Falling Awake

Just Darts Since 2009

Cleaning out my files–part 4: John Edwards’ pet bloggers

**Strong Language Alert** 

Remember how Democrats suddenly started quoting scripture after the last presidential election?  Did you think they were for real?

The story:

John Edwards–as mainstream a Democrat as they come–hires Amanda Marcotte for his campaign.  I won’t link to her site directly, or quote her stuff on my site, but you can click here to read some choice excerpts.  [Language Alert #1]

Read that? Good. Now here’s (reg. req.) what John Edwards says to people who may think that hiring someone who uses that sort of language might display his campaign’s contempt for Christianity: 

“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.”
He also said that he would not allow his campaign to be “hijacked” by religious conservatives who had pointed out the bloggers’ most provocative comments and demanded their removal.

The two bloggers have since resigned from the campaign.  Edwards was in a pickle: if he kept them on, he couldn’t win in his home state, never mind anywhere else; if he fired them, he would alienate a substantial portion of the Democrats.  That’s right.  A sizable minority of Democrats are consumed by anti-Christian bigotry.

In the WSJ (reg. req.), Mary Eberstadt writes about how this dilemma causes problems for all of the Democratic Party’s presidential hopefuls.  Her conclusion:

Sophisticates and secularists have always titillated themselves by despising the Bible Belt. But professional Christian-bashers have never been as “embedded” in the liberal mainstream as they are today. And therein lies a problem for Democrats. More Amanda Marcottes are not what the party needs as it scrambles to re-establish its religious bona fides with wary red-staters. No wonder so many Democratic candidates are in church. Now they really have something to pray about.

Finally, Iowahawk does a good job capturing the characteristic tone of  Edwards’ erstwhile blogger-in-chief.  [Language alert #2]

Advertisements

4 responses to “Cleaning out my files–part 4: John Edwards’ pet bloggers

  1. johnib February 21, 2007 at 3:27 am

    I am not particularly religious but when a national candidate disrespects the religion of others so blatently he deserves what he gets. Edwards is dead meat as a national contender i think.

    John E. Carey
    http://johnib.wordpress.com/

  2. INFJ February 24, 2007 at 11:51 am

    Edwards accepted the assurances of these two haters that, “they never intended to malign anyones faith.” What (In God.s Name ) did he think they were doing? If he’d had the guts to fire them he might have saved face with decent Democrats.

  3. Mike Kriskey March 4, 2007 at 9:39 pm

    The problem is, the “decent Democrats” don’t vote in primaries. Democratic primary voters are primarily… well, never mind.

    I was going to label them, but that’s really not useful. I might, for instance, say “homosexuals.” But I know some conservative homosexuals. I might also say “blacks,” but most blacks I know are closer to me in ideology than they are to Al Sharpton. I might also say “feminists.” There are so many ludicrous feminists now that that might work, but that’s only because the real work of decent feminists was completed a generation ago.

    Let’s just look at the Connecticut Senate race last year. Who won the Democratic primary? Ned Lamont. That’s all you need to know when you’re trying to figure out why Democratic candidates are running to the left. Connecticut is a blue state, but we’re not *that* blue. And yet the primary voters here voted for Ned Lamont.

    This is making me wonder if the vaunted Clinton political sense is mistaken. Well, maybe not mistaken. Hillary has to win the primary first, but if she does that by running too far to the left she won’t have a shot at the general election. She’s taking her stand by not apologizing for supporting the war. It’s a calculated gamble. (And Hillary is nothing if not calculating.) I think she’ll end up winning the nomination, and then no one will be able to point to her primary comments and sink her in the general election, as they could with John Edwards.

    Edwards is toast.

    P.S. If I wasn’t a registered Republican, in 2000 I would have voted for Lieberman in the Connecticut primary. I didn’t vote in the Republican primary, because I didn’t like Bush or McCain. All I’m saying is, wouldn’t it be great to have a presidential election between two decent people? A coupla mensches?

  4. INFJ March 12, 2007 at 10:33 am

    It’s been a long time since we had a, ” coupla mensches.” We usually have to vote for the lesser of two evils. Even so, we just have to hope that campaign promises will be carried out., and just as importantly, HOW they’ll be carried out.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s