was a dream job in some ways, but as an astute observer of the culture in general and politics in particular, you can't have gone into this with your eyes closed. Walking away so soon only fuels the fire and hands Donohue an easy and early victory. Politics is ugly. That's not right, it's not the way it should be, and the attacks on you were wrong. Still, while acknowledging that it's easy for me to say because I'm not in your shoes, I think you let yourself down by not fighting harder for this. It was a great job and a chance to do something that made a difference, and you let Donohue win with hardly a fight.
Of course, to be fair, Edwards should have handled this completely differently. For starters, the Catholic League is not likely to turn out to vote for Edwards anyway, and giving in to pressure from a sexist, homophobic religious organization certainly doesn't appeal to Edward's core constituency.I think that Edwards should have approached this as a non-negotiable, defended Amanda and Melissa's ability to do the job they were hired to do, and otherwise ignored it.
It's a shame that Donohue won this round so easily.
