Edwards, another Democrat accepting of the most vile insults hurled at Christians. We hear little outcry from his supporters, the Hollywood left, or his fellow Democrat candidates. Had these been anti gay remarks by a republican staffer the people referenced above would have had torches and clubs to go after the candidate. So for the Dems only some bigotry is wrong, which demonstrates how bankrupt their values really are.

Although I cannot support Edwards, for a variety of reasons, he would have been smart to look into the remarks these bloggers had made prior to their employment. I agree with Brendan McGrath in relation to the complete lack of any good judgement Amanda Marcotte represents when making a comment about Mary, and the manner in which she came to be with child, the Son of the Living God. Amanda, if you cannot accept the virgin birth, simply say so without some perverted remark. The things of God are foolishness to humanity.
There are many things we do not understand, but it does not negate the possibilty, and judging by God's word, and the fulfillment thereof, the absolute probabilty that all will be fulfilled as He has ordained it.

Unlike John Edwards, Bill Donohue is not running for the highest office of the land. When John Edwards found out that he had two bigoted narrow minded staffers he should have fired them. I am a moderate Catholic Democrat and it is important to me that a candidate running for office not have two people on their staff who writes hate filled rants about my beliefs. That is like they had two anti-Semites with high level postions. It seems the Media is more concerned that some person from Fox news was doing the job that you weren't in catching this. I guess it is now ok to be bigoted and working for a Presidental campgain as long as it is only anti-Catholic and anti-Christian. Democratic candidates have to remember that we Catholics also want to be represented fairly.

Allegedly anti-Catholic rhetoric??? Did you happen to read any of their comments about Catholicism? That's like saying ahmadinejad is allegedly anti-Israel.

As far as Ezra Klein's analysis, he's right about how it would look if Edwards got rid of Marcotte and McEwan (which he did, by the way). But that's because it IS that way. The characterization of people who object to their hate-filled sickness as "rightwing professionals", as if no one else would be offended, is ridiculous.

Taken out of context, blog comments made by Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan do express what appear a strong anti-Catholic bias; however, you must understand these comments were made in response to extreamly hateful attacks by Catholics like John Horvat II. Both sides were looking to find each other's vulnerable sensitivities. Don't judge until you read the comment chain.

Thanks for the advice guys but I've read Pandagon daily for a year and a half now.

Amanda Marcotte is neither anti-Catholic nor anti-Christian. She's anti-misogynist and anti-fundamentalist. Those who believe you have to be a misogynist fundy to be Catholic/Christian are the ones who are taking such umbrage at her words. Imagine that!

In my spare time searching through blogs and occasionally posting on them I've come to notice that blogs are just so combative. There's not much political debate, but rather political preaching and fighting going on.

I applaud John Edwards for embracing the netroots, but he and his campaign should have been more selective about the type of blogger they hired. There's no need or benefit to having an abrasive and unyeilding blogger because it only hurts the campaign.

Field operatives are given scripts and their words cannot even be easily traced. Bloggers do not necessarily need scripts, but why hire someone who is consistently and unappologetically inflamatory?

As a fairly liberal Democrat is concerns me that a growing number of our political stripe seem to think that it is acceptable to viciously attack the Catholic Church because of political and/or religious disagreements.

When I worked as a field operative many religious people called me a pagean for being a Democrat. While I know that a lot of that comes from their personal biases against Democrats, a fair amount of it also comes from what must be described as anti-Catholic sentiments from the left.

I truly do not understand why John Edwards would put himself in the crosshairs like that. He was going to have enough trouble as it is. He made his bed and he is going to have to sleep in it.

"too many of the netroots are too into themselves, approriating some special status for themselves which just doesn't exist."

Amen!

Let's take the specifics out of the situation and make it generic.

A politician hires a person to do a media relations job for them. That person uses it to promote their own agenda. Excluding a contractual problem, the politician has every right to fire the person.

That's what this is. The protestations are groundless.

They reinforce my feeling that too many of the netroots are too into themselves, approriating some special status for themselves which just doesn't exist.

"Blogs are a highly irresponsible form of communication in that they allow for anonymous commenters, like me here, to say whatever I want. These poison the well and undermine any chance we have for a civil dialogue that is so desperately needed in this county. That's one message that Barack Obama is delivering with real effectiveness. We have to do better."

"values matter" may be an Obama supporter. But I would put forth, if "values matter" were to ask Barack Obama himself if he thinks that anonymous communication is poisonous and blogs should be done away with, he would say "of course not."

The blog community evolves like anything else. Right now it is dealing with a glut of obnoxious behavior, but it will find a way around it. That's "hope" for you that Obama is always talking about, seeing the positive and the potential for greatness.

The alternative that "values matter" is suggesting is to react to temporary negatives by wanting to shut down the whole system and stifle independent voices.

"US President Tim Kalemkarian, US Senate Tim Kalemkarian, US House Tim Kalemkarian: best major candidate."

Except that he isn't a major candidate. Apparently he's not affiliated with any party, and nobody's heard of the guy. The fact that he's running for three offices at once implies that maybe he's not serious. I haven't even been able to figure out what state he's running for House and Senate in! If you want to give some information on the guy, I'd love to hear it.

To the no-name who posted at 08:32 AM: The "Angry Left" are the bloggers who are demanding that the Edwards camp not "give in" to the pressure to appologize for employing the anti-Catholic bigot bloggers.

Anyone who disagrees with the left's anti-religious agenda is somehow termed a racist or an anti-semite, so your characterization of Mr. Donahue with a slanderous description isn't that suprising, nor is it credible.

This is what happens to a campaign when the attention gets side-tracked to the personal stories or perceptions of lower level staff. You can do a lot with this medium without hiring so much baggage, and still keep the focus on the candidate and his positions. This is beginning to sound like the early stages of George McGovern and his veep picks. Vetting is both an art and a science.................

This is a simple matter of demographics - if you look at exit polling some of the biggest gains Democrats made last year were amongst white Catholic voters. They need to retain most of that support to win in 2008, and opposition to the Iraq War is a great way to do so.

If you look at Marcotte's comments and imagine the outcry if they were aimed at Muhammad or the Jewish religion, this is an easy call for Edwards. She's gone, and all you lefty bloggers can rest easy, because I am sure the end result for her will be more money and notoriety.

US President Tim Kalemkarian, US Senate Tim Kalemkarian, US House Tim Kalemkarian: best major candidate. Kalemkarian is better than Edwards.

'Blogs are a highly irresponsible form of communication in that they allow for anonymous commenters, like me here, to say whatever I want. These poison the well '

Not like Sean Hannity or Ann Coulter or Bill O'Reilly, who are so respectable and responsible and hardly ever talk about murdering liberals...

'I find it enlightening that the Angry Left is viciously attacking those Catholics who are offended by these offensive remarks.'

Excuse me, who is angry and who is attacking whom?

William Donohoe is virulently anti-semitic-- but that doesn't seem to bother anyone. I wondeer why that is?

' many of her previous comments simply aren't respectable,'

'respectable' -- to whom? and her cmments were, as you say, 'previous' -- not after she joined the campaign.

do you think we should follow chris around with a microphone, so we know whether everything he's thinking is 'respectable'? ridiculous.

ohmigod, edwards is a 'millionaire' -- how horrendous. how disgusting, to have started poor and worked your way up, defending people who are injured.

what part of that disturbs you petty little gop losers? jealous, because you never did anything with your life?

you don't seem to have any problems with your frat boy prez bush, gop -- who was born filthy rich without lfiting a finger.

I'm a big fan of Edwards, and at this point he's my first choice among the Dems. But he (or his staff) blew it with this one. It shouldn't have taken much vetting to weed this blogger out. I've read her blog, and it is indeed anti-Catholic (or even, more broadly, anti-Christian). Her remarks are every bit offensive as if she had used the N-word to talk about blacks or used anti-gay epithets. It's one thing to disagree with Catholic theology (I do) or to criticize the church (on some issues, it deserves it); it's quite another to write in the way she has written. If she hasn't lost her job by now, she should.

I wouldn't go assuming that perceived anti-Catholic statements made in the past by Edwards's campaign staffers will cost him all Catholic support. I'm sure it will hurt some, but one of the most vocal groups criticizing the Catholic Church is Catholics themselves. The Church is so hidebound, ossified, and corrupt that even its own followers are often disgusted with it.

Blogs are a highly irresponsible form of communication in that they allow for anonymous commenters, like me here, to say whatever I want. These poison the well and undermine any chance we have for a civil dialogue that is so desperately needed in this county. That's one message that Barack Obama is delivering with real effectiveness. We have to do better.

Draft Al Gore people creates thousands of illegal fake signatures with the help of few people , they also stole money from Katrina Victims. In order to Fool John Edwards supporters, Hillary's supporters and Obama supporters worthless unemployed Draft Gore Con Artists created fake signatures . These people don't have any moral values or ethics, basically Draft gore is supported by few unemployed desperate old Ladies who are looking for attention.

Draft Gore Criminals ruins and Destroys Al Gore ' s Reputation

http://electgore2008.blogspot.com/2007/02/draft-gore-people-ruin-al-gore-future.html

Draft Al Gore people creates thousands of illegal fake signatures with the help of few people , they also stole money from Katrina Victims. In order to Fool John Edwards supporters, Hillary's supporters and Obama supporters worthless unemployed Draft Gore Con Artists created fake signatures . These people don't have any moral values or ethics, basically Draft gore is supported by few unemployed desperate old Ladies who are looking for attention.

Draft Gore Criminals ruins and Destroys Al Gore ' s Reputation

William Donohue has a rather expansive definition of anti-Catholic bigotry: basically, everyone who does not believe exactly what he believes is an anti-Catholic bigot. Donohue is a nobody trying to pose as a kingmaker. Unfortunately for his hubris, he doesn't own the First Amendment and doesn't get to tell anyone else what to do with it.

to an dliodoir -

i do apologize if anything i said was taken as offensive. most of my family is catholic, and a good number of my friends, albeit not many who practice actively. i do not mean to dismiss the valuable social work which was and is practiced by catholics... i just have a problem with the prioritizing of controversial, usually sex-related issues over issues of social justice which i see as far more important.

and for the record, i do not support edwards, and i certainly would not support his paying anyone to write and post offensive things. my point, which i appear to have made badly, is just that religion and religious issues are a cheap way to start a fight, rather than open a discussion on issues where there is disagreement... and these issues often seem to overshadow other, equally deserving ones. for example, while i don't know if edwards' way is the right one on national health care, the religious issue has now been given to the right wing as a convenient way to change the subject from a universal, single-payer plan, which polls show a great number of americans support, but which is obviously not something that big pharma wants considered.

once again, no offense was intended, and i apologize if any was taken.

I find it enlightening that the Angry Left is viciously attacking those Catholics who are offended by these offensive remarks.

Apparently, only minorities, gays and other 'protected groups' can be offended and demand public apologies. But if one of these precious groups are attacked, LOOK OUT! The offender will be forced into "rehab" (reeducation facilities?) and we will ALL have to endure hours and hours of ranting and raving by Paula Zahn, Olberman, Wolf and the rest of the gang about "what it means" to our society's attitudes about racism, sexism, weightism, etc.

Of course religion is off limits, too - as long as it's not that 'dumb' belief in one God, to the exclusion of others. That's "Bigotry" and is fair game.

Please, Leftists. Either the Culture of Offense Routine works both ways, or it needs to be dismantled. Either free speech works for ALL, or it works for none.

If this little circus was dismantled, though, how would those snarkly Leftist on CNN and MSNBC *ever* fill their schedules?

As much as I enjoy the "what it means" big-picture navel-gazing, it would be nice if somebody could get a confirm/deny on Salon.com's report that Edwards had fired McEwan and Marcotte.

You know ... news, or something.

I'm a devout Catholic who finds Madonna's "Like a Prayer" to be a beautiful expression of the Catholic imagination -- so it takes a lot for me to regard something as anti-Catholic. Now, the Catholic League reports the following about Amanda Marcotte:

"...on June 14, 2006, she offered the following Q&A: 'What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit,' to which she replied, 'You'd have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.'"

I cannot think of a more disgusting, obscene, and vicious thing to say in connection with the Blessed Mother. I don't think I have ever come across an instance of anti-Catholicism that outrages and infuriates every fabric of my being as that one. And it is offensive not only to Catholics, but to all Christians, not to mention Muslims, who also hold Mary in high regard.

I was raised Democrat, but I've been feeling alienated from the party for a while now, and right now I'm so angry I just might become a lapsed Democrat.

I want to complement you on your even handed approach to this story. Can't same the same of the rest of the MSM

In reading through these postings I have to say that the problem with politics today is best exemplified by your postings. ( although a sampling that probably does not represent the population as a whole....considering where you are posting that is ).

If you all cannot be civil with one another why should it be expected that the candidates be? I would imagine that the media advisors that run the campaigns take note of what you are saying here and elsewhere and then go from there...sow enough disinformation and accuse everyone of having no morals and substance and then they can pounce at the right time and grab those that are not yet certain of their views....thus getting those votes that come from being uninformed as to the facts ( hidden as they are ) by taking advantage of all the confusion you are causing.

I think american politics are all about money and visibility. not a lot of substance. I am afraid of the outcome.

We will get who we deserve in the end...that will be our reward. and we will all in one way or another regret that choice. And then we will all work together to set someone up and destroy them too.

How sad.

What's your point meuphys? So you're not a Catholic anymore, hooray for you. Does that mean that Edwards is justified in hiring people who are anti-Catholic? Does that mean the it's a good thing that the Dems are driving away voters? I thought we as Dems accepted differences? Or do we now have a litmus test that excludes Catholics? Sounds pretty unAmerican to me.

Also, if one looks at the history of the modern Democratic party they will see that it was built upon the backs (and votes) of a predominantly urban, working class, Catholic constituency. Church teachings support the Dem position on capital punishment, social welfare, immigration, and the illegality of the war in Iraq.

. . .but if you'd rather we take our votes elsewhere. . .

meuphys - The content of the blog has nothing to do with it. I agree with you that the people criticising Edwards are likely right wing zealots. But, paying someone to post "independent" opinion is something that leads to the sort of abuse we saw with the Swift Boaters. I think it's time we leave the nightmare and tactics of the Bush years behind, in the gutter, where it belongs. I now appears that it can be proven that Cheney put Libby up to outing Mr. Wilson's wife as a CIA agent. He ought tyo be impeached for that and tried and convicted and serve hard time in a federal prison. McCaine has hired the Swift Boaters and has sunk to the Bush-Cheney level. I don't want my party's candidates rolling in the gutter with any of them.

hey zouk - in re: "You mean the NYT prints lies? I am shocked, shocked to find that out."

i would hope this does not mean that you are joining the reality-based community. if so, well, your boys at fox have yet to learn that as a young prince of zouk, you were schooled in a madrasa. just wait...

as a recovered catholic, i feel completely justified in saying that the church's near-obsession on sex (abortion, adultery, gay marriage) is hypocritical. how about thou shalt not kill, covet, have false gods (here please note that wealth and country completely count), bear false witness, etc. no, instead the catholic vote went in the last election to a president guilty of all of the above, because he was anti-choice and a homophobe. how about some separation of church and state here, people?

I like Edwards, but paying for a blogger is a little too "Karl Rove" -"Swift Boaters" for me to swallow.

Human,
You may wish to read some of Marcotte's posts on her blog. If you still believe she is not Anti-Catholic then you need to seek some professional help.As for the ever hopeful Mr. Edwards, many out here on mainstreet America still identify someone by the company they keep. Keep chasing the ambulances John, you'll be much more successful in that endeavor than trying to convince the majority of Americans that you have the necessary qualities to run this nation.

human wrote :Amanda Marcotte is not anti-Catholic.:

Actually she is and she'd tell you so herself. Her comments are pretty clear on their face. Or did you not read them before you spoke human? Hiring people who mock and villify the largest religions denomination in the country isn't going to help Edwards. In fact, about 45-50% of American Catholics self-identify as Dems. Perhaps Marcotte and McEwan are really Republican operatives driving that 50% into the arms of the GOP?

You mean the NYT prints lies? I am shocked, shocked to find that out.

This is insane. How many more people connected with supposedly credible mainstream newspapers are going to repeat lies?

Amanda Marcotte is not anti-Catholic. Some guy released a press release claiming she is: he lied. That press release got picked up by the New York Times and now you are repeating it uncritically. Isn't there supposed to be a higher standard of journalism from the Washington Post, even if it is "only" the Washington Post online?

I used to think Hillary Clinton was immoral. But John Edwards makes Hillary Clinton seem like Mother Theresa.

John Edwards campaign stop on MTP can be easily summarized:
He supported the war before he didn't support it, he would pull out 40,000 to 50,000 troops immediately, and he favors raising taxes to pay for a universal health care plan. One can imagine the Democratic primary ads already: "John Edwards: He's a flip flopping, tax raising, ambulance chasing lawyer--and a multi-millionaire."

Think about it this way: If Jen Palmieri had made those statements, she'd be fired in a second -- even as important and loyal as she is to the campaign. I'm sure Jen gets that, but the campaign seems paralyzed by threats from other bloggers. The blogosphere shouldn't support Marcotte. She left the freedom of pandagon and joined a presidential campaign where every employee is held to a higher standard. That's just a plain and simple fact.
A blogger shouldn't get special treatment. This is presidential politics, and edwards would be stupid to keep the foul-mouthed blogger on board. many of her previous comments simply aren't respectable, regardless of where you stand on the issues.

this is the kind of problem he should have been hoping for. It takes away the attention from his tax and war non-starter policies. Let's raise taxes and cozy up to Iran. What planet is he from again?