As some of you may know, there's quite a tempest going on over Amanda Marcotte, one of the web babes for the Edwards campaign. The other one is Shakespeare's Sister (goddess) who has somehow been spared the attacks Amanda has had to face. I think the reason is, that anyone who goes after Shakes is gonna have their balls cut off with pinking shears and fed to them for lunch. By me. Shakes has a fierce, devoted following for a reason. She's a good. person.
I'm sorry, I don't know anything about Amanda Marcotte and do not read her blog, Pandagon, at least not on a regular basis. I may have read her once or twice through a link, but I don't remember.
Anyhow, in a very silly attack, Michelle Malkin read aloud from Marcotte's blog, including at least one F-bomb (sorry I couldn't bring myself to watch the whole thing; Malkin has pigtails in this one and a top designed to make her chest look bigger, which fails miserably) and posted it to youtube. Yep, you're right, Malkin almost makes Pammy look sane.
Other bloggers have pointed out that it's more than just the F-bombs that make Amanda Marcotte look bad. She apparently jumped on the Duke rape "hang'em high" bandwagon when she should not have jumped. (Memo to Amanda, take a page out of your candidate's playbook and say "I. Was. Wrong.") There's all kinds of intimations that Pandagon, the blog, is being retroactively edited to make it more suitable for Presidental Campaign consumption, but I don't believe that. Purging the fucks from any blog would just take too much time, and you'd always miss one. The one that Michelle Malkin would then read on youtube.
But all of this hits a little close to home, as I slowly abandon all hope of ever getting a high school teaching job here in Alabama, not because of my anonymous blog but because I refuse to coach girl's volleyball. This story makes me wonder if just because I used the F-word 49 times in one post (but COME ON, it was about David Broder) and alluded to, but never actually described, Michelle Malkin as a "demented cunt", does that preclude me from serving as a paid pol in a Presidential Campaign?
Well, to quote Shakes her own self, Fuckity-fuck-fuck.
The blogosphere, whether George Will likes it or not, is a place where what one wise blogger called "Bush-inspired Tourette's Syndrome" is permitted to flourish. There are places for the F word and places where such language rightly does not belong. I even post some things at The Aristocrats that I would not post here (like the Broder piece), because the post would not be appropriate here, and my fellow 'Risties lurve that kinda filth.
I wouldn't submit the David Broder F-word 49 times piece to The Washington Post. I would not allude to Michelle Malkin as a "demented cunt" on her cable TV show. Oh, well, yes I would, but it would get bleeped out, and people would have to click on an extra "objectionable content is okay by me" button to watch the unedited version on youtube. See?
A non-blogging for instance, now that Al Franken is running for the Senate, he lets David Letterman tell the Buddy Hackett penis jokes for him. Appropriate, Al. And good luck with your campaign. If you need a paid consultant on penis jokes, call me.
BUT SERIOUSLY:
My one disappointment with all of this is that somehow this debate is assuming that mere blogging is less, oh, legitimate than working for a Presidential Candidate. Anyone who's gotten this far in this post knows, what I do here at Blue Gal, and what all us bloggers do, with or without swearing, is a legitimate, valid contribution to the political process. And if you don't think so, scroll over the white space below:
Break out the Astroglide and FUCK. MY. ASS.
Oh, I didn't mean you, Senator Brownback.
i think blogging has made it into the "mainstream". we are finally become more than just a blip on the political radar and that makes us a target.
ReplyDeleteit's only going to get worse, but we do have some things to say that need being said. especially with the faux news channel and the like.
as to the f bombs, well as they say round here, "fuck em if they can't take a joke." (or the truth!)
A fuckin' men. Best post ever.
ReplyDeleteThis is really stupid. I've long thought Amanda Marcotte was one of the most brilliantly readable bloggers around.
ReplyDeleteIf she broke out "The F Word" a time and again, well, she's from Texas, for God's sake. Her salty tongue is one of the things I like about her.
Edwards' hiring of her shows he has a good eye for talent. End of story.
I feel the same way about Shakes, Ben. Based ONLY on his hiring choices, I'm willing to give the ol' trial lawyer a fresh look. After New Hampshire. No endorsements 'til after New Hampshire. BG is old fashioned that way.
ReplyDeleteOff topic, anyone know where we can find info on where the AIPAC money is going in this horserace?
Let me hasten to add, I think Shakes is a very fine blogger too, and I agree with your "No endorsements 'til after New Hampshire" policy.
ReplyDeleteI would not have written what Amanda Marcotte wrote. I don't always agree with her. If she's going to work for John Edards, she'd better knock it off, because the Blogshirts are going to be parsing her every syllable.
ReplyDeleteBut at least she has a brain. At least she can actually articulate an argument.
Malkin, on the other hand, could not earn a "C" on an essay for my 8th grade persuasive writing class. She is incapable of doing anything but spewing. Her little video "dramatic reading" suits her perfectly. Most of the time, she's sneering and spitting her own bile. This piece sounds a lot like something she would write.
Except, of course, for the fact that what she's reading makes sense. And hat is with that get-up, anyway?
Malkin is a warmonger who, like so many of the others, is of the appropriate age to go fight in Mr. Bush's dirty little war. Last week, she was beating up on Lara Logan, a CBS war correspondent (NOT a reporter) who has the serious brass enough to actually GO to where the fighting is and report the truth. Ms. Malkin wouldn't know the truth if it walked up and slapped her.
Of course, to do that, the truth would have to take a number and get in line...
"*what* is with that get-up"...
ReplyDeletePoints off for typos...
It's for precisely this reason (the cosmically insignificant chance that I will be flagged down to work on a presidential campaign) that I always maintain Emily Post Manners at my blog. Certainly, I would never describe elected officials as "sock puppets," "flying monkeys," or (my personal favorite), "lickspittle minions."
ReplyDeleteFor someone who is all for interning brown people (for their own protection, of course), Malkin sure is a wuss about F-bombs. I hope she realizes that the troops she claims to support regularly use phrases that would curl her pigtails.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't worry, BG. Turns out that Pandagon lost a whole mess of posts when they switched platforms from WP to MT (or the other way around, I forget). So, like Jamilgate and the whole "blown up and burned" vs. "DESTROYED" circle jerk she had going with her little hangers-on and troll wannabes, she is just trying to manufacture ...
ReplyDeleteYou know, honestly, I have no idea what the hell she is doing anymore. I really have no idea what the hell she is on about this time.
Which, considering we are talking about La Malkin, is really saying something.
What did Malkin hope to accomplish with this? All she accomplished was to further publicize Marcotte's writing, with which I whole-heartedly agree. Well, that and proving she can dress like a retarded goon. Edwards just went up a couple notches in my book.
ReplyDeleteP.S. Malkin can read from my profanity-laced blog any time. lol
ReplyDeleteIf bloggers had no influence Malkin wouldn't care what Marcotte wrote. As for Edwards, he's going to have to change his stand on marriage equality before I could back him.
ReplyDeleteBAC
I won't even mention that the very concept that some words are 'bad' is antithetical to the idea of freedom of speech. Oh darn, now I've gone and mentioned it!
ReplyDelete"We train young men to drop fire on people. But their commanders won't allow them to write 'fuck' on their airplanes because it's obscene!"
ReplyDelete--Kurtz
BG - I found some small amount of comfort in Malkins comedic stylings. I think her acting career has potential that her critical reasoning career could never hope to match.
ReplyDeleteBest regards,
Tengrain
Quaker Dave,
ReplyDeleteOther than her continuously running themes, which are that white men have a penchat for exploitation, conservative Chirstians love to hurt women, and the patriarchy is something to to be overcome, what arguments does Amanda Marcotte make? Its not that I agree or disagree with all her points, but her style is more in question here. By style, I do not mean F-bombs. If that were all it was, this contraversy would never have materialized.
I can't claim to have read everything she's ever posted, but I've read enough to say that she tends to make more assertions than arguments. Some may be right, some may be wrong, but they don't seem like good arguments.
I think she is what many people say she is: witty, passionate, etc. Those are nice qualities to have, but they're no substitute for validity and soundnes.
When challenged on her blog, she often just bites back at the poster in a quick and witty fashion. As I've already told her, I think she generates much more heat than light.
This is not about something as trivial as cursing, and it shouldn't matter that Michelle Malkin and Bill Donahue are among the ones against Ms. Marcotte. Yea OK they're crazy. Now that its been said, were does that leave us? My point is that killing the messanger may be justified, but it doesn't deal with the substantive issues that have been raised in regard to this ordeal.
Why don't I raise those issues now? Cuz I've lost all confidence that anyone who supports Ms. Marcotte will do anything other than deal with tangential issues and imply that I'm a Klan member.
Sorry, I know not everyone fits that mold, but its happaned to me too many times, and I don't have the faith to make the same argument again when its proven counterproductive so many times.
I just want to say that when the right wing obfiscates the issue (which they do most of the time) and tries to divert attention by pointing to the worst arguments on the left instead of the best ones, that drives me nuts. But its even more disheartening to see it on the left, since I think part of being a liberal ought to be about raising the level of discourse. Thinking this issue is essentially about cursing or the credibility or lack thereof of people like Michlle Markin is ignoring more important issues surrounding this episode.
Thanks for that Jay and QuakerDave and the rest of you. I think one of the questions that's also being raised here is whether bloggers are able to "cross-over" from blogging to the, and here's the term I hate, "big time." I don't think working for Edwards gives (gave? there's rumors afloat that they're gone) Melissa and Amanda legitimacy. They had that before, AS BLOGGERS. And if we forget that, we're sunk.
ReplyDeleteHere's my question. Really.
ReplyDeleteWho. The. H-E-double hockey sticks. Is. Bill. Donohue?
Why does he get so much TV face time? Why does anyone care what the heck he thinks about anything? Who makes up his "Catholic league"? How many members? Several of my closest friends are devout Catholics: he not only doesn't speak for them, but they've never even heardof him.
I really don't get this. Why would the Edwards people knuckle under to this one man Brownshirt gang so quickly? I don't care what's on her blog. I don't care whether she can argue or assert or whatever. If she was qualified, in their minds, for the job for which she was hired, then Edwards had an obligation to stand by his choice. Period. Instead, the wingnuts get to do the happy dance, and Edwards, frankly, looks like a toady.
Pardon me, but McCarthyism really does suck.
Especially when it works.
Salon is reporting that Marcotte & McEwan have been relieved of their duties. Edwards is back down to his original position in my book. The story is here: http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2007/02/07/edwards_bloggers/index.html
ReplyDeleteLast I heard, the Salon report is suspect. I really hope Edwards will stand by Melissa and Amanda. Clearly, he and his staff believed they were well qualified when they were hired; that belief shouldn't change overnight -- or under pressure from people who wouldn't vote for Edwards if he were the only person running.
ReplyDeleteI think Melissa McEwan is one of the best political writers in the US, and I hope if nothing else comes of this brouhaha that it will bring her wider notice.