Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
As a gay liberal, I'm saddened to see such juvenile whining from a figure who is, for a moment, one of the left's spotlighted spokespersons. And if you've lost me, Ms. Marcotte and Co., I can only imagine the effect your words are having on those in the political center.
Yep, from the political center, the regular old blue-collar Democrats, I will say that she did Edwards no favors. Won't cost him my vote but she well could have written Edwards political obituary with her loose-lipped rants. The Catholic right types will milk it for all it's worth.
I feel real sorry for Mr. Edwards. She probably just wrecked his chances.
Still, I'm left with a simple question: Is it possible the real target was Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards and not the two bloggers he hired? After all, the attacks consumed the campaign and at least temporarily put Edwards on the defensive.
Definitely so. What I'm pissed off at these two clowns for is giving them the ammo to seriously hurt a really good man and candidate.
Franklin D. Roosevelt, first two paragraphs of a campaign speech at Columbus, Ohio, August 20, 1932:
"WHEN I opened my campaign in Chicago seven weeks ago I spoke briefly and plainly of the issues of this campaign. Following that address I outlined to the people of the country the platform of my party. In the order of logic I should devote this address to the Republican platform and the speech of acceptance of my opponent. I find it necessary, therefore, not only to discuss these statements, but to consider them in the light of Republican policies and promises of the past few years. To do so without severe criticism is impossible.
"I regret that necessity, for destructive criticism is never justified for its own sake. And yet, to build we must first clear the ground. We must find out why the Republican leadership--and mind you, all the way through this campaign I am not talking about the millions of fine men and women who make up the Republican Party, I am addressing my remarks to the Republican leadership--why that Republican leadership built so unwisely. We must determine the causes that made the whole structure collapse."
She may have single-handedly cost the election for John Edwards!
You can't bash Catholics and expect to win most Catholics votes in the General Election.
I find Amanda's love of the destruction of unborn babies to be incredibly mean-spirited.
Republican Dove
"I'm going to hire some bloggers," screamed Elizabeth, "and the usual goes - if you run your smart mouth, no more sex."
"I can't hear you honey," said Silky Pony, as he continued combing his hair in front of the mirror.
"I already told you I'm a feminist, so I'm going to hire a foul-mouthed 13-year-old who shares my views."
Silky Pony had other matters to attend to, like hiring more staff for his huge residence, and appearing at a speech, talking about how he could feel for the poor. Plus he was having a bad-hair day, and had to think up some new make-work for Elizabeth, or she was going to REALLY be pissed.
So it wasn't his fault. Or Amanda's. It was other people.
The End.
I hope that you have gained something from this, and that you will think twice before lowering yourself again to become involved with System.
You’re too smart and brave for that.
Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit?
A: You'd have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.
You are surprized that people took offense to this little tittle of yours, just what did you expect. Yes on a private blog you can say anything you like, no matter how ignorant or distasteful, but to enter the public arena you have to know that any and everything you have done, said, written, insinuated or other is going to come back to hit you.
I am a progressive and a Christian, I don't believe a real Conservative can be a Christian as Jesus and His Message was of utmost Liberty and Liberality, but I was highly offended by the above posting of yours. You apparently thought yourself clever in writing it, you have now found out that what seems clever at one time, may come back to bite you on your rear end, that is not misogynistic, that is politics, something you were obviously not clever enough to consider when you stuck your poker in Christian Peoples Eyes with the above posting!
Criticizing ignorant xtians isn't being bigoted. That's like saying criticizing the Nazis was being bigoted. Most of the hate and division in this country can be laid at their filthy little feet (or cloven hooves more likely.)
It's not like the conservative xtians are hapless victims. They spend their lives attacked others and when they get attacked back they scream like bitches.
Screw them. Their myth-believing isn't going to protect them anymore.
If you choose to blog using vulgar language and ridiculing beliefs of those you don't agree with, you really shouldn't be surprised when others respond in a like manner. Civility is in short supply on all sides of the blogosphere. Calm, rational presentation of a viewpoint should be expected of anyone connected with a presidential campaign. Most adults have figured out that "private life" blogs can and will be having an effect on their professional lives. Any Fortune 500 executive who publicly expressed views in a similar manner to Ms. Marcotte and Ms. MacEwen would also be without a job.
Marcotte wrote: “I announced that I was taking the job on Jan. 30, and the same week, I noticed a small flare-up of oddly aggressive and misogynistic comments in my moderation queue over a short, irritated post I wrote about the coverage of the Duke lacrosse rape case on CNN. I assumed that some anti-feminist blogger had linked me and so, in frustration, I went and rewrote my by-then week-old post to mock the commenters by spelling out my views in childish, easy-to-understand language. This may have been the first indication that the right-wing noise machine had noticed me and was looking for something with which to hurt me and my new employers.
A few days after my announcement, another in a series of inept shitstorms in the right-wing blogosphere came to my attention. Some vocal conservatives were accusing me of "scrubbing" my posting history at Pandagon, apparently on the theory that I was trying to hide inflammatory material. The evidence for this accusation was that I had mockingly rewritten a one-paragraph post, …”
In the above paragraph and a half Marcotte obliquely refers to a “by-then week-old post” that she “rewrote” to spell out her views. She coyly tells readers that with the rewrite she is not trying to hide inflammatory material.
Here is Marcotte’s original (before deletion) Jan 21st version of her position with regard to the Duke Lacrosse case (titled ‘Stuck at the airport again’):
“In the meantime, I’ve been sort of casually listening to CNN blaring throughout the waiting area and good fucking god is that channel pure evil. For awhile, I had to listen to how the poor dear lacrosse players at Duke are being persecuted just because they held someone down and fucked her against her will—not rape, of course, because the charges have been thrown out.
Can’t a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it?
So unfair.”
Marcotte followed that post with the following Jan 21st commentary:
“Yes, how dare a rape victim act confused and bewildered like she was raped or something.”
“Natalia, do you know the details of the case? If so, why do you think a women enthusiastically jumped into a sexual situation with men making slavery jokes at her? Furthermore, what is your theory on why she supposedly looooooved having sex with guys holding her facedown on the bathroom floor? There’s no “if” they behaved in a disrespectful manner. We have conclusive evidence that happened.”
“This is about race and class and gender in every way, and there’s basically no way this woman was going to see justice. In her part of the country, both women and black people are seen as subhuman objects to be used and abused by white men.”
“Yeah, I know, Alon. Which is why I’m frustrated that people are pretending ‘can’t identify which one raped her” somehow equals ‘wasn’t raped’. I had some initial confusion about exactly who was assaulting me when I was assaulted, but that doesn’t mean that his hands weren’t actually where they were.”
On Feb 2nd Marcotte also deleted her above four Jan 21st comments when she deleted her original post. Very curious considering her explanation that she was merely spelling out her views.
Marcotte made the libelous postings notwithstanding the fact that rape charges had been dismissed against the Duke Lacrosse players a full month before Marcotte’s Jan 21st post.
Marcotte replaced the original Jan 21st post with the following:
“Since people are determined to make hay over this quick shot of a post, I’m deleting it and here’s my official stance. The prosecution in the Duke case fumbled the ball. The prosecutor was too eager to get a speedy case and make a name for himself. That is my final word.”
Want more. When readers look at the comments included in the sanitized version of the ‘Stuck in the airport again’ post (the second link below), readers should hunt for comments made by “Bretto” on Jan 21 at 5:47 pm and “MartinG” on Jan 24 at 12:34 pm. Wait, I’ll save you the trouble. They no longer exist. Marcotte scrubbed the Bretto and MartinG comments into nonexistence simply because they were appended to her comments which she scrubbed after the fact.
Ooops!!! Talk about a mad rush to ‘clarify.’
The deleted Bretto and MartinG comments are visible in the screen capture of the ‘Stuck in the airport again’ post (first link below).
Here is a screen capture of the ‘Stuck in the airport again’ post with full commentary before any deletions:
http://www.herdwatching.com/media/library/2007/02/pandagon_airport_comment.png
Here is the ‘Stuck in the airport again’ post and commentary as it stands now after deletions and scrubbing:
http://pandagon.net/2007/01/21/stuck-at-the-airport-again/#comments
Thoughtful readers can decide if Marcotte deleted her post, scrubbed her commentary and scrubbed the commentary of other ‘innocent bystander’ commentary because, as she said “…I was trying to hide inflammatory material,” or if she rewrote her commentary to “…mock the commenters by spelling out my views…” It is worth noting however, that the Duke Lacrosse case plays out in North Carolina, the state which Senator Edwards represents (just a few scant miles from Senator Edwards’ home).
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
