The tone and the sentiment of some of Amanda Marcotte's and Melissa McEwan's posts personally offended me. It's not how I talk to people, and it's not how I expect the people who work for me to talk to people. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that kind of intolerant language will not be permitted from anyone on my campaign, whether it's intended as satire, humor, or anything else. But I also believe in giving everyone a fair shake. I've talked to Amanda and Melissa; they have both assured me that it was never their intention to malign anyone's faith, and I take them at their word. We're beginning a great debate about the future of our country, and we can't let it be hijacked. It will take discipline, focus, and courage to build the America we believe in.
Personally I think John Edwards in between a rock and a hard place and no matter what he does, he is basically screwed.... at least THIS decision will not lose him the support of the far far far far left liberal democrats.
[UPDATE] 3:42pm- Salon announces that Edwards campaign has fired the two controversial bloggers from his campaign.
The right-wing blogosphere has gotten its scalps -- John Edwards has fired the two controversial bloggers he recently hired to do liberal blogger outreach, Salon has learned.
The bloggers, Amanda Marcotte, formerly of Pandagon, and Melissa McEwan, of Shakespeare's Sister, had come under fire from right-wing bloggers for statements they had previously made on their respective blogs. A statement by the Catholic League's Bill Donohue, which called Marcotte and McEwan "anti-Catholic vulgar trash-talking bigots," and an accompanying article on the controversy in the New York Times this morning, put extra pressure on the campaign.
Speculation from sources that the two bloggers might be rehired was bolstered by Jennifer Palmieri, a spokeswoman for the Edwards campaign, who said in an e-mail that she would "caution [Salon] against reporting that they have been fired. We will have something to say later."
I will continue updating as more comes out... be back later.
[End Update]
With Senate and the house stomping their feet and throwing temper tantrums because they do not like the parlimentary rules, security operations starting in Baghdad, Iran skipping merrily along in their uranium enrichment, North Korea having tested a nuclear weapon and allllllllll the other "important" issues of the day... I am finding it extremely ironic that the top story seems to be some foul mouthed bloggers being hired by John Edwards.
First... there is nothing wrong with the word FUCK. Some say it, some do not. Blogs are personal and it is our personal thoughts and opinions that go on our blogs.
This does seem to go beyond cussing though... A candidate for presidency does suffer when they make drastically bad decisions.
Until this became "news" I had never even heard of Amanda Marcotte OR Shakespeare’s Sister...I usually do not make a habit of visiting liberal blogs, although I do make exceptions now and then when I am making a point and need to reference the left side of an issue.
With all that said, once I started reading a little more today on the left,the right and the MSM, I WAS disturbed a bit by the decision of Edwards to hire bloggers that have said some of the things I have now seen.
Terry Moran's piece has some quotes from Amanda Marcotte that are extremely vulgar and I am not talking about the word FUCK here. I am talking hate speech.
A couple examples:
ON THE CATHOLIC TEACHINGS ON BIRTH CONTROL:
Last year, Marcotte blasted the Catholic Church's position on birth control: "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."
Disrespectful. Period.
I am not religious in any way, shape or form but I DO have a healthy respect for a persons right to practice their religion (as long as it does not include murdering thousands of innocent people in the name of said religion) and this type of commentary on a blog is the blog owners business. We, as individuals, simply do not have to read their hate speech nor link to them or acknowledge them in any way, unless we choose to.
John Edwards though needs to ask himself if HE wishes to be "associated" with that type of speech.
Next example:
ON THE DUKE RAPE CASE:
"I had to listen to how the poor, dear lacrosse players at Duke are being persecuted just because they held someone down and f***** 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."
If that was sarcasm it was lost on me. If that was a joke it was in bad taste, but it does give us a flavor of who John Edwards has hired to "represent" him on his campaign blog.... which is, after all, the heart of the media frenzy on this issue.
Next Example:
ON REPUBLICAN VOTERS:
“Voters who are motivated by misogyny, homophobia, and racism aren’t going to leave a racist, misogynist, homophobic party for one that is all those things but just less so.”
So what? Both sides of the blogosphere insult the other side and that is not going to change....soooooooo FUCK it.
Nothing life altering in these examples....but it WILL be campaign altering.
Right or wrong, a candidate WILL be judged on their choices and people will ask themselves whether a man that chooses this type of person to represent them is somebody we want to risk our national security to.
More disturbing examples via LFG, who provides links to earlier posts from Marcotte.
The trash-talking Stalinists at Pandagon have removed or changed all the posts to which I responded in the links above; LGF reader Egfrow dug those Pandagon posts out of the Internet Archive, so you can see the kind of speech John Edwards thinks is “edgy.” These links go to the archived copies of the Pandagon posts:Read for yourself... Personally, if I were John Edwards and I actually wanted to get elected, I would dump this woman...politically it would be suicide not to.
A few of those examples:
Vitriolic Lefty Post of the Day
When Lefty Blogs Attack
Hysterical Leftist Post of the Day
The Marching Morons
Right or wrong.. he WILL be judged on his decisions and if a man wishes to be the President of the United States, he cannot have people that use hate speech on a regular basis to "speak" on his behalf, even if it is "just" a blog.
I will ask you to go get yourself a great laugh with Michelle Malkins video where she highlights some of Amanda Marcotte's....ummmmmmmm, wisdom.
Then hop on over to Hot Air and check out her other video...both are hysterically funny, especially since she is acting out Marcotte's actual words from her personal blog.
Better than the comedy shows, I tell ya!!!!
Then go join the Townhall pool where they are taking guesses in their comment section on a date and time that people think Edwards are going to fire his new blogmistress.
There is a wonderful post at Patterico's site on this subject with more examples of the hate speech from Marcotte's blog. Alot was gotten from google cache because "somehow" the worst of her posts have disappeared since she was hired by John Edwards.
Riehl World View has more examples, some of these even worse.
Here is an Example from his site:
Too Sensitive For Their Own Good
I can’t wait until Nigger Jenkins and The Flying Kike-Boy fight over the Cruiserweight Championship next week! Oh, you’re offended? It’s just a discussion about racial tensions between blacks and jews, and the ending will promote racial reconciliation, at least until the Zionist Conspiracy gets involved.
Head on over to see the rest of the examples here.
The point is, it is her blog, she can write what she wants and we have the choice of either going to read it or not.
On the other hand, John Edwards or whoever was responsible for choosing a blogger to head his campaign blog, should have done their homework and asked themselves if they can afford to have their name associated with the type of hate speech that will follow this woman whereever she goes....because a blog IS personal it does tend to say alot about the person writing it.
The NYT weighs in here.
It seems as if everyone else in the blogosphere is weighing in here at memeorandum.
Even if John Edwards fires this woman, the question of his choices and his lack of research on such a simple matter will call into question his capabilities.
.
