Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
This is apparently the "new" type of feminism: Spoiled brat feminism.
Amanda seems to want the unlimited right to take unlimited verbal stabs at anyone or any group she pleases, all with a mocking smirk on her face, but without the world negatively responding to her. In other words, no one can do back to her what she does to other people and groups.
The image that comes to mind is an out-of-control adolescent girl who says the most vile things to people, all as snotty as can be, and then starts crying when she finally gets a response. Then she's a victim. Just a poor little helpless girl that people are being mean to for no reason at all.
I also don't really get all the fuss about her - she has a very limited bag of rhetorical tricks: Take childish, mocking stabs at groups she doesn't like, put words in the mouths of people - things they never said - in fact not even getting the facts right in many cases (like Duke), and build up strawmen and then knock them down. All tricks that many 13-year-old girls have. She just has to work a bit more on rumor-spreading then she's ready to be the drama queen at a junior high.
Weep not, Amanda, my child! Better days will come. You are young, you are feminist, you will survive even this outrageous turn of fortune!
Seems that those really at fault are the Edwards campaign folk who hired you.
A personal blog may certainly contain all the uncivil, attention-seeking verbal pyrotechnics its author chooses.
But a Presidential campaign, to be taken seriously, must operate in a much different place, a place where civil, measured discourse which seeks to bring clarity and illumination to positions and ideas must be the goal.
The type of blogging you've done, whether personal or otherwise, simply does make you a liability in the world of serious Presidential politics.
The Edwards campaign people were amazingly wrong not to see this before they ever offered you the job.
As a lifelong Democrat from California who likes Obama, I'd say just look on this, Amanda, as a
life experience that may help you mature.
Regarding Marcotte's problems with the Duke case, I was part of that dustup at Pandagon. My problems with Marcotte's blogging on this were posted here:
http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2007/02/our-collective-voice-limits-of-social.html
Marcotte's inability to get past her slant of feminist theory to the facts of the lacrosse case is what sunk her in that matter. It's always good to actually know what you're talking about when going into a debate about something.
It's also good when you want to get elected not to alienate a large bloc of potential voters. You'll note that Marcotte's mouth and Edwards' interests diverged at this point, signaling why her employment with Edwards' campaign was going to be brief.
There are more Catholics than readers of Pandagon and the vast majority of those Catholics have no love at all for the fascist Donohue and his beliefs. They just don't like to be insulted.
Marcotte and many of her supporters want to make this a match between good and evil, Marcotte being good and Donohue being evil. Amanda wants to portray her failure in the political arena as a great battle and amplify the tragedy of her fall, a struggle of epic proportions. Tragedy doesn't befit a spear carrier. That's why she is gone from Edwards' campaign.
Why not write something critical about Islam, rather than just picking on Catholics?
Ah - I see your courage fails you. What a surprise.
Golden Boy
PS Do you think your story of being fired for writing dumb things makes you more of a victim than the three Duke players being framed for rape?
Proof, if any were needed, that young blogging girls named Amanda might not be quite ready to join the big leagues where the grown-ups play.
Over at Pandagon, Amanda Marcotte played queen to her cohort of head-bobbers. Anyone who dast disagree with her was smitten mightily by her wrath. Amanda's jejune brand of cliqueish viciousness seems to be lifted right out of "Heathers." Now that she has ducked for cover, she uses Salon to promote the time-worn excuses offered by many caught in the same situation: "it was my idea to quit" and "that thing I said that caused so much trouble--it was just meant as a joke." Amanda, there is a playground aphorism that applies perfectly to your problem: You can dish it out but you can't take it.
When trying the link at the end of this article, I was given an error message, saying:
The web site address you entered could not be found.
Please try the related content suggestions and paid advertisements below, or try another search.
You entered "frog.punkasshost.com ".
Did you mean www.asshost.com, www.sshost.com?
Is this a weird right-wing sabotoage thing?
You sound very nice and upstanding, and IMHO much closer to the real meaning of Jesus than the literalists. However, even in this forum you cannot call yourself a Christian without literalists taking you on to call you something else.
If you wish to keep calling yourself a Christian, I urge you to take this conversation back to your church and find a Biblical way to address the literalists.
For me, I have not been successful in that endeavor. I don't call myself a Christian ("Follower of the Anointed One") or a Believer, instead I call myself a simple follower of Jesus. (The literalists probably take that as meaning I am someone who is slowly being "drawn in" by God and will one day share their black-and-white worldview.) In the meantime we can work together and support the REST of the message of Jesus: the Beatitudes, the Sermon on the Mount, and the loving of our neighbors.
Oh gosh! A right wing conspiracy took down Pandagon! Those misogynist godbag haters of Amanda that want to rape her raped her server in the name of Jesus and holy spunk!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!!!!
No, what happened is explained on the error page: We've taken down Pandagon to move it to a new server to avoid further slowdowns and outages. Changing servers takes about a day, so thanks for your patience.
Now, of course, Amanda's dim choices have her wonderful satirical non-offensive blog hosted at a domain called: punkasshost.com. This is indeed funny, but once again casts questions about Amanda's choices in life.
But, speaking as a liberal, I have to ask, why the hell can't people, especially liberals, read? And why choose conspiracy theories over a simpler explanation?
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"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
