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.
This is exactly right. And the America we believe in is not one in which intolerant antisemites like Bill Donohue get to set the agenda for Democratic candidates for President. Heck, in the America I want to live in, they wouldn't even set the agenda for Republicans. I'm concerned that John Edwards allowed Donohue to control this news cycle for as long as he did. I know the campaign is young, but he hasn't really stopped running for President since the last election.
I can't believe they didn't expect that someone would dredge up a few choice passages from anyone they hired as a campaign blogger. Nor can I imagine that they didn't decide that this was exactly the sort of statement that ought to be made if anyone questioned those bloggers' essays from months and years before they were hired.
Like a lot of people, I didn't bother jumping into this story when the first attacks on Amanda and Melissa came out. Not because I didn't care, but because I didn't think it would stick. Edwards gave the story legs by firing – or considering firing – those two staffers. That's a mistake that it will take time for him to recover from.
- Log in to post comments
Bill Donohue merely stated the facts about these two bloggers. His job as head of The Catholic League is two-fold: 1) to defend against unfair attacks on both the Catholic Church and its followers and, 2) to draw attention to and publicize such said attacks. What is surprising about the two bloggers is that they are BOTH from the anti-Catholic "branch" of pseudo-liberals. Edwards needs to get more balance. He's lost my vote because of this issue.
Donohue stated some facts about the bloggers. Neither is anti-Catholic, and the comments I've seen are pretty clearly criticisms of the Catholic Church's position on birth control, not a wide-ranging criticism of Catholicism per se.
Bill Donohue merely stated the facts about these two bloggers
And Intelligent Design proponents merely states facts about evolution.
Rigggghhhhht.
"Bill Donohue merely stated the facts about these two bloggers. His job as head of The Catholic League is two-fold: 1) to defend against unfair attacks on both the Catholic Church and its followers and, 2) to draw attention to and publicize such said attacks. What is surprising about the two bloggers is that they are BOTH from the anti-Catholic "branch" of pseudo-liberals. Edwards needs to get more balance. He's lost my vote because of this issue. "
Other links:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200412210001
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=19389
Posted by: Richard Lee
His job is to say whatever right-wing stuff rolls through his head: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Donohue#Scarborough_Country_appearanc…
"Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, OK? And I'm not afraid to say it. That's why they hate this movie. It's about Jesus Christ, and it's about truth. It's about the messiah."
"Hollywood likes anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children. They like abortions. I believe in traditional values and restraint. They believe in libertinism."
Another juicy one, from http://www.catholicleague.org/06press_releases/quarter%204/061004_Mark_…
As for the alleged abuse, its time to ask some tough questions. First, there is a huge difference between being groped and being raped, so which was it Mr. Foley? Second, why didnt you just smack the clergyman in the face? After all, most 15-year-old teenage boys wouldnt allow themselves to be molested. So why did you?
For a completely different take on the Edwards fiasco, see link below:
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/46050301-85ff-4d6b-acf8-bf41a242f93f