Edwards gives Marcotte and McEwen a ‘fair shot’

February 8, 2007

John Edwards’ presidential campaign issued a press release a short while ago on work Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwen did as “independent bloggers before joining the Edwards campaign.” Edwards said:

“The tone and the sentiment of some of Amanda Marcotte’s and Melissa McEwen’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.”

Amanda said:

“My writings on my personal blog, Pandagon on the issue of religion are generally satirical in nature and always intended strictly as a criticism of public policies and politics. My intention is never to offend anyone for his or her personal beliefs, and I am sorry if anyone was personally offended by writings meant only as criticisms of public politics. Freedom of religion and freedom of expression are central rights, and the sum of my personal writings is a testament to this fact.”

And Melissa said:

“Shakespeare’s Sister is my personal blog, and I certainly don’t expect Senator Edwards to agree with everything I’ve posted. We do, however, share many views – including an unwavering support of religious freedom and a deep respect for diverse beliefs. It has never been my intention to disparage people’s individual faith, and I’m sorry if my words were taken in that way.”

This appears to be very encouraging news. The right called for Amanda’s and Melissa’s heads, and the Edwards campaign clearly thought about it, but made the right call in the end.

This leads, of course, to a few questions.

* What took so long? — The campaign first started getting pushback on Amanda and Melissa last week. The traditional media started emphasizing this about 36 hours ago. I don’t mean to sound picky, and I’m glad that this is working out well, but those internal deliberations seemed to go on quite a while.

* What will the far-right do? — Bill Donohue, who has nothing better to do, will probably whine his way through another press conference or two, but I suspect the GOP smear machine may not pursue this with much gusto, at least for the next few months anyway. Republican candidates are starting to hire their own bloggers, and a certain level of detente works to everyone’s benefit. As for the right-wing media, I suspect Fox News and the Washington Times will try and milk this at least through the weekend.

* What will Edwards’ Democratic rivals do? — It strikes me as highly unlikely that other Dems will go after Edwards for keeping Amanda and Melissa on his staff. If they did, the ferocity the netroots would have aimed at Edwards would immediately shift to whomever launched the first attack.

* Could Edwards have done more? — I suspect there are some on the left who had hoped that Edwards would not only keep his bloggers on staff, but would also issue a full-throated denunciation of the right-wing media swarm over this story. From where I sit, Edwards’ statement is good enough.

* Has the incident undermined Edwards with the netroots? — Probably a little. Had the Edwards campaign immediately rebuffed the right-wing demands, he would have scored major points with bloggers and blog readers. Instead, the campaign dithered and took the demands seriously. Edwards has reached out to the community, but I expect the incident to cause some lingering/simmering resentment, even though the campaign did the right thing in the end.

What do you think?

This incident was a test to see if Edwards was smart and tough enough to be president. Alas, he only got a gentleman’s “C”. Still, the course has a ways to run.
What Edwards NEEDS to do is fire the staffer who told him to fire the bloggers. Those folks are the real millstones around his neck.

  • Wow … color me impressed. This is the money line from Amanda:

    [My posts on religion are] satirical in nature and always intended strictly as a criticism of public policies and politics.

    I’ve been typing that exact same thing for three days. If someone not so bright (like me) can figure that out, not sure what the folks at the AP or ABC couldn’t.

    I guess when you’ve already decided that liberals spend every night having gay orgies that only stop for the hourly “Burning of the Flag and Performing of the Late Term Abortion,” then logic and reasoning don’t really factor in anywhere.

    In the end, Edwards did the right thing even if it took a damn long time (better late than never).

    And the blogosphere has never really been a huge supporter of Edwards, so I’m not sure this is going to help or hurt — my guess is that support will probably be about the same.

  • I think the decision is probably the right one, but the way it was arrived at seems…..triangulated, to use a newly-minted cussword of mine.

  • This was a staffing decision folks. Andy Card didn’t walk into the room and tell Edwards the country was under attack and he just sat there. He did what a careful lawyer would do under the circumstances. There is nothing slow about John Edwards, he can think on his feet just fine. So this one stumped him a bit, and he reverted to his legal training in responding. Heck, he did the right thing in the end, let’s move on.

  • One of the most often used Quotes from the Bible is, 1 Corinthians 13:11 “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child: now that I am become a [wo]man, I have put away childish things.”

    I am sure these two will speak differently now, as well they should. This is the way the world works. We live, we grow, we change.

    Now if only the Christins on Right would impliment another passage:

    “Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” Matthew 7:5

    We’ll see.

  • What’s wrong with thinking things through? Or taking the time to do it?

    If George W. Bush had thought things through, would he and the country be in the mess in Iraq that we are today?

  • Yep, count me among the people who are still turned off by how long it took for Edwards to respond, not to mention how much his comment about how he was “personally offended” by Amanda’s and Melissa’s remarks irked me. Shame, too, I was actually starting to lean more in his direction.

    And for future reference, John, don’t worry quite so much about offending people whose purpose in life it is to destroy everything you specifically and the left in general believes in. Your existence offends them, anything else they accuse you of is just window dressing.

  • Edwards made the right call and although it may have been longer in coming than I’d prefer, I agree with slip kid no more’s sentiment that taking time to think things through is a behavior I’d like to see more of from our politicians. Personally, I don’t see any triangulation in it. Triangulation would be if he had fired them but hired some other progressive bloggers without any record of anti-religions sentiments (assuming of course that any exist).

  • Right on all your bullet points, CB.

    It’s first one (about the length of time involved) that still troubles me. I can’t get the word “triangulation” out of my head, though that’s hardly a slam against Edwards since everyone else is doing it transparently. I just thought he had a bit more candor going for him, silly me.

  • Meanwhile in Bizarro-world, (aka the world we live in), McCain continues to go unchallenged by the media on his absolute LIES about Terry Nelson’s role in the racist ads in Tennessee that Terry produced and paid for.

  • I’m with slip kid #6. While the blogosphere (and myself included) would have liked a faster and stronger response, we’re not the only people in the country. Edwards can say, ‘We heard the complaints. We looked at the histories, and we made the right call. What we will not do, is jump through hoops of fire everytime someone from the right throws a hissy fit.’

  • Further questions:

    Didn’t anybody read the blogs before they were hired?

    I don’t expect Edwards himself to be deeply involved in these decisions, but surely someone should’ve anticipated this sort of thing. Perhaps the candidate should’ve been advised beforehand.

  • I think it’s a good move by Edwards, but IMO this issue has more danger to it than most of the leftblogosphere realizes. There’s no way to win this issue 100%, and I know we’ll be seeing this same issue again and again, because there is a new political element in play.

    The new element is the reams of juicy blog entries that can easily be dredged up from who knows when, and the ability to instantly disseminate these bits of flame to all corners of the country at will, thus generating “news” for the scandal-hungry corporate media whores, who actually make more money by repeating this garbage than by doing real reporting. When this new element is combined with the stupidity of the swing voter (who is offended by rather trivial things and is almost by definition beyond serious reasoning) this makes for a powerful tool in the hands of the political assasins who currently rule the campaigns, primarily on the right.

    In other words, we do not keep our left blog moral purity without risk in the general election.

    I’m hoping there’s some smart people who are figuring out right now how to avoid hiring people who have too much traceable flame in their Google caches. As easy as this issue will be for Republicans to exploit, I would not blame them too much for trying to avoid the obvious pitfalls, if that’s possible.

  • I vote with slip kid at #6 also. We need more thoughtful responses in this witless, knee-jerk sea of spite we’ve been living in for so long. Edwards is still not my favorite candidate but I respect him more now than I did before.

  • * Could Edwards have done more? — I suspect there are some on the left who had hoped that Edwards would not only keep his bloggers on staff, but would also issue a full-throated denunciation of the right-wing media swarm over this story…..

    This is true and the full-throated denunciation would have been welcome by more than left-wing bloggers. This incident reinforces my impression that Edwards is not much of a leader. What was needed from Edwards here was a scathing, unapologetic denunciation of that mouthy douchebag, Donohue, and a call to all his opponents on the right to own up to their own consorting with “trash-talking bigots”.

    At no time should Edwards or anyone else on the left feel compelled to treat the reichwingnuts better than the treatment they give others.

  • I think we’re all a bit addicted to the instantaneous nature of the web and expect human decisions to be the same. I too agree with slip kid #6. Nothing wrong with looking at a situation before acting.

    Reacting from the gut is overrated.

  • Edwards actually acted very much like Obama did with the madrassa mess. First he ignored the brouha to see if it would blow over, then responded after a delay to see how the situation played out. This was a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario and just the way Repub dirty tricksters like it. A quick tit for tat response could have become a flame war in the media. A slow, measured response was probably the best thing. And while we perform an autopsy on the corpse of this matter, the right is working on their next target.

  • It’s regretable that Salon put up the headline Edwards Fires Bloggers. That’s the only place I saw that claim. I wonder who their source was. I think that heated up the reaction.

    And I think bloggers need to rethink this no-change, no-delete ethos of blogging. Scrub those blogs whenever you feel like it. It’s in bits not stone.

  • My problem with the slow response is that it means they weren’t prepared for it. We cannot afford an ill-prepared campaign this time. Each candidate must anticipate and be prepared to deal with as much as possible in advance.

    I’m sure the depths of the right wing attack machine will still catch some unawares, but this wasn’t that hard to see coming.

    Also, the delay somewhat legitimizes the rantings of the lunatic Donohue.

    On the other hand, I do agree that immediate responses tend to be bitter and imprecise. It’s too bad the media gives wings to the callous attacks of right wing blow hards.

  • Today, the nation has an incumbent President who throws common sense into the nearest dumpster, contemplates the reality of things just long enough to invent an answer that has nothing to do with the question-at-hand, jumps to conclusions, and shoots from the hip.

    Simultaneously, the nation has a Presidential candidate who evaluates common sense, examines the reality of things to determine the best course of action, picks apart the premise before contemplating the conclusion, and “looks before he leaps.”

    Of the two above individuals—who would make the better president? Seems to me that Edwards stopped to weigh the ramifications of his options. Sure—he didn’t go all medieval on the Reich; lobbing broadsides at the wingnuts and trading salvo for salvo with Donohue. They’re not worth an exhale’s worth of carbon dioxide spit to begin with. But he also didn’t sit back and just ignore the noise—the fatal flaw of Kerry—and he didn’t cave to the faux righteousness of that blasted little yammering yip of a punt-dog, either. (On a personal note, I’d have burned the man in effigy on a weekly basis if he had, after skewering his images with rusty nails, plastic golf-tees, bamboo shish-kebob sticks, and an assortment of wooden stakes from the workshop.)

    Seems pretty “Presidential” to me….

  • I think everyone may be missing the the most important point here.

    With more and more bloggers moving into the mainstream, and all of their past writings immediately accessible to everyone, it will be tempting for bloggers to self-censor with an eye on future careers.

    By not responding forcefully and immediately to Donahoe et al, and by requiring his staffers to abase themselves by issueing common-currency “non-denial denials,” Edwards has allowed the right-wing to intimidate the leftblogosphere, even if it is only on an unconscious level.

    Isn’t the main value of blogs really just the reality of free speech unfettered?

  • I have no problem with the timing of the response; I only wish it hadn’t looked (in part due to inaccurage media coverage in Salon) like the delay was due to a lot of hand-wringing. Better it had looked like Edwards simply had more important things to deal with — a delayed response can send the message that the Right Wing Hit Squad doesn’t set our agenda.

    While Edwards’ response was close, I do have some problems with the content. I would have been nice had he made the same “fair chance” point slightly differently, noting that what these two bloggers said on their own blogs, on their own time, prior to any affiliation with the campaign was their free speech, and while Edwards does not agree with every word and tone, he respects their substantive contribution to the debate and their right to show their passion, and feels the totality of their work and their subscribers speaks for itself – and oh, by the way, it pales compared to what conservative bloggers say day in and day out. The bloggers now understand that a campaign is a different role for them, and Edwards will judge them on how they express themselves in that role — they will have a fair chance to show what they can do wearing a new hat, as the campaign has every faith that their skill in analyzing and communicating the issues will serve the campaign well.

    But Edwards didn’t ask me to be his communications director.

  • I think you’re right on the money with every point, Steve. Some on the right (jeff goldstein, for one) are already saying that Edwards “publicly humiliated” Amanda and Melissa, and you know what? I think he’s right.

    This is not how you treat the people who support you, and also if he didn’t want strong opinions, he shouldn’t have hired two of the most outspokenly liberal bloggers out there.

  • Edwards did the right thing.
    I think the only reason we “percieve” a delay is the fact we are used to instant-message news, as we are instant-gratification internet junkies.

    His deliberation, and response were well metered and tempered. No knee-jerk reaction to appease a rabid voter base.

    Who cares what the Right does, the less attention we give them, the less legit their rants appear.(For good reason!)

    And while some bloggers may irked at the response, we can debate and discuss it, and get over it, this reasoning ability is what make us the correct choice to run Government.
    It’s Conservatives who prefer the view, looking backwards.

  • Kathy,

    Some on the right (jeff goldstein, for one) are already saying that Edwards “publicly humiliated” Amanda and Melissa, and you know what? I think he’s right.

    Maybe I’m off-base, but I think we should let Amanda and Melissa decide if they’ve been humiliated not some right wingnut/blowhard like Goldstein. If they felt they’d been humiliated, I think we would have seen very different public reactions from them and they wouldn’t be on the Edwards team. Lets give those women some credit.

  • I’m finding myself cooling on Edwards, and the reason why has really nothing to do with Amanda or Melissa, or the outcome of this particular contretemps. In the grand scheme of things, it’s just not that important.

    What concerns me is what this says about the response of his campaign to noxious right-wing attacks. All of the Democratic candidates are going to be subjected to the Right-Wing Noise Machine and blather from odious, bigoted gasbags like Bill Donohue. To succeed, Democratic candidates must – MUST – have a strategy for dealing with them. This strategy must include at a minimum: (1) rapid identification of scurrilous attacks by high-intensity monitoring of the right-wing cockroachosphere; (2) opposition research on the gasbags who push this stuff into the mainstream, so that they can be marginalized; and (3) front-door and back-door conduits into the mainstream media to push back against the slime.

    In this situation, the Edwards campaign should have identified the narrative last week when Malkin and others were percolating it, and should have been prepared to answer Bill Donohue with a laugh, a reference to his complete lack of credibility, and a couple of choice quotes of his to show just how marginal he is. For most of these characters, you don’t need to go to any great lengths to show what whackos they are; just use their own words. Google and NEXIS are your friends here.

    I despair that, in this day and age, after all that we’ve seen over the past decade, Democratic candidates still don’t understand how the slander machine works and how to defeat it.

  • I think the left blog-o-sphere needs to stand back and take a good look at itself and its reaction to this matter. Too many of the posts and comments I read across numerous sites yesterday were little more than knee-jerk indignation that anyone would have the audacity to attack one of their own. Too many pointed fingers at those on the right for doing the same thing, without considering the charges levied at Marcotte and McEwen or defending them on the merits of what they’d written. Too many talked about how Edwards was toast if he did something other than what they, the all-powerful blog-o-sphere wanted. Too many were just plain defensive, and blindly rallied around their own just a we accuse the right of doing. Different flavor, but kool-aid nonetheless.

    Certainly, the liberal blogs have gained some influence within the party and over public attitudes, but all day yesterday, I heard a wildly inflated sense of self-importance — a puffed up display of self I haven’t seen since the last time I saw GWB on the tube (something I try to avoid for fear blood will start squirting out my ears).

    Don’t we constantly blast the right for refusing to own what they’ve done and said in the past? When Coulter says somebody ought to knock off a judge, and then says “just kidding,” don’t we rake her over the coals? Yet when I read Marcotte’s and McEwen’s statements above, that’s what it sounds like — “we didn’t mean to offend anyone.”

    If you didn’t mean to offend, you shouldn’t have written what you did in the way you did. And if you did mean what you wrote, you shouldn’t deny it now. Integrity still matters. At least, I hope it does.

  • I think Edwards did the right thing, if a bit slowly and haltingly.

    However, this brings up one factor very important to the netroots and candidates – we also have to show support for candidates. It’s a two-way street, and it’s a bit difficult to know who has to make what moves first.

    I think the netroots need to keep hammering away at Donohuse, the hate-filled blogospheric right, and keep turning these issues around to be about the right wing noise machine. When Candidates realize that the netroots WILL rally to them and will smack down the wingnuts, they’ll be more receptive in the future. This may be a good chance to show that.

  • I’m delighted Edwards decided to keep them on. I mean, nobody would think being called a “Christofascist” was maligning their religion, right?

  • I wished he would have said

    My staffing decisions will not be based on the likes and dislikes of a bigoted anti-Semite

    end of story ..

    Turn focus back on to Donahue and reduce his “influence” with the media…..

    plus DEMS always treat their opponents with kid gloves…..time to take the gloves off and hit back HARD….

    (just like Jim Webb’s …”we will show the President the way line” after the SOTU)

  • Well, for my part, if Edwards would have dropped these two based only on the right-wing yellfest, he would’ve lost a potential vote from me immediately.

  • as of this point in time, salon’s war room has not retracted their story. that really disappoints me.

  • I think Edwards should drop out of the race. No, he should drop out of the race and shoot himself. Wait! He should drop out of the race, be forced to spend five years in a political rehabilitation and re-education center. Then he should shoot himself.

  • Sharon, do you have an equal distaste for the word Islamofascist? Do you think that because someone claims to be a Christian that they cannot also be a fascist? Do you think that a fascist cannot use a warped view of religion to justify their horrible actions to themselves?

    You poor sheltered troll. Time to come out from under your bridge.

  • Edwards’ response is OK as far as it goes. What’s missing is he, or someone on his staff, somebody in his campaign, should be giving Bill Donohue both barrels. Guys like him have to be confronted and strongly attacked, not merely parried, every time they slither out from under their rocks.

  • Edwards should have responded instantly. What could possibly require more attention from a presidential candidate than a couple of bloggers his campaign just hired?
    Oh.
    And kudos for:
    “… while we perform an autopsy on the corpse of this matter, the right is working on their next target.”
    Comment by petorado — 2/8/2007 @ 1:24 pm
    “Edwards… he, or someone on his staff, somebody in his campaign, should be giving Bill Donohue both barrels. Guys like him have to be confronted and strongly attacked, not merely parried, every time they slither out from under their rocks.”
    Comment by FreakyBeaky — 2/9/2007 @ 12:29 am

    • Comments are closed.