Amanda Marcotte has resigned from the John Edwards campaign. Her post at Pandagon points fingers at Bill Donohue, but it was only a matter of time before her nasty mouth got her into trouble. She's the kind of gal you couldn't bring home to meet Mom, unless your Mom happened to be a whore.
It may have some to do with this review of the movie, Children of Men:
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. But this movie offers an alternative interpretation of the virgin birth--one where "virginity" is irrelevant and one where a woman's stake in motherhood is fully respected for the sacrifice and hard work that it is.
In the large sense, this movie isn't really about fecundity, but about hope. Babies are nothing but a symbol of hope, really. The movie is about what would happen to a world without hope, and the disturbing conclusion is that it wouldn't be much different than the world we have now. And while both men and women are capable of feeling genuine hope--the sort of hope that rests with a child, which is to say the reality-bound hope, the hope for small joys and long life--the movie rather explicitly frames false hope as a result of male dominance and male control.
The whole thing is at the above link. The interesting thing is that she posted this on Sunday, well after the controversy about her previous anti-Christian posts and her reported assurances to Edwards that she didn't "mean to denigrate anyone's religion." Clearly, she took the non-firing, or firing/rehiring, or double-secret probation or whatever Edwards' response was, as a go-ahead for business as usual.
Of course, a cursory reading of her past posts told anyone with a nodding command of English just what sort of gyno-warrioress she imagines herself. Edwards looks like a fool.
Hat-tip to K-Lo at The Corner for pointing to this breaking announcement.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
2008 Presidential Race, Candidate Blogs, Edwards
Comments (5)
I am so glad my entire worl... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Lorie Byrd | February 13, 2007 1:57 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I am so glad my entire world is not invested in my gender identity, as it appears to be for Marcotte. I can't even imagine how limiting and depressing it must be to imagine myself in a constant battle with the patriarchy, or whatever it is she calls it.
1. Posted by Lorie Byrd | February 13, 2007 1:57 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 13, 2007 01:57
2. Posted by Jim Addison | February 13, 2007 2:53 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
There's nothing wrong with putting up an "edgy" blog with your own unfiltered opinions.
The problem is candidates hiring bloggers. The nature of campaigns means the blog must be essentially noncontroversial except about those issues the campaign wants on the forefront, and in the precise way the campaign might wish to be controversial. It means the blog must walk lock-step with the candidate on every issue. Campaign spokesmen/press secretaries/managers/consultants just don't contradict their candidate - EVER.
No matter how popular a blogger is, he/she can't possibly keep doing the things which made it popular while working for a campaign.
Ann Althouse, I believe it was, said it well: (paraphrased from memory): many bloggers want a job and to get into politics, but blogging for a campaign means you must be boring.
That's because a "campaign blogger" isn't a "blogger" at all, in the sense we have come to know. He/she is more of an "internet press agent" who posts links to favorable news about the candidate, unfavorable news about the opponents, and whatever "official" baloney the campaign wants posted. Period.
Being a campaign volunteer or paid worker means giving up your individuality for the duration and working ONLY for your candidate's interests. That mixes with the independent spirit of most bloggers about as well as oil and water.
The relationship between the internet and politics is evolving before our eyes. The current practice of just hiring a blogger "name" for the campaign won't survive, IMO. The only blogger who has come close to making it work is Jerome Armstrong, because he tends to stay in the background of the campaigns he advises rather than being the "front man."
2. Posted by Jim Addison | February 13, 2007 2:53 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 13, 2007 02:53
3. Posted by Falze | February 13, 2007 8:58 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Babies are nothing but a symbol of hope, really."
Well, I guess this gives us an insight into the more leftward ends of the pro-choice movement.
I can't help but think that the whole 'Edwards has decided not to fire them' was in fact 'Edwards politely asked them to 'resign' and not let the door of his ginormous house hit them on the rump on the way out'. Guess we'll know better if the other one also slinks away blaming the victims of their bigoted tirades for what they said/wrote.
3. Posted by Falze | February 13, 2007 8:58 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 13, 2007 08:58
4. Posted by tas | February 13, 2007 2:37 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
What exactly is offensive about the portion of the movie review that you quoted?
4. Posted by tas | February 13, 2007 2:37 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 13, 2007 14:37
5. Posted by Falze | February 14, 2007 10:35 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Well, the other one resigned. I think it was like the old coach being asked to resign so they didn't have to fire them. This way Edwards gets to pretend to still be the good guy.
As for the quote, the first sentence is pretty bad for starters. I can't say as I know many Christians that think women are just baby vessels that people (or God) are befouled by when they come in contact with them. I think she meant to say 'Muslims'. I'm not Catholic, but I'm almost positive that this massive segment of the Christian population doesn't view Mary as just a befouling vessel.
5. Posted by Falze | February 14, 2007 10:35 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 14, 2007 10:35