Jolie Rouge

How to become a leading Democrat's blogmaster
--and more wit and wisdom of Amanda Marcotte
By Michelle Malkin · February 03, 2007 10:13 PM
http://michellemalkin.com/

Last week, far left-wing blogger Amanda Marcotte began her stint as Democrat presidential candidate John Edwards' "blogmaster:" http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2007/1/30/175015/518


The question is: How long will the Edwards campaign want the "insightful" and "issues-oriented" Marcotte to be a part of them?

Seems that everyone but the Edwards campaign has tracked Marcotte's foul-mouthed nutroots diatribes. Or perhaps the Edwards team is well aware of her lunatic blogging and can't wait for her to unleash her unbridled anger on their spiffy website to give him a gritty, "progressive" edge.

Whatever the case, Walter Olson, K.C. Johnson, LieStoppers, and Jon Ham all caught Marcotte trying to cover the unhinged tracks at her old blog. At some point before she started her new job, she deleted a screed about the Duke lacrosse players that she had posted at Pandagon on Jan. 21. Jon Ham captured the cached screenshot:



Guess what? It's not the only completely off-the-wall, profanity-choked post she's trying to hide.* Updated/correction below

Look at this:



Now, here's the Google cached page of that missing post that someone doesn't want the Edwards campaign to see: http://pandagon.net/2005/09/05/215-a...-bill-oreilly/







Just a small taste of the "insightful" and "issues-oriented" writing that apparently makes one qualified to be the blogmaster of a Democrat presidential campaign.

And there's plenty more where that came from, if the Edwards campaign only bothers to look.

***Updated/Correction. Looks like Marcotte's Katrina post is actually still available to the public here under a different URL. My bad. Or rather, John Edwards' bad. Because it's even worse for the Edwards campaign that its blogmaster left crackpot posts like that one up and hired her anyway.

Danny Glover notes a Pandagon habit : http://beltwayblogroll.nationaljourn...first_blog.php


A reader sends Marcotte's defense of Cynthia McKinney's abuse of the Capitol police, titled "Even if Cynthia McKinney did what they say, it wouldn’t matter:" http://pandagon.net/2006/04/08/even-...ouldnt-matter/

And Dan Riehl plumbs the depths of Marcotte's mind and posts more of her uncensored blog rants. http://www.riehlworldview.com/carniv..._marcotte.html

I am not EVEN going to post that one here because of language which is inappropriate to a family forum ... you will have to read it yourself.



If this is whom Edwards chooses to represent him and his campaign .... my estimation of him ( and his chances for the White House ) just dropped.

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Enjoy our Hot Air Theater presentation of the wit and wisdom of Amanda Marcotte, the official blogmaster of the John Edwards for President campaign:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcNbv-7sNLw&eurl=


Walter Olson follows up: http://www.overlawyered.com/2007/02/...te_encore.html


And Patterico shares his experience and insights into the warped mind of John Edwards' blogmaster (*language warning*): http://patterico.com/2007/02/05/5776...paign-blogger/



Frank J. takes a humorous look at liberal blogs and vulgarity. G-rated!
http://www.imao.us/archives/007244.html



Dan Riehl takes a closer look at "Pandagon." http://www.riehlworldview.com/carniv...tes_a_pie.html

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

This is only a short clip from a full article ... most of it so profanity laced that I would get banned if I posted it all. So, to put it in to it's proper context go to : http://pandagon.net/2005/09/04/livin...freedom-world/


This is her reply to a poster who calls her an idiot. ( granted - rather rude ... but her reply is a little over the top. I can't beleive Edwards wants this person to represent his campain.

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Edwards’s Bloggers Cross the Line, Critic Says
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: February 7, 2007

WASHINGTON, Feb. 6 — Two bloggers hired by John Edwards to reach out to liberals in the online world have landed his presidential campaign in hot water for doing what bloggers do — expressing their opinions in provocative and often crude language.

The Catholic League, a conservative religious group, is demanding that Mr. Edwards dismiss the two, Amanda Marcotte of the Pandagon blog site and Melissa McEwan, who writes on her blog, Shakespeare’s Sister, for expressing anti-Catholic opinions.

Mr. Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, is among the leading Democratic presidential candidates.

Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, said in a statement on Tuesday, “John Edwards is a decent man who has had his campaign tarnished by two anti-Catholic vulgar trash-talking bigots.”

Mr. Edwards’s spokeswoman, Jennifer Palmieri, said Tuesday night that the campaign was weighing the fate of the two bloggers.

The two women brought to the Edwards campaign long cyber trails in the incendiary language of the blogosphere. Other campaigns are likely to face similar controversies as they try to court voters using the latest techniques of online communication.

Ms. Marcotte wrote in December that the Roman Catholic Church’s opposition to the use of contraception forced women “to bear more tithing Catholics.” In another posting last year, she used vulgar language to describe the church doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.

She has also written sarcastically about the news media coverage of the three Duke lacrosse players accused of sexual assault, saying: “Can’t a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it? So unfair.”

Ms. Marcotte joined the Edwards campaign at the end of January in the new post of blogmaster. She has lived in Austin, Tex., for the past 11 years and wrote on her blog that she was planning to move to Chapel Hill, N.C., in February to work full-time on the campaign.

Ms. McEwan referred in her blog to President Bush’s “wingnut Christofascist base” and repeatedly used profanity in demanding that religious conservatives stop meddling with women’s reproductive and sexual rights. Multiple postings use explicit and inflammatory language on a variety of issues.

Ms. McEwan signed on with Mr. Edwards at the end of January with the title of Netroots coordinator, for campaign activities on the Web.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/07/us...nk&oref=slogin


The Edwards Blogger: The Endgame is Afoot
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/189...e-bc2235f0b773

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

ABC's Terry Moran asks, ""Does John Edwards condone hate speech:"

http://blogs.abcnews.com/terrymoran/...ohn_edwar.html


Rick Moran (Terry's excellent blogging brother!) takes the NYTimes to task for trying to Marcotte-ize the whole blogosphere:
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archive...g-and-burning/


Rand Simberg also notes the NYTimes' attempt to Marcotte-ize the entire blogosphere: http://www.transterrestrial.com/arch...56.html#008456



James Joyner:
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/arc...han_candidate/

That goes for candidates of either major political party.

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Blogger Jason Clarke:

http://jasonclarke.org/2007/02/07/as...pains-persist/

A few comments on the latest political/blog scandal. First, some background. This time around, liberal blogger Amanda Marcotte, recently hired to run presidential candidate John Edwards’ campaign blog, is being criticized for a variety of blog posts she’s written at her personal site, Pandagon.

As to be expected, liberal bloggers are rising to her defense, while conservatives are, without calling for her removal (and I count threeone who think she should stay), commenting on the issue and re-publishing her thoughts on issues from Hurricane Katrina to the Catholic church.

What was said?

So that we’re clear on some of those comments, and please note that the following contain graphic language that may not be suitable for all ages, here are some of Ms. Marcotte’s writings, as re-published at ABC News blog Pushback:
Clearly, these are not simply liberal opinions expressed with power or wit. Rather, they’re pretty disturbing, irrational comments that I would sincerely hope do not represent the general tone of the Edwards– or any other– campaign for president.

So…should she be fired?

But do these comments– as disturbing as they are– mean Ms. Marcotte should be fired?

With respect to the issue of a political campaign firing a blogger for controversial things he or she has written in the past, I don’t think a precedent should be set that any blogger should be fired for simply publishing any controversial thoughts- in fact, this should be obvious, that tends to be one of the reasons they’re hired in the first place.

However, to me that’s not the real issue here. The real issue is not that Ms. Marcotte published some controversial ideas,
Clearly, these are not simply liberal opinions expressed with power or wit. Rather, they’re pretty disturbing, irrational comments that I would sincerely hope do not represent the general tone of the Edwards– or any other– campaign for president.

So…should she be fired?

But do these comments– as disturbing as they are– mean Ms. Marcotte should be fired?

With respect to the issue of a political campaign firing a blogger for controversial things he or she has written in the past, I don’t think a precedent should be set that any blogger should be fired for simply publishing any controversial thoughts- in fact, this should be obvious, that tends to be one of the reasons they’re hired in the first place.

However, to me that’s not the real issue here. The real issue is not that Ms. Marcotte published some controversial ideas, as some of the liberal bloggers on this case would have us believe. Rather, the issue to me is whether or not the particular things she’s said are in line with how the Edwards campaign wishes to portray itself. If Ms. Marcotte’s published writings are not in line with the beliefs of the Edwards campaign, I think there can only be two reasonable courses of action going forward:

1) The Edwards campaign should immediately fire Ms. Marcotte and apologize for the decision to hire somebody whose writings are outside of the scope of rational political discourse.

2) OR, the Edwards campaign should immediately release a statement roughly along the lines of this:

Either way, this should happen soon, and decisively, and the campaign should then immediately announce some kind of “free beer for all Americans” program or something equally as earth-shattering.

That’s not the end of this issue though. Far from it.

The argument for failed hires- and for moving on.

A few bloggers have made the point that the Edwards team should have done a more thorough vetting of Ms. Marcotte’s blog and other public writings before bringing her on and placing themselves in the middle of such a difficult situation. Fair (and obvious) enough! But now at least one blogger is arguing that the campaign should live with their bad hire and carry on.

What?!!

Anybody who has even been remotely involved in the managing of a company or organization that aims to be successful has to understand that making the wrong hire does happen. You don’t want it to, but it will happen from time to time. And when you realize you’ve made a mistake, the best thing you can do is cut ties with the scandal as quickly and as completely as possible. Nothing short of that makes any sense for the ongoing success of your organization.

In fact, when the scandal becomes too big to manage, a decent person in Ms. Marcotte’s position, particularly if that person professes to support the organization in question (as Ms. Marcotte has expressed support for Edwards’ campaign), should take the responsibility and immediately recuse him or herself from that difficult position. That’s called honor, and it’s rare.

Mis-direction and revenge

Something else beyond Ms. Marcotte’s comments really bothers me here, and that is the way in which many liberal bloggers have chosen to defend Ms. Marcotte.

Without addressing her comments directly, Glenn Greenwald chose to talk about the rude comments of a conservative blogger.

Without addressing her comments directly, Daily Kos diarist Kagro X suggested that other Democratic candidates circle the wagons around Edwards.

Without addressing her comments directly, Shakespeare’s Sister blogger Waveflux commented on one of Ms. Marcotte’s critics.

And most disturbing of all in my opinion are the comments from Chris Bowers, writer at the popular liberal blog MyDD. Short of addressing the particulars of Ms. Marcotte’s comments– should we then assume he supports them?–Bowers instead launches a pretty bold threat directly at the Edwards campaign:

Bowers goes on to reference a straw poll at liberal blog DailyKos, commenting that “Either way, [Edwards] won’t be tied with Barack Obama in Dailykos straw polls anymore. It will be hard in one direction or the other” (emphasis mine).

In a later post, Bowers continue to actively threaten the Edwards camp, writing that “If someone is willing to stand with us, that should mean something big, and should not go unrewarded.”

Bowers’ message here is loud and clear: We don’t care what she said, whether or not it’s offensive, or any effect it might have on “our” candidate- we only care that one of “our own” is being threatened.

Could Bowers be any more direct? Fire Ms. Marcotte, and he will “let loose” on the Edwards campaign with a “vicious rant” (the same kind that Marcotte writes, I wonder?). However, if Edwards does what Bowers wants, then that “should not go unrewarded”.

These are pretty direct, and audaciously arrogant, threats for a liberal blog to make at a presidential candidate. Particularly when they are accompanied by a deafening lack of comment about exactly what Ms. Marcotte has written and its potential effects on the electorate.

This is a soggy, pathetic affair, and it reflects poorly on the entire blogosphere. Sadly, it will also likely have a negative effect on the prospects of talented, intelligent, and reasonable bloggers being hired by not just political campaigns, but by organizations on the whole.

And like many things, the initial situation was unfortunate. But the cover-up is turning out to be much worse.

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

IMPORTANT ACTION ALERT about the leftosphere's IMPORTANT ACTION ALERT.

Over at Crooks & Liars, http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/0...ld-be-ashamed/ John Amato is promising that a Pandora’s Box has been opened. I suppose a line has also been crossed, a martini has been shaken and an i has been dotted. A cliche has certainly been loosed upon an unsuspecting world. And someone’s taking himself and this whole incident waaaay too seriously.

Again, hilarious.

Let’s review the facts. Marcotte and….McEwan, that’s it…have been blogging for umpteen years at a collection of lefty blogs. In those blog years, they have collectively tossed out umpteen billion profanities, f-bombs and assorted insults. They have smeared Catholics, Protestants and pretty much everyone else they disagree with. Marcotte in particular seems to have a deep-seated hatred for all things male and Southern (so she’d probably take a swing at me if we met just on general principle). I wonder if she realizes that John Edwards is both a) male and b) Southern. Anyway. The pair have behaved badly on the internet, which being viewable to lots of people, means they have behaved badly in public. They have, as Terry Moran pointed out, engaged in what amounts to hate speech. Often, repeatedly and with great zest.

I myself am not a fan of labeling stuff “hate speech,” I don’t like hate crime laws or anything else that makes thoughts crimes. It’s dangerous, and usually ends up aimed at people who are a) male b) Southern and c) not liberal. Meaning, people like me. I have enough trouble obeying speed limits; I don’t need a whole new set of crimes that some prosecutor can just decide to tack on for fun based on my demographics. But liberals love the whole hate crime thing though, which makes this whole situation hilariously ironic: Here are two copper plated liberals, getting hoisted on hate speech charges. And a cursory trip through their archives–er, unless they get airbrushed–shows that the charge is valid and will stick.

The Edwards campaign erred in hiring these two. In fact, at this stage for any politician to hire almost any high profile liberal blogger carries a certain risk and baggage. Hire Kos and you get the “screw them” baggage. Hire Jerome Armstrong and you get Vanuatu and his planetarily aligned stock recommendations, or whatever. Most of the big name lefty bloggers drop f-bombs the way most normal people breathe. Josh Marshall doesn’t, but his writing is so full of unjustified whispering and speculation that I sometimes come away from his posts expecting to find Agent Mulder looking over my shoulder. And when the guy doesn’t deliver the goods that he whispers so earnestly about, no one ever calls him on it. But he is at least a very polished writer whose vocabulary goes well past four-letter words.

The notion that most liberal bloggers a) want to feel like they can play in the big leagues with the likes of Edwards and Hillary! but b) actually hiring them is likely to hurt the candidates they support is probably feeding all the rage on their side right now. They’re all looking back at their own virtual paper trails and regretting this wild rant or that uncorked ragefest. (Did I really smear every single Southerner who ever lived just to take a shot at BushCo? Why yes, yes I did. Several times last week and at least once a month since starting this blog.) Plus, no one likes it when their side looks bad, and their side looks bad right now (though why it looks bad, most of them don’t seem to understand yet). Edwards looks like he made a bad call and can’t make the right call to fix the bad one. He’s got himself in a no-win situation–keep the bloggers and you’re keeping haters around who will lose you your own home state if you get that far; fire them and the netroots will smear you until the day you die.

Before the lefty bloggers get their IMPORTANT ACTION ALERTS and vicious rants all drafted and ready to fire, a little introspection might be in order. Why might keeping Marcotte and…McEwan around be a bad thing? Because they’re likely to write something embarassing at exactly the wrong time. Because they’re likely to smear voters rather than engage them. Because to most people sex isn’t used as a threat and the death of a Supreme Court Justice isn’t an occassion to shout, essentially, IT’S ALL ABOUT ME!!!! at the top of our lungs. Because the gratuitous use of profanity is not, to most people, the sign of a healthy mind. Because they’re just bad for business.
Those bloggers appear to readers and the outside world now getting a small taste of their writings very much like the character Michelle conjured up for the two Vents that are related to this story. If I had thought she was overacting, I would have said so, but after reading the posts I had to say that her portrayal is dead on.

Writing is a revelatory thing. Use of ALL CAPS is a shout; use of profanity to me reflects unseriousness and lack of a vocabulary (or at least a thesaurus) and a lack of manners. Using every single issue to smear and denigrate rather than persuade, enlighten, or heck, just entertain for a second, makes the writer look like a loon. Making every post somehow All About Me and My Proclivities That You Can’t Stop exhibits paranoia. It just does. And that’s why the two bloggers have become a liability.

On this side of the aisle, it’s just a hilarious situation to watch unfold.

Everyone over there, threatening Edwards and threatening bloggers on the right and styling themselves as a bunch of internet Napoleons, just look like a collection of clowns falling all over themselves to be the next one to one-up the incandescent rage of the last one. Who can take themselves so seriously? Who can take them seriously anymore?

And in the midst of it, there’s John Edwards sitting in his ginormous house in the America where having a home the size of three football fields is normal, wondering what to do. Over a couple of bloggers, he has shoehorned himself into a no-win situation. Let’s make him Commander-in-Chief!

Update (AP): Be sure to see Ace’s last update here http://ace.mu.nu/archives/214895.php , in which Bowers basically pledges to make Amanda “Hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit” Marcotte’s employment his litmus test for the 2008 Democratic primary. God willing, his idea will catch on and nutroots morons around the ’sphere will take the pledge themselves, thereby confirming that their passion for politics has less to do with policies than with exerting their own power. I agree with Glenn http://instapundit.com/archives2/2007/02/post_2324.php (and Conn Carroll) too — it’s possible that Edwards’s people brought Marcotte on because she’s so repulsive, because they knew she’d appeal to the cretins he’s trying to woo. In which case, they absolutely should stand by her. Keep her on and let Chris Bowers swear his oath of loyalty to the guy who had the foresight, the vision, to hire one of the nutroots’s Christian-hating finest.

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

From John Edwards' :
http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2007/2/8/113651/4503



That’s vintage nutroots newspeak, on the same paranoid continuum as questioning the timing, and I’m sure it won’t be lost on his target audience. Their answer to every right-wing challenge, policy or otherwise, is to look for an ulterior motive that we’re allegedly attempting to distract them from. Opposing abortion isn’t “about” protecting innocents; it’s about “controlling women’s bodies.” Opposing affirmative action isn’t “about” fairness and meritocracy; it’s about reinstituting Jim Crow. The Iraq war isn’t “about” trying to reduce the incentives towards terrorism by introducing democracy; it’s about oil, Israel, Halliburton, colonialism, or any/all of the above. And criticizing Edwards’s bloggers isn’t “about” the fact that they’re offensive wretches whose brand of discourse has now been mainstreamed; it’s about conservatives trying to hijack the debate about which of the two Americas Lionel Hutz purchased to accommodate his palace.

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Thursday, February 08, 2007
Sects and the witty

http://www.dawneden.com/2007/02/sects-and-witty.html

Pandagon blogger Amanda Marcotte, a familiar name to readers of this blog, whose online persona caused controversy after John Edwards hired her as his campaign blogmistress, has issued an apology of sorts:

I guess it's nice to know that all those times her blog referred to Our Lord and Saviour as "Jeebus" — in 114 blog entries to date (the most recent last Sunday) — she was only kidding. http://pandagon.net/index.php?s=jeebus

A search of Pandagon archives shows that Amanda has yet to devise a similarly ha-ha name for Mohammed. Well, give her time; she's been on the Edwards campaign for only a week and a half.

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Thursday, February 08, 2007
http://proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/22327/

Okay, so maybe a few more words on this whole Marcotte dustup. Because Oprah tells me I need closure, and because, well, it dovetails nicely with some of my site themes (UPDATED)

Lots of gloating already in the comments by the flying monkeys the left typically dispatches to sprinkle schadenfreude over the poppies. But that’s to be expected, I guess. That their commentary is rife with further attacks on the faithful and suggestions that those who find Marcotte reprehensible have been saddled with tiny penises—well, this, too, is about as surprising as a Marcotte post that doesn’t somehow wend its way back to the institutionalized torturing of her pudendum by misanthropic godbags.

But lost on these Marcotte supporters—who are cheering on the power of the “netroots” to cow a politician into keeping on an ugly and hateful liability—is that Edwards just showed up Marcotte and McEwan as frauds and posturing blowhards, writers who have been pulling the wool over their audiences’ eyes by posting vicious “arguments” they never truly believed. To use the loaded language of establishment feminism—he publicly castrated them—and in so doing, he made fools out of their audiences, to boot.

Further, in doing so, he has shown himself to be nothing more than a calculating political opportunist of the worst sort—one who believes the voting public so daft they might actually buy a statement like the one he just released.

As I wrote yesterday, I don’t care one way or the other, personally, about whether or not Marcotte and McEwan are allowed to keep their josb. That’s Edwards’ call. And from a blogging perspective, I suppose Edwards’ decision is good news.

But let’s not confuse the effect with the rationale—which is both risible and insulting. Because were it really never Marcotte’s intent to malign anyone’s faith, she probably wouldn’t have dedicated so many hate-filled blog posts to, you know—maligning anyone’s faith.

Of course it was her intent. Just as it was McEwan’s intent. And worst of all, Edwards knows it. That he has pretended to take the two at their word, in an ostentatious gesture of “trust,” is precisley the kind of staged treacle that makes people doubt the sincerity of politicians; and that both Marcotte and McEwan have assured their own personal Patriarch that they’ll behave, now that he’s promoted them to the grownups’ table, is, to put it bluntly, one of the most pathetic public surrenderings of personal integrity I’ve ever seen.

Seriously. We should feel bad for them.

That is, were we to actually believe they meant any of it. Because how this plays out for the netroots is this way: either they are cheering on an ideological sellout, or they are knowingly and happily embracing an opportunistic liar. So. Congrats to them. Once again, they’ve covered themselves in white hot sticky glory!

Edwards and Marcotte deserve each other, as far as I’m concerned. A presidential candidate who tries to sell me on the fact that Marcotte and her group of shrieking ill-tempered character assassins had no intent of maligning anyone—all for a bump in the DailyKos straw poll—is a charlatan and a waffling opportunist.

Similarly, if Edwards believes “we’re beginning a great debate about the future of this country,” he might begin by instructing his “Blogmistress” that deleting dissenting opinions doesn’t exactly further “debate” as it is commonly understood.

Of course, “debate” as it is understood in progressive circles means something different, I suppose—namely, circling the wagons and attacking dissenters, even as you airbrush away their dissent so that you alone can characterize it —so, in at least one America, Edwards is directly on point.

I’m tempted to say here, “Jesus wept”—but I fear that would only bring about a thousand cheers from a thousand self-styled emancipated vaginas.

I never really cared wither way either, but paid attention mostly to see what Edwards would do. This is by far the most interesting of the two possible outcomes because it says so much about Edwards, who he considers his base, and ultimately how much power (voting power? PR power? both?) he thinks they carry.

Personally, I find it hard to believe that were so awash in wingbats that a presidential hopeful would stake his campaign on them; but then again what the hell do I know...

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

MSM Spin ... Edwards, the article reports, has never met his bloggers.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...020800878.html






Catholic group Fidelis responds:

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?