Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
The right wing "smear machine" isn't what did you in, it was the sensible people in the Edwards campaign.
Do you really expect anyone to believe Michelle Malkin has any weight with Edwards? If so, I guess you were a tool of the right wing!
No child, you were done in by your own words, and by people who know better. I think we can expect the person who recommended you to Edwards to leave the campaign shortly for "personal reasons."
I don't doubt that there are elements of sexism involved here, but it is also clear that a lot of men wouldn't have backed down so easily.
Politics is a tough business and you gotta let a lot of s--- roll off your back, even if that includes personal (and let us say ridiculous) insults and threats (which should be turned over to the legal authorities).
Some of what I see in this piece is the result of inexperience. Some of it is the shock of being hit hard and being accustomed to playing nice instead of coming out swinging.
It's too bad that the Edwards campaign didn't pull an experienced strategist to lend a hand in fighting back, but, as noted, personal lives become public in politics. It is a huge mistake on the campaign's part though, because, if they'd hit fought back on this issue, they could shown that they are tough and aren't going to put up with nonsense. That might have spared them some crap down the road.
Now their opponents know that they just have to make the girls cry and the campaign will whimper in the corner.
To read Ms. Marcotte's recent self-victimization, one can't help but be impressed with one of the most drawn-out, complex, self-centered instances of intellectual suicide of the blog era. Having been very critical of the possible logic and motivation that lead John Edwards to hire-fire-hire"resign" Ms. Marcotte, I am only really certain of one thing. The best argument that any respectable organization should be wary of associating themselves with Ms. Marcotte is contained in Ms. Marcotte's own reckless writing. Despite the fact that many of the posts in question have been removed from Ms. Marcotte's blogs in a cowardly attempt to deceive the public as to her record, virtually all of the reasoned objections to Ms. Marcotte's sentiments make no assumptions about her position outside of her own statements. It would seem that, in Ms. Marcotte's world, a right-wing smear attack consists of nothing more than a quotation of something which she previously wrote.
Ms. Marcotte should pray that she avoids a civil suit for her comments on the Duke University lacrosse team scandal. Her comments, now desperately deleted by Ms. Marcotte herself but preserved by others, were libelous, despicably insensitive and recklessly uninformed. Commentary such as hers should be criminal.
then get back in the kitchen and rattle those pots and pans, Amanda!
When you play with the big boys it's not the kind of game where you can run and cry to mama when you lose.
Catholics have freedom of speech too, and even though you say (wink, wink) you did not intend to offend, you offended plenty.
You seem to think freedom of speech is your own special property, or maybe the property of the left. It is not.
When you speak people have every right to criticize that speech. That is a legitimate exercise of their freedom of speech.
Grow up, little Amanda, or go home to mama.
I've read over all the comments that have been written since I wrote mine during the night, and after thinking about this all day, I want to apologize for the part of my earlier comment that said that by quitting, you gave the people who sent you hate mail exactly what they wanted.
Who the hell am I to judge whether you felt a real threat from those who wrote with rape and death threats? I had no right to judge that decision and I apologize for my quarterbacking after the fact.
I understand quitting. I've quit, too, under fire--after years of being under fire--tired, stressed, more important, isolated and unsupported. Often happens to black professionals working in all-white environments. Your experience is quite similar, believe me.
Except I can't believe you didn't have some kind of support system when this storm began to rage. Knowing how these people work, modeling the dirty tricks campaigns of the Nixon era, couldn't you have employed some other strategy to weather the storm besides quitting? Why not shut your blog down, period? Clam up for awhile. Fly under the radar.
This is a long narrative that contains loads of good reasons for quitting, which almost sounds like you are trying to convince both us and yourself that quitting was a good idea. I've been there and recognize the arc and structure of the explanation. But 2 weeks into it just seem too short a time to bow out for the good of the campaign. Was your quitting supported by those who hired you?
I can't see John Edwards suggesting that you exit, but knowing politicians left and right, I'm well aware that they would not want people to think that they would suggest such a thing. One day the suggestion simply materializes in the atmosphere--the aroma of non-communication, the sounds of silence. Maybe this wasn't a good idea. This is one set of bags we just don't need right now.
Having said that, and now having read some of your posts, wittily appropriate for the blogosphere, I'm surprised Edwards hired you. Politicians are so manufactured and cautious, even those on the left. They rarely make the kind of remarks pundits and bloggers pride themselves on.
I guess I'm saying here that I still have a lot of questions about why you were hired and what Edwards expected of you.
Marie Angell wrote, "Some of what I see in this piece is the result of inexperience. Some of it is the shock of being hit hard and being accustomed to playing nice instead of coming out swinging."
So, Ms. Marcotte got her employer in deep voodoo through her rant about the Virgin Mary and the "sticky Holy Spirit". Employer dithered, then kept her on board. Ms. Marcotte then within 24 hours posted a movie review which includes more controversial remarks about said Virgin Mary. And this is "the shock of being hit hard and being accustomed to playing nice instead of coming out swinging?"
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
