Marcotte Issue Hits WaPo and NYT
Amanda Marcotte has said,
you don’t pick on Twisty’s glorious coinage “godbag” without tangling with me.
And indeed, that glorious coinage shows up in quite a few of her posts.
But apparently the “godbags” have decided to tangle with her. The Washington Post (in an AP article) reports:
Two bloggers hired recently by Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards were criticized Tuesday by a Catholic group for posts they had written elsewhere on the Internet.
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, demanded that Edwards fire Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan.
“John Edwards is a decent man who has had his campaign tarnished by two anti-Catholic, vulgar, trash-talking bigots,” Donohue wrote in a statement. “He has no choice but to fire them immediately.”
And the New York Times has more:
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.
Well, don’t leave us in suspense, New York Times! What did she say? The New York Times won’t tell you — but that’s what blogs are for, right? Here you go:
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.
The New York Times also has a quote from that post she deleted about the Duke lacrosse non-rape case:
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.”
I disagree with Donahue. As I have already said, I urge John Edwards to keep these bloggers on.
Because when it comes down to it, who really cares what the godbags say?
On Michelle Malkin’s blog there’s a link to Kathryn Lopez’s article about this ghastly woman.
I’ve read a few of her insane rantings lately, but that one probably takes the cake. She is a seriously disturbed person. I can’t think of too many other people so filled with hatred and anger. I feel like showering after reading her awful stuff.rightisright (2fce83) — 2/7/2007 @ 12:29 am
As a Christian, my main objection to that sentence is that Amanda didn’t capitalize the masculine pronoun.
There are a bunch of other objections, but that’s about the only one that Ms. Marcotte is intellectually equipped to understand.
–BumperStickerist (af1392) — 2/7/2007 @ 5:46 am
It also looks like there is going to be some call into Congressional hearings on whether or not the Bureau officials did some covering up and lying of their own. Remember how Sutton keeps insisting that the illegal was shot in the buttocks while “fleeing”? ahemDarleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 6:54 am
Whoops!! I posted the above to the wrong thread….
I apologize…. please delete or move. Sorry.
[chagrin]Darleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 6:55 am
Penis envy can be very difficult to overcome.rooster (fdf219) — 2/7/2007 @ 6:55 am
Politically, Edwards has to keep them and stand by them.
If he throws them overboard, well just watch his online support go away–something he can’t afford to have happen.Geek, Esq. (f63bcd) — 2/7/2007 @ 6:57 am
Edwards’s Bloggers Making More News Than Candidate…
After several days of criticism from the right side of the blogosphere, John Edwards’ blog outreach team is now coming under fire from the Catholic League, which is demanding that Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan be fired for anti-Catholic comm…Outside The Beltway | OTB (30d6b6) — 2/7/2007 @ 7:03 am
Point of Information:
The Immaculate Conception does NOT refer to Mary’s conception of Christ. It is the dogma that the Blessed Virgin Mary was “preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin” from the first moment of HER CONCEPTION.Lesley (9f37aa) — 2/7/2007 @ 7:04 am
This time on topic…yes, I hope Edwards keeps Mandy on… wait until her anti-Israel views get exposed. That’s in line with a lot of functional anti-Semites on the Left, but might turn out to be yet another Edwards liability.Darleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 7:07 am
Lesley beat me to it, the Times doesn’t know what The Immaculate Conception is (and apparently couldn’t be bothered to look it up).
Catholics don’t tithe, either. Or rather, they are not required to. They’re expected to contribute to the support of the Church, but there’s no set percentage of income.
I don’t mind the anti-Catholicism so much — I’ve seen it for years — I just wish that one of those anti-Catholics would get the doctrine correct.Steverino (d27168) — 2/7/2007 @ 7:21 am
[…] (HT: Patterico) […]Right Wing Nut House » CRASHING AND BURNING (5ada7f) — 2/7/2007 @ 7:41 am
“The Immaculate Conception does NOT refer to Mary’s conception of Christ. It is the dogma that the Blessed Virgin Mary was “preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin” from the first moment of HER CONCEPTION.”
I have a serious question (and I ask this with all due respect, out of curiosity): How does the Roman Catholic Church explain Romans 3:23 (“for ALL [emphasis mine] have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God”)?Leviticus (68eff1) — 2/7/2007 @ 8:19 am
Man, can you imagine what would have happened if Amanda had said something similarly snarky about Islam? She’d have to worry about a fatwa, not just “godbags” coming after her; and Edwards would drop her, and the MSM would—you should only pardon the expression—crucify her.
Amanda, like most leftists, attacks only safe targets.TalkinKamel (31555f) — 2/7/2007 @ 8:31 am
Bill Donohue is more of a grunting, half-human savage than even Pat Robertson, and I can hardly think of a greater compliment than being on the receiving end of one of his hysterical McCarthy-like crusades. It’s also great to learn about the new bubbleheaded epithets floating around the cesspool of the rightwing blogosphere; here’s my favorite one of the day: “That’s in line with a lot of functional anti-Semites on the Left . . . .”
Ooooh, “fucntional anti-Semites.” I guess those would include the eighty-seven percent of Jews who voted for the Democrats in the last election, and who detest George “Still As Respected As NAMBLA” Bush?legaleagle (637aba) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:07 am
“In 2004, Media Matters first detailed anti-Catholic comments made by Jerome Corsi, who, as co-author of Unfit for Command (Regnery, 2004), was one of the ringleaders of the smear campaign by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth against Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) — a Catholic presidential candidate. Among Corsi’s bigoted comments:
CORSI: “So this is what the last days of the Catholic Church are going to look like. Buggering boys undermines the moral base and the laywers rip the gold off the Vatican altars. We may get one more Pope, when this senile one dies, but that’s probably about it.”
CORSI: “Boy buggering in both Islam and Catholicism is okay with the Pope as long as it isn’t reported by the liberal press.”
Corsi also called Islam “a worthless, dangerous Satanic religion,” and a “cancer that destroys the body it infects” and claimed of Muslims: “RAGHEADS are Boy-Bumpers as clearly as they are Women-Haters — it all goes together.”
Despite the uproar surrounding Corsi’s comments, Donohue apparently remained silent at the time, and subsequently dismissed the comments as “quips.” A search of the Nexis database yields no examples of Donohue denouncing — or even commenting on — Corsi’s anti-Catholic remarks.”
Hiring Marcotte was a stupid move politically. Slackers go off the reservation. But Malkin is an absolute idiot and the Catholic League calling others’ bigits. That’s a laugh.AF (59792e) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:20 am
After reading blogs for years now, there isn’t much that literally makes my jaw drop, but that quote from Amanda just did.
This isn’t debating or being funny or even sarcastic opinion. This is vile bitter bigoted hate.Rightwingsparkle (c5a98e) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:23 am
Here’s my favorite bubbleheaded epithet floating around the cesspool of the leftwing blogosphere; I can’t wait until Nigger Jenkins and The Flying Kike-Boy fight over the Cruiserweight Championship next week!rooster (fdf219) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:37 am
Michael Moore is more of a grunting, half-human savage than even Al Gore, and I can hardly think of a greater compliment than being on the receiving end of one of his hysterical McCarthy-like “documentaries”.
I could do this all day.rooster (fdf219) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:40 am
Hey, feel free. But, not surpisingly, I didn’t see a single word about Donohue’s dismissal of the virulently anti-Catholic screed of Corsi, as pointed out in AF’s comment. Now why would that be? Likewise, Marcotte’s comments made poor Rightwingsparke’s jaw drop, but Corsi’s KKK rant seems to be no problem at all. Hypocrisy anyone?legaleagle (637aba) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:53 am
Ah. So the wingnut clown chorus who cheerleaded an attack based on a perceived threat (and continue to do so) where thousands die under the most barbarous circumstances believe they reserve the right to complain about someone’s “potty talk”.
You don’t. Do shut up.MyPetGloat (b590d5) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:59 am
Leviticus – wrt to your doctrinal question, I don’t have the answer as I am an Anglican, not a Roman Catholic. On almost all matters of faith, we Anglicans agree with the Roman Catholics with the exception of the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of the Virgin, and the infallibility of the Pope (although, we do recognize his Primacy). I would encourage any of my friends across the Tiber to help explain this to you.Lesley (686801) — 2/7/2007 @ 10:00 am
Because no one cares, really, about Donohue or Marcotte. The whole attraction here is the train wreck. Watching extremists go at each other, tossing logic and decorum out the window, appeals to me. It’s bloodsport for the civilized man.
The patriarchy and all that other hoo-ha.rooster (fdf219) — 2/7/2007 @ 10:02 am
Remember, the only thing bad and evil that exists is George Bush and the war in Iraq. Pay absolute no attention to anything else. Especially, a private citizens freedom of speech.G (722480) — 2/7/2007 @ 10:05 am
“And I’m so sick of southern guys with ranches running this country. I want a guy to run for President who doesn’t have a fucking — I’m sorry, a ranch. Wouldn’t that be good. A guy who wasn’t on the ranch during Katrina he waas on the streetcorner answering questions”
He likes Giuliani.
And here’s Donahue again
“Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It’s not a secret, okay? And I’m not afraid to say it.”
And some nice stuff on Patrick Hynes too.
Miner: Is it fair to call America a “Christian nation”?
Hynes: Yes. America is a Christian nation. As I write in my book, “Is America a Christian nation? Of course it is. Don’t be ridiculous. What a stupid question.
And then a bit on his anti-mormon anti Romney work.
This is so silly. The right wing accusing others of being bigots. The GOP platform is based on bigotry.AF (59792e) — 2/7/2007 @ 10:31 am
If you too would like to keep Amanda on, please sign the petition to the Edwards campaign at the link. And, please send it around to other progressive blogs like this one. Thanks!Free Amanda Petition! (cc42f6) — 2/7/2007 @ 10:45 am
John Edwards, meet the Tar Baby. Oh … I see you already have. Lotsa luck getting loose from her! (What a delicious show this is becoming.)Rosco (dc8ea5) — 2/7/2007 @ 10:47 am
Remember, the only thing bad and evil that exists is George Bush and the war in Iraq. Pay absolute no attention to anything else. Especially, a private citizens freedom of speech.
Well yeah, in terms of low tooth per-capita armchair genocidal goonsquads who faint and clutch their pearls over a blogger who offends them. They can have all the free speech they want – it just comes with no credibility attached.MyPetGloat (b590d5) — 2/7/2007 @ 10:52 am
“Michael Moore is more of a grunting, half-human savage than even Al Gore”
MORE than Al Gore?! He must be some kind of monster to be considered more of a savage than AL GORE!
Why does the right hate Al Gore? Global warming?Leviticus (68eff1) — 2/7/2007 @ 11:27 am
We’re all gonna die someday, rooster… quit being a baby.
And thank you for the response, Lesley.Leviticus (68eff1) — 2/7/2007 @ 11:27 am
I’m not a Catholic but I think this is the answer to your question:
In other words, Catholics believe that God’s miraculous grace exempted Mary from original sin.DRJ (605076) — 2/7/2007 @ 11:28 am
“G” and “MyPetGloat” – What the hell does this have to do with free speech? Who said that this vapid bigot couldn’t write whatever she wants?carlitos (b38ae1) — 2/7/2007 @ 11:30 am
“the GOP platform is based on bigotry”
Bigots accusing bigots of bigotry.rooster (fdf219) — 2/7/2007 @ 11:31 am
Leviticus, I was mocking legaleagle. I ignore Al Gore the same as ignore everyone else. I don’t discriminate when it comes to not listening to people.rooster (fdf219) — 2/7/2007 @ 11:35 am
“McCain and his blogger apparently agree: Chelsea Clinton is “ugly”AF (59792e) — 2/7/2007 @ 11:53 am
Ahhh, the truthiness of it all. Looks like this week will be interesting.rooster (fdf219) — 2/7/2007 @ 11:59 am
Edwards Pulls A Warner…
Candidates for office should read all the scriblings by bloggers before deciding to hire them. First Mark Warner hired a blogger and kooky astrologer, who was also under investigation by the SEC, and now Edwards is in hot water for…Sensible Mom (72c8fd) — 2/7/2007 @ 12:05 pm
What AF, legaleagle and PetGloat don’t seem to realize is that the issue under discussion is not “who in the blogosphere has ever written anything offensive and bigoted?”
It’s “Who in the 2008 Presidential Race has hired a blogger who has ever written anything offensive and bigoted?”
Right now the only answer is … Edwards. And make no mistake, the realistic accusation against Edwards right now is “lack of oversight on hiring decisions”. If he delays much longer the accusation may plausibly be changed to “Does he agree with her?”
The trolling triumvirate seem to think that the accurate quoting of the blogger in question is some sort of attack against which she (and Edwards) need defending … curious.
It’s understandable that they can’t keep up – they’d rather sling insubstantial insults at an entire group than debate the facts. Some Lefties seem to have trouble with those “fact” things. Best for them to stick to “truthiness”.
But, tell you what legaleagle and PetGloat and especially you AF (to whom I’ve made this point before, shame it didn’t actually stick – but based on your past posting behavior, good advice never does stick with you), you start your own blog and you can post about the alleged perfidy of the GOP in general and this Donahue guy (whoever *he* is) in particular and the ability of Jews to do whatever it is with NAMBLA that legaleagle is claiming that they do; we’ll all be along shortly to marvel at your razor-sharp closely-reasoned arguments.
Heck, if you’re ambitious, you might even try to libel an entire religion and get hired by a frontrunning Democrat presidential candidate. Christian, that is (the religion, not the candidate – obviously). A moon-worshipping death cult simply won’t do (for your libelling, not for a Democrat attempting to run for President – obviously).
Guys, give it up. Your trolling is really pathetic. Which do you think is a more effective argument for you on this board:
1) “Marcotte is a bigot and based on these recently come-to-light blog entries, Edwards should fire her. Speaking of Edwards, his position on X is particularly noteworthy because of [wonkspeak, wonkspeak, wonkspeak …]”
2) “Oh yeah?!? Well some guy somewhere else on the blogosphere who’s also a nut said some bad things about other people too!! And all conservatives suck!!”
Clearly you’ve chosen (2) as the answer to that question. Not only have you exposed your inability or unwillingness to address the issue, you’ve also left unchallenged the idea that Edwards should a) have done some background checking on Marcotte and b) should get rid of her post haste.
The fact that *even you guys* don’t try to defend her remarks speaks to the fact that those remarks are objectively indefensible.
The good news for Edwards is this breach of sensibility came early in the campaign – by the time things are going full-swing, folks will have forgotten (with the help of the MSM memory hole) who Marcotte ever was.Abraxas (2f586f) — 2/7/2007 @ 12:14 pm
I explain why Mandy is a functional anti-Semite here and here.
When one holds Israel to a different standard than any other country, when one deliberately ignores the history of the region and the copious writings, speeches and actions of Hezbollah (and other Judenhass groups); then regardless of one’s personal feelings about individual Jewish people or whether one identifies as being a Jew (ethnically) then one is engaging in functional anti-Semitism.
IE Noam Chomsky is Jewish AND an anti-Semite.
And those of the Left who engage in rhetoric about the “mistake” of Israel as a state are anti-Semitic.Darleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 12:37 pm
believe they reserve the right to complain about someone’s “potty talk”. You don’t.
I do have that right. Please tell me where the Constitution guarantees only YOU the right to talk and …
Do shut up.
… ME, only the right to agree with you or
Missing your irony gene, eh?Darleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 12:42 pm
The GOP platform is based on bigotry.
I am really curious what you label “bigotry”.Darleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 12:44 pm
Marcotte and McEwan have been fired. The nutroots are going crazy at DU and other sites. I’m making some popcorn.
[Salon broke the news — but oddly quotes the campaign as cautioning Salon against saying they’ve been fired. Not sure what it all means. — P]Old Coot (581b7e) — 2/7/2007 @ 12:54 pm
My bad, rooster. I didn’t see legaleagle’s parallel remark.
DRJ: It’s not that I don’t understand the concept of the Immaculate Conception, it’s that I don’t understand how Mary can be without sin when “all have sinned and falled short of the glory of God”.Leviticus (43095b) — 2/7/2007 @ 12:59 pm
How can a blind man see? A deaf man hear? As I stated earlier, it’s God’s miraculous grace. He takes what isn’t and makes it so.DRJ (605076) — 2/7/2007 @ 1:06 pm
Links??Darleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 1:09 pm
“I am really curious what you label ‘bigotry’ ”
Tent Lott, Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, Senator Macacawitz, “Harold… call me,” the looney toons on the Christian right (interracial dating anyone?) do I need to go on?
And of course, zionism is racism but to think otherwise is nondenominational in this country. You want to tell me how I have a “right of return” to land my ancestors left 2000 years ago, but that others, who’s ancestors did not leave, have been forced off of? Neither Patterico nor yu can answer that one, but don’t worry many “liberals” can’t answer either. “A land without people for a people without land”AF (59792e) — 2/7/2007 @ 1:14 pm
But of course there were people on that land as even Israeli historians now admit.
So cut your racist bullshit.
Salon, NRO’s The Corner, Ace’s place, many others. Sorry, I don’t do links.Old Coot (581b7e) — 2/7/2007 @ 1:19 pm
“What the hell does this have to do with free speech?”
nothing. I was just being stupid.
Man, AF is just trying way too hard.
“and found bad words and posts that they claim are offensive.” I guess this is one of the largest problems that I have with the left. There is no definition to what is offensive.G (722480) — 2/7/2007 @ 1:22 pm
The Ethnic Cleansing of PalestineAF (59792e) — 2/7/2007 @ 1:23 pm
It’s written an Israeli born in Haifa: Ilan Pappe. Look him up yourself, but don’t try to come back to me with your self-important ignorance. I don’t have the fucking patience.
Why should anyone be interested in the revisionism by a person who doesn’t recognize the legitimacy of the state of Israel? Who doesn’t consider Zionism a legitimate nationalist movement? Who supports even the academic boycott of Israel?
Yeah. Objective scholarship there.Darleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 1:38 pm
He’s an Israeli dear. It’s his home and he’s not moving.AF (59792e) — 2/7/2007 @ 1:40 pm
You figure it out, you’re a big girl.
Do you have a link? If it’s true they’ve been fired, they could probably use some cheering up. I suggest this up-to-date but always classic Steve Martin.DRJ (605076) — 2/7/2007 @ 1:40 pm
“I do have that right. Please tell me where the Constitution guarantees only YOU the right to talk and …”
No, but definitely ignored or at least elicit the very language you decry (from Marcotte) but nonetheless deserve. Even then, you’re still getting off easy. Who needs an irony meter to know you have no credibility?MyPetGloat (b590d5) — 2/7/2007 @ 2:15 pm
Pam Spaulding of Pandagon wrote about the supposed dismissal of the lovely Miss Marcotte here, but, oddly enough, commented that she hadn’t actually spoken to Miss Marcotte about it yet, so even Pandagon doesn’t know if it’s true. 🙂
Y’all will love the comments section.Dana (556f76) — 2/7/2007 @ 4:07 pm
Surely someone named after the third book of Moses would understand:
The miracle of the Immaculate Conception includes the concept that God kept Mary free from sin throughout her earthly life.Dana (556f76) — 2/7/2007 @ 4:10 pm
What is being lost in this whole concocted debate over the merits of “free speech” and relative hypocrisy is 1) the fact that Marcotte’s writings reveal her to be an extraordinarily prejudiced, hateful, and small-minded person; and 2) that Edwards hired her to run his blog and presumably drum up the support of her readership.
The latter is quite understandable in this day and age, and Edwards is to be commended for looking to the blogosphere to increase his political base. The problem is that he apparently did not take the time to actually investigate Ms. Marcotte’s writings and ask whether those kinds of opinions he wanted associated with him as a result of hiring her, which was inevitably going to happen.
Notable hires on a campaign staff are going to draw increased scrutiny, regardless of the political candidate. The brouhaha over St Amanda of the Bitter Ovaries’ blogging history is just as relevant as if she had authored a textbook of historical criticism or a pamphlet of political manifestos. For Marcotte’s defenders to pretend that her writings suddenly don’t matter in the context of a political campaign is extraordinarily silly.
She publically has made her opinions known on a variety of subjects, and that makes her and those who hire her for political purposes fair game for whatever criticism might result from those actions.
Either way, Edwards is going to come out of this with a lot of egg on his face. If he wasn’t aware of Ms. Marcotte’s blogging history, why should anyone trust him to be able to pay attention to detail and hire the kind of individuals who will be responsible for maturely interacting with powerful and often touchy foreign leaders on a regular basis? If he was aware of Ms. Marcotte’s screeds, particularly her rather cavalier attitude towards the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” when it comes to certain demographic groups, what does it say about his own attitude towards a large number of people he is trying to convince to vote for him?Chris (49f7cf) — 2/7/2007 @ 4:42 pm
Matt at MyDD: “When I was hired by the Corzine campaign, right-wing blogs dug through my past and tried to smear me with what I had written. It hurt and it sucked…”
Isn’t it awful when people try to smear you with what you wrote before, ignoring that it is plainly inconvenient for you RIGHT NOW? God, I just hate it when that happens!Sherlock (bbf2af) — 2/7/2007 @ 5:08 pm
I can think of worse things with which to be smeared…unless we’re talking about Ms. Marcotte’s writings.
“It hurt and it sucked.”
Jeebus. Was this guy breastfed until puberty?rooster (7d33ac) — 2/7/2007 @ 5:12 pm
He’s an Israeli dear. It’s his home and he’s not moving.
And Timothy McVeigh was an American.
So?Darleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 6:10 pm
The sad tale of John Edwards’ (now former) bloggers…
As I mentioned briefly in my last post, the mega-watt hot issue the last couple of days in the blogosphere has been the story about two popular left-wing bloggers that the John Edwards campaign hired as his ‘official bloggers.’ Several we…Sister Toldjah (1466f5) — 2/7/2007 @ 6:19 pm
“He’s an Israeli dear. It’s his home and he’s not moving.”
Sure. You bet. Like this guy was an American. Like you’re an American, AF.
BTW, this is the last time I will waste any time or thought on you.nk (b57bfb) — 2/7/2007 @ 6:32 pm
The phrase was coined by Israel Zangwill in the context of the so-
called ‘Uganda Scheme’ proposed by the British Colonial Office.
The land referred to in the slogan was BRITISH EAST AFRICA.
Got that AF? Probably not.Stu707 (5b299c) — 2/7/2007 @ 6:46 pm
Nice work everyone .You’ve all come a long way since the good old days of pitchforks and torches.RedStayteColluge (7d663a) — 2/7/2007 @ 7:36 pm
Irony: This man probably votes for Senator Byrd every election.OHNOES (d573a4) — 2/7/2007 @ 8:28 pm
Only go on when you ACTUALLY SOURCE YOUR OWN CLAIM … you said the GOP platform was based on bigotry.
Then you give me a list of individuals (and a unsubstantiated charge against Christians)
BFD … I can match ya and outdo you with Dem bigots all day long.
What GOP platform position is based on bigotry?Darleen (543cb7) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:06 pm
And NK cut the treason bullshit unless you want to talk about how much safer we are now thanks to your hero’s lies. But perhaps on the other hand you should read a book for once in your life before you spout your opinions. A little knowledge would help; but knowledge doesn’t interest you much; you prefer uneducated righteous indignation. “America Rocks!
A bunch of fucking geniuses. RillyAF (59792e) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:16 pm
Do you talk this way to people you don’t know that you meet in “real life”?
Either it’s your personal habit or you are genuinely angry, but I don’t see why you feel so venomous toward people you don’t even know.DRJ (605076) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:28 pm
“If you want to impress a fool, praise him.
If you want to impress a wise man, improve yourself”
That’s some Sufi commentary for ya.AF (59792e) — 2/7/2007 @ 9:57 pm
“If you want to impress a fool, praise him.”
Well done, AF.Abraxas (db3144) — 2/7/2007 @ 10:05 pm
AF is the greatest.Patterico (a8fa4a) — 2/7/2007 @ 10:08 pm
Patterico drops by with a witty reposte
but no argument.AF (59792e) — 2/8/2007 @ 7:32 am
As opposed to:
“‘If you want to impress a fool, praise him.
If you want to impress a wise man, improve yourself’
That’s some Sufi commentary for ya.”
Which is such a devastatingly incisive argument and so absolutely on topic, there can be no possible counter to it.
If you want a fool to go away, do you patronize him? Anyone?Abraxas (db3144) — 2/8/2007 @ 8:01 am
“Which is such a devastatingly incisive argument and so absolutely on topic, there can be no possible counter to it.”
Mostly all I do is cut and paste. data.
no response to that or nothing worth noting.
What’s more important, Abraxas? Pat and every other idiot comes out of the woodwork when I toss in an insult, but never when I offer detail.
You win: The world is flat. and the moon is made of cheese, we’re winning your war and the prez is a genius and a saint.Mati Klarwein (59792e) — 2/8/2007 @ 8:30 am
[…] It wasn’t their intention to malign anyone’s faith? By referring to religious conservatives as “godbags” and “Christofascists”? Quote: Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? […]Hot Air » Blog Archive » Patriarchy thwarted! Edwards to retain Marcotte, McEwan (d4224a) — 2/8/2007 @ 10:08 am
Edwards Flip-Flops on Firing of Bloggers…
They’re not gone, after all. Sayeth John:Mary Katharine Ham (b5f39f) — 2/8/2007 @ 11:35 am
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……
[…] h/t Hot Air and Patterico’s Pontifications. […]High Desert Wanderer » Blog Archive » Candidates, Bloggers and other Idiots (5eb6e7) — 2/8/2007 @ 12:17 pm
Don’t tell your tempest how small your teapot is……
…let the Internet tell it for you. Though in fairness, a tempest that big in a teapot that small was probably bound to explode before anyone even spoke the words.The Random Yak (dec680) — 2/8/2007 @ 1:36 pm
For those living in a cyber-hole or otherwise unavailable, it appears John Edwar…
[…] From Allahpundit: It wasn’t their intention to malign anyone’s faith? By referring to religious conservatives as “godbags” and “Christofascists”? Quote: Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? […]Right Voices » Blog Archive » John Edwards Can’t Stand Up To Hard Left Blogs, What Makes Us Think He Can Stand Up To The Terrorists? (1466f5) — 2/8/2007 @ 3:35 pm
[…] Allah of Hot Air is outraged over Amanda’s disrespect toward Christianity, and what it says about John Edwards: It wasn’t their intention to malign anyone’s faith? By referring to religious conservatives as “godbags” and “Christofascists”? Quote: Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? […]Sadly, No! » Smells Like Something’s Still Burning Over There (d83a19) — 2/8/2007 @ 10:01 pm
[…] Remind me, another day, to give a little tutorial on the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception because I see it misunderstood everywhere. In the past few days I have seen countless bloggers refer to one of the Edwards Campaign Blogmistress’s remarks (Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit?) as referencing the Immaculate Conception. It’s not. That is referencing the conception of Christ. The Immaculate Conception is something completely different, and I wish I had time to go into it today. This weekend, I will! […]The Anchoress » Anna Nicole, Palestinians, Al Qaeda, Stem Cells, Pandas (1b383c) — 2/9/2007 @ 10:45 am
Notice how not one person noted comment #8; the vulgar Marcotte doesn’t even know wht the Immaculate Conception is. Idiots mock what they don’t understand or know.Mike (f5578f) — 2/9/2007 @ 11:26 am
[…] I supposed early on that he didn’t bother to vet her himsef–which makes me wonder who on the campaign did and what they were thinking. If Edwards did read her stuff beforehand, then it was simply a clear-cut case of trying to have your political cake and eat it too: Get the nutroots on board by hiring one of their own, and we won’t lose any credibility because the blogosphere takes up only a very small portion of voters, and they’re very insular–the rest of America won’t know or care who does the–what was it again?–”blogging” on the ol’ intertubes. If that was what he, or his staff, thought, they grossly miscalculated. Gone are the days when AllahP could justifiably moan that nobody reads the blogs and thus they don’t affect anything. Mainstream media outlets picked up the story, albeit dialing down the grotesque nature of her rhetoric, and Edwards’s camp cottoned to the idea that this wasn’t going to stay hidden away on a web page, tucked nicely into a little compartment labled “Internet” that didn’t really spill out onto voters who don’t read the blogs. So he apparently took an old political route out of the hardship: ask for her resignation. No, nobody’s said that he (or they) asked her to, but it’s not difficult to suppose. It’s such a classic dodge: allows both the person leaving and the persons not doing the firing to save face *coughHarrietMierscough*. […]Anwyn’s Notes in the Margin » Amanda Marcotte Resigns: Edwards Tries to Eat Cake (e8be5d) — 2/12/2007 @ 10:49 pm
Backfire and redemption…
Ah HA!, screamed the bottom feeders in anticipation of the “outing” of a newly discovered and outspoken conservative. CPAC honoree and Marine reservist Cpl. Matt Sanchez had a gay-porn film career in his past, and leftist goons were smacking their……JunkYardBlog (621918) — 3/8/2007 @ 4:41 am
[…] to, and in some cases, moments past its birth, exonerates murderers based on their skin color and vehemently hates religious people provided that faith isn’t in Global Warming, would hang out with Satan. I […]Six Meat Buffet » Dante’s Caucus (03391a) — 7/1/2008 @ 8:40 am