Part of the reason no one picked up on the outrage perpetrated by spreading misinformation on contraception to newlyweds, is that AM's inflammatory style overwhelmed the point. There are legions of people, like Donohue, who are doing just about everything in their power to avoid discussing the implications of their views on reproductive freedom -- and by writing in such an offhandedly offensive manner, AM gave them yet another tactic for reinforcing the wall of silence. It's tough, I'm sorry, but the best way to combat misogyny is not to give your opponents additional ammunition to use against you. Even many of AM's defenders felt constrained to acknowledge that her writings were beyond the pale, yada yada yada. This isn't the best position from which to change the topic to the very real underlying concern of her post. Sometimes I like AM's no holds barred style, but in the end, at it's best, it's a sermon that keeps the choir motivated, and it isn't compatible with an actual political campaign. That's why AM's work never made the "real news" until a politician hired her.

Before last week, the only place I'd ever seen this woman's name was on Salon's Broadsheet - usually a link to a story or whatnot - now she's in the Times and headlining at Salon - her 15 minutes will probably secure her a real job at some lefty outlet - where she's be adored by those who adore such people. Instead, all she can do is whine like a baby and blame her sex and age for her failings - not her words - because Amanda doesn't seem to recognize that words come back - never mind the intention - the words themselves: this is a country where a man who used the expression "niggardly" was fired from his job (and he wasn't even young OR a woman) - this is a country where a Vietnam vet is turned into a coward while his draft dodging opponent is made the hero - yet Amanda doesn't get it: it's not about intentions or righteousness - it's about surface and perception and the perception of Amanda - who can't even write a Salon piece without resorting to sophmoric expressions such as "shit storm", is one of an undiciplined and immature bomb thrower - one whom Edwards should never have hired in the first place...

This isn't about freedom of speech. The power of the state is not being invoked to silence Ms. Marcotte. She's as free as she ever was to say whatever she wants.

Her original thoughts were speech. What Donohue said was speech. Then a lot more speech went flying around. The Edwards campaign listened to all the speech and made a business decision (then unmade it, but whatever).

You are entitled to say what you want. Your employer has no obligation to keep you on the job if what you say is offensive or damaging to them. This is the way it's always been.

Wait a minute. It's all about you being a woman? Get help. God bless you.

Especially the, "oh it's all cause your a woman, boo hoo" comments. First of all, she made a passing comment about the sexism, which you reinforce by saying that.

Second, this article is so well written and is not all about herself, she really gets to a good point when she talks about the younger, internet, common crowd that is truly democratic. She says nothing about free speech, which for some reason everyone is arguing about. She is talking about democracy and equality in the world of elitism. It's beautiful if you read it for what it is, instead of thinking oh this is some victimized feminist girl. Read the ideals! Not her body.

I think the article is great, keep it up Amanda.

Does anyone really care about this meaningless crap? This blogger and her opponent have no real place in the world and offer nothing but clutter. Can we please box them in a black, soundproof room?

Ms. Marcotte condemns the `noise machine' that `forced' her to resign from Pretty Boy Edwards' campaign, but she is part of the same machine that is causing political discourse to become so nasty.

It is, altogether, just deserts... and of course, the Kossacks and the Huffingtons will be searching for their scalps. Will Salon print their victims' sob stories?

thanks

A Canadian Observer

I was absolutely horrified by the threats that Amy received. I know that as someone who was not targeted this is easy for me to say, but has either of the two women targeted considered turning this over to the police? It seems to me that this is the only way to send a clear message to these bullies. Some of the letters that Ms. Marcotte received certainly looked to me like they would qualify for criminal charges.

If this seemed like too stressful a course of action, I fully understand. I have experienced rightwing threats myself, although not as foul as those Ms. Marcotte received.

Matthew Lenoe

I would tend to blame the Edwards' campaign for not doing the due diligence on your past work. Bloggers are polemicists, often viciously so. I enjoy reading a good lefty rant, but they should not be in charge of a major communications component of a campaign if there is something in their body of work that can damage the candidate. Obviously, speculating what happens after the Lord shoots his hot wad into the V. Mary will piss off a large enough group of people that it will cause a problem, possibly a shitstorm. Especially if your candidate is actually trying to get a large enough group of people to vote for him to actually win.

for drafting such an obviously rank amateur into the big leagues.

Welcome to the real world Ms. Marcotte, where what you do and what you say actually has consequences. Sitting in your supposed feminist microcosm (your particular brand of it anyway), you are obviously convinced that many people think the way you do. They don't. Your words once had zero impact. Now you know what happens when they do.

Only the perverse little choir you preach to finds your statements about religion amusing. Before connecting yourself to an effort that is supposed to represent "all the people" why don't you get out a little more and find out what the people are actually like. And not just the ones you happen to agree with. I think you will be surprised. Most of them are not like you.

More importantly, why did the Edwards campaign hire you in the first place? Deflection, maybe? Fodder? Press? (any press is good press - never forget that - Edwards doesn't) If this is how his campaign is being run, I see little hope for it.

Poco