<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>techPresident - Edwards Blogger Heads for the Door - Comments</title>
 <link>http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/blog/entry/44/edwards_blogger_heads_for_the_door</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;Edwards Blogger Heads for the Door&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>This goes beyond Donohue</title>
 <link>http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/blog/entry/44/edwards_blogger_heads_for_the_door#comment-21</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Let&#039;s take a look at one of the things Amanda Marcotte wrote:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As a Catholic, I find that offensive.  Equating the Holy Spirit to a human penis and the entire religion to an &quot;ancient mythology&quot;.  And it was obvious she wrote it with the intent to offend.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It&#039;s one thing to argue abortion, gay rights, and the involvement of the church in political matters.  It&#039;s another to intentionally deride sacred teachings of a religion in a self-righteous manner.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This goes well beyond Bill Donohue, whom I regard as a buffoon and a bigot.  I can assure everyone that he doesn&#039;t speak for me.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And I don&#039;t really see him being put on a pedestal.  He&#039;s a spokesperson for a relatively large organization.  With that, he gets invited on political talk shows.  I&#039;m sure Marcotte will now be invited to speak as well.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Think about it.  The Edwards campaign hired her in a communications capacity.  She&#039;s written things that are both highly and intentionally insulting to the religion of 76,000,000 Americans.  Please.  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.digitalstreetjournal.com&quot; title=&quot;www.digitalstreetjournal.com&quot;&gt;www.digitalstreetjournal.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:12:52 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jonathan Trenn</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 21 at http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Mike&#039;s got a point</title>
 <link>http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/blog/entry/44/edwards_blogger_heads_for_the_door#comment-18</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;It&#039;s true that Marcotte&#039;s prior writings were controversial enough that the mainstream media could have raised questions without Donohue&#039;s intervention. And yes, once the questions were raised, they had to be addressed, regardless of the accuser. But I still don&#039;t think the media has done a fair job of informing the public about Donohue&#039;s motivations and beliefs. &lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:27:04 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Micah L. Sifry</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 18 at http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>I have to take issue with Micah&#039;s question.</title>
 <link>http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/blog/entry/44/edwards_blogger_heads_for_the_door#comment-8</link>
 <description>&lt;ul&gt;2. Should the big media that jumped on this story once Bill Donohue blasted the Edwards campaign do a fair job, or did they parrot Donohue without telling their readers of his own, shall we say, checkered record as a would-be opponent of religious defamation? Why is he on a higher pedestal?&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I respect the idea behind the question, but that&#039;s really not how the media operates.  The story was Amanda Marcotte.  If you&#039;re charged in court, there is a burden of proof and the motives of your accuser will be questioned.  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That isn&#039;t the case in the news media.  In the media, you have a responsibility to disprove the charges against you regardless of the accuser.  Maybe Micah&#039;s is a question that needs to be asked of the media, but they are hardly to blame for the concept of guilt by association.  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If you hang with thieves and drug dealers, you can&#039;t exactly be surprised that people think you might be one.  If you hire people with an anti-religious bent (call it anti-theocratic if you want), you can&#039;t be surprised if people question your campaign&#039;s beliefs on the subject of religion.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If the Edwards camp hired her in ignorance of her writings, that shows a lack of due diligence that indicates a serious flaw in his campaign apparatus.  If they hired her despite her past writings, it shows that they were willing to cozy up to someone with anti-religious views in order to score a big name for the credibility and media attention it would garner.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Well, they got the media attention, but not in the way they might have hoped.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:37:55 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Michael Turk</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 8 at http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>I&#039;ll one up you -- there&#039;s much more</title>
 <link>http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/blog/entry/44/edwards_blogger_heads_for_the_door#comment-7</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;To start, I for one nodded along when &lt;a href=&quot;http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/2007/02/index.html&quot;&gt;Ezra Klein&#039;s suggested&lt;/a&gt; that Amanda&#039;s hire was a great deal suprising. I think it has to make you wonder if the Edwards organization wasn&#039;t mostly interested in scoring themselves a high-profile name. Without claiming too much insight into their motivations and thinking, this whole episode does hint at a superficial understanding of online politics, and a certain lack of respect for it to boot.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I&#039;m not at all sure about this, but it seems to me that Amanda&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/02/fool_me_once.html&quot;&gt;Children of Men review&lt;/a&gt; went up at just about the same time she hopped off the Edwards train. (Marcotte is said to have written &quot;The Christian version of the virgin birth is generally interpreted as super-patriarchal, where god is viewed as so powerful he can impregnate without befouling himself by touching a woman, and women are nothing but vessels.&quot; But Pandagon&#039;s down due to alleged &quot;asshat spammers,&quot; so it&#039;s hard to verify much.) Maybe it was a cathartic post, who knows. Either way, posting in the midst of such turmoil might seem appropriate behavior for a blogger, not so much for a campaign staffer. So in my mind, the question before campaigns now is this: when hiring on bloggers/netroots activists/online staffers, just what is it that you want from them? Seems to me that a campaign mining the online world for advantage owes it staffers to tell them just what sort of relationship they&#039;ve gotten themselves involved in.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:06:16 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Nancy Scola</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 7 at http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>There&#039;s more going on here</title>
 <link>http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/blog/entry/44/edwards_blogger_heads_for_the_door#comment-6</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;There are lots of issues raised by this episode. Here are a few that come to mind:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;1. Did the Edwards campaign do a careful enough job vetting Amanda Marcotte&#039;s writing before hiring her to be their blog-master? I&#039;m not saying they shouldn&#039;t hire people who have written passionately and provocatively in the past--that would make it impossible for lots of great political activists to enter electoral politics--but you have to wonder if they did their homework.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2. Should the big media that jumped on this story once Bill Donohue blasted the Edwards campaign do a fair job, or did they parrot Donohue without telling their readers of his own, shall we say, checkered record as a would-be opponent of religious defamation? Why is he on a higher pedestal?k&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3. Should Marcotte have continued to post on her personal blog after she started working for the Edwards campaign? When I went to work for my partner Andrew Rasiej&#039;s campaign for NYC Public Advocate, I stopped blogging at Personal Democracy Forum (and found a terrific pinch-hitter for me in Chris Nolan). I don&#039;t understand why Marcotte thought it appropriate or even realistic to keep her personal blogging going.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;4. Do we as a community want now more witch-hunting of campaign staffers who have written things in the past that might have offended someone? How far down that slippery slope do we want to go?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Micah&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:12:48 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Micah L. Sifry</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 6 at http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Edwards Blogger Heads for the Door</title>
 <link>http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/blog/entry/44/edwards_blogger_heads_for_the_door</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;John Edwards&#039; blogger Amanda Marcotte has left his campaign staff, effective yesterday. The great deal of negative attention paid to her by the Catholic League&#039;s Bill Donohue, she says, made it impossible for her to keep serving her candidate effectively.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/blog/entry/44/edwards_blogger_heads_for_the_door&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/blog/entry/44/edwards_blogger_heads_for_the_door#comment</comments>
 <category domain="http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/taxonomy/term/34">Amanda Marcotte</category>
 <category domain="http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/taxonomy/term/59">blogging</category>
 <category domain="http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/taxonomy/term/60">campaign bloggers</category>
 <category domain="http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com/taxonomy/term/3">John Edwards</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:44:59 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Nancy Scola</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">44 at http://techpresident.personaldemocracy.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
