|
Author
|
Topic: The Edwards-Marcotte Fiasco (Read 42249 times)
|
|
Epublius
|
If Edwards keeps Marcotte on the payroll, I think he is finished with whatever paltry hopes he might have had, and it won't have anything to do with her egregiously inappropriate comments about the LAX case. I read through some of Pendagon earlier, and middle America (i.e. the largest block of voters) will be offended by its content. There's something for pretty much everyone to find offensive there, unless you're from the farthest fringes of the nazi wing of the feminist movement. I really can't understand why Edwards, at a time when the country is moving almost uniformly to the center from both sides, would hire someone to be his "web face" who is so far away from any semblance of mainstream opinion. Here's hoping she doesn't retain her habit of deleting any comments that are not exactly her opinion on his blog.
TFTL, I've just finished reading this woman's memorialized comments on TS, and I have to say that she's beyond the fringes; she's a nutcase! Why Edwards would hire anyone who hates men, and who is incapable of separating facts from her own bizarre parochial biases, is more than a curiosity. Her gutter language is bad enough. But, her shrill, strident, and septic approach to those who disagree with her prejudices would seem to make her unfit for representing a candidate like Edwards. Why would Edwards want to telegraph his bad judgement in picking staff with every post she makes on his behalf? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
abb
|
http://beltwayblogroll.nationaljournal.com/archives/2007/02/the_first_blog.phpFebruary 03, 2007 BELTWAY BLOGROLL The First Blog Scandal Of Campaign 2008 We're only one month into 2007 and the first blog scandal of the 2008 campaign already has erupted. The central character: Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon, who this week accepted a job as "blogmaster" to the presidential campaign of Democrat John Edwards. Part of her job is to write at the campaign blog.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
abb
|
http://therogersinstitute.blogspot.com/2007/02/silky-pony-and-potty-mouthed-feminist.htmlSaturday, February 03, 2007 The Silky Pony and the Potty-Mouthed Feminist It seems little Johnny Edwards has decided to make sure his campaign runs well out of the mainstream. He has hired Amanda Marcotte to be his chief blogger. Amanda, also known as Heap Big Potty-mouthed Man-hater, is a radical left-wing feminist who posts regularly over at Pandagon, a self-referential feminist blog famous for its lack of balance and very radical views.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
abb
|
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/118501.htmlThe Campaign to Sham America Jeff Taylor | February 2, 2007, 4:12pm John Edwards has a new blogger-in-chief. First order of business? Covering her tracks. Amanda Marcotte joins Edwards' crew from Pandagon. A couple weeks ago Marcotte uncorked the following post there, on the occasion of getting stuck at the Atlanta airport:
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
abb
|
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006818.htmHow to become a leading Democrat's blogmaster By Michelle Malkin · February 03, 2007 10:13 PM Amanda Marcotte: A bleepin' embarrassment Last week, far left-wing blogger Amanda Marcotte began her stint as Democrat presidential candidate John Edwards' "blogmaster:"
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
PB
|
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/118501.htmlThe Campaign to Sham America Jeff Taylor | February 2, 2007, 4:12pm John Edwards has a new blogger-in-chief. First order of business? Covering her tracks. Amanda Marcotte joins Edwards' crew from Pandagon. A couple weeks ago Marcotte uncorked the following post there, on the occasion of getting stuck at the Atlanta airport: There's something fascinating about the idea that the 2008 litmus test for Presidential fitness for some people will be whether you believe the Duke 3 should have to undergo a trial to determine whether they are guilty ot not of the crimes for which they are charged. Harry Morant could only wish his plight had been of national concern. Had the Bushveldt Carbineers only had more upper-crustacians among its memebers, who knows? Harry might have been spared the bullet. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Epublius
|
Edwards, a lawyer, should really be impressed by this woman's position that rape is a crime like no other, and that rapists must be required to prove their innocence "beyond any possible doubt", as opposed to the prosecution proving their guilt.
In other words, she wants to stand the criminal justice system on its head, and presume an accused rapists GUILTY until he can prove beyond any doubt at all that he's innocent.
I was also impressed that she apparently wants to take race and class into consideration in a rape case.
Edwards must be so proud to be represented by the Godzilla of the radical feminist movement.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Epublius
|
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/118501.htmlThe Campaign to Sham America Jeff Taylor | February 2, 2007, 4:12pm John Edwards has a new blogger-in-chief. First order of business? Covering her tracks. Amanda Marcotte joins Edwards' crew from Pandagon. A couple weeks ago Marcotte uncorked the following post there, on the occasion of getting stuck at the Atlanta airport: There's something fascinating about the idea that the 2008 litmus test for Presidential fitness for some people will be whether you believe the Duke 3 should have to undergo a trial to determine whether they are guilty ot not of the crimes for which they are charged. Harry Morant could only wish his plight had been of national concern. Had the Bushveldt Carbineers only had more upper-crustacians among its memebers, who knows? Harry might have been spared the bullet. PB, Why would you try people for a crime that never happened? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MarkRougemont
|
Noticed she was planning a move to Chapel Hill..she is being torn to shreds here as well as on LS. Maybe TL can invite her here to explain her comments. I think she should have the opportunity to explain her comments and express her opinion.
Mark: Because you are not always "trollish" in my opinion and I think you are being serious here, I will explain why I think your idea would do no good, and why Amanda will not take Jerilyn up on it: Amanda is used to having full control. She'll delete your posts for any or no reason at all, even if they consist of nothing but a list of facts she finds inconvenient. She will not, and cannot argue on a level playing field. How do I know that? I've known about her for years as she is a feminist blogger , among other things, and people I've known from various boards have run into her before, and I've read Pendagon more than a several dozen times. Also, one of her frequent friendly posters is ginmar. I urge you to google on ginmar..esp. her livejournal. She is someone that Amanda hangs out with and considers her a friend..and never, ever censors her. You are known by the company you keep. Amanda doesn't keep very good company. Believe me, I understand about being judged by the "company" you keep. J here at TL also considers her a friend-are you going to judge her based on that? It seems that if you are a feminist you are immediately labled a man-hater or lesbian. Why is that? I looked in on this same topic at LS and thought I had hit on the Stepford blog by mistake. Why are women with a "foul mouth" looked at differently than men? I don't agree with her views on this case but I do think some of her causes are good and her opinions need to be expressed. Maybe the worst I could say is her use of this case to back up her cause was a bad choice. Other than that, I would still invite her to participate in this discussion. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Epublius
|
Why are women with a "foul mouth" looked at differently than men?.
Mark, That's an excellent question. I don't like gratuitous profanity from men or women. But, the reason it is worse for women has to do with its juxtaposition to what we consider "lady-like" qualities and demeanor. When I was in the military, I ran into a number of people who believed military service was a license to 'cuss like a sailor' - a phrase that's unfair to most sailors. To the extent that I could, as an officer, I dispossessed as many people as possible of that notion. Most of us, myself included, use profanity every now and then. But, when it is a part of every paragraph you write or utter, then that's over the top. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
inmyhumbleopinion
|
Why are women with a "foul mouth" looked at differently than men?.
Mark, That's an excellent question. I don't like gratuitous profanity from men or women. But, the reason it is worse for women has to do with its juxtaposition to what we consider "lady-like" qualities and demeanor. When I was in the military, I ran into a number of people who believed military service was a license to 'cuss like a sailor' - a phrase that's unfair to most sailors. To the extent that I could, as an officer, I dispossessed as many people as possible of that notion. Most of us, myself included, use profanity every now and then. But, when it is a part of every paragraph you write or utter, then that's over the top. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
QT
|
|
|
|
Epublius
|
Why are women with a "foul mouth" looked at differently than men?.
Mark, That's an excellent question. I don't like gratuitous profanity from men or women. But, the reason it is worse for women has to do with its juxtaposition to what we consider "lady-like" qualities and demeanor. When I was in the military, I ran into a number of people who believed military service was a license to 'cuss like a sailor' - a phrase that's unfair to most sailors. To the extent that I could, as an officer, I dispossessed as many people as possible of that notion. Most of us, myself included, use profanity every now and then. But, when it is a part of every paragraph you write or utter, then that's over the top. Darned serious. :) Why? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Lousy1
|
Having read the initial (pre sanitized) web postings of Amanda I would rank her at least as offensive as the subsequent posts that I have seen on LS. However, to my knowledge, of all these posters only Amanda has been selected to represent an important facet of a presidential campaign.
Would it be any more acceptable if an authoritarian foul mouthed male White Supremicist had been invited to join the Edwards campaign rather than foul mouthed, feminist, racist with a demonstrated tendancy to delete any attempted postings that runs counter to her agenda.
If you think I am being to harsh peruse the unabridged version of her blog, preserved at LS
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
inmyhumbleopinion
|
"cussing lke a sailor" is in keeping with "what we consider ["gentleman-like"] qualities and demeanor?"
Is it worse for a woman to not act like a lady than it is for a man to not act like a gentleman?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
QT
|
|
|
|
 |
Advertise Here
