MyDD posts letter from John Edwards just now. Not fired.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/2/8/12441/88455

"Chapel Hill, North Carolina - The statements of Senator John Edwards, Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwen in reference to their work as independent bloggers before joining the Edwards campaign are below.

Senator John Edwards:
"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 Marcotte:
"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."

Melissa McEwen:
"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."

When this type of thing is done to the right, they defend vigorously and go on the attack. Like every other time this happens to Dems, they feel the need to concede. The bloggers did nothing wrong and nobody had any reason to apologize to anyone or clarify their feelings on it. Instead this should have been turned around on Malkin and Donohue and the media that gave this non story any time of day at all.

I'm not as pissed as I would be if he fired them, but this still rubs me the wrong way and doesn't give me a warm, fuzzy feeling about Edwards as our potential nominee.

higher standard, as it should be.

Playing "blame the victim" by saying that it is Edwards fault that he is getting slimed repeatedly (presumably because he does not have the kind of knee breakers that the Bush family has) just does McCain's work for him.

Here is more detail about the McCain Team's smearing of Edwards with their character attacks designed to split him from his base.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/8/1319/06023

...but it would be foolish to not be concerned that his response to this would be indicative of how he will respond to it in the future.

Kerry was utterly blameless for the Swiftboating that happened to him in the '04 campaign. But even he himself has admitted that his fairly tepid response to the attacks cost him.

I don't think at all anyone involved in Edwards campaign is to blame for anything. I'm just stating that the tone and nature of his response gives me paus when I stop to think about whether he will be the fighter that he needs to be if he was our nominee.

The guy that started this crap should really be exposed for standing at the front of the bigot line.

I think it is in the recommended list now.

please? (looked but didn't see)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/8/95321/56338

"DONOHUE MAY HAVE BROKEN LAW PROHIBITING INTERVENTION IN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS

According to United States law governing the behavior of 501(c)(3) organizations, it seems highly likely that William Donohue--President of the Catholic League, a 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization--may have broken the law by attempting to intervene in a political campaign.

The IRS document Organizational Test – IRC 501(c)(3) (link opens PDF file) states explicitly that an organization with this tax exempt status cannot intervene in a political campaign.

Despite the legal restrictions on his organization, Donohue appears to be using the Catholic League to campaign against John Edwards bid for the 2008 Democratic nomination for President, in particular the IRS strict prohibition for 501(c)(3)'s on "issue advocacy" as a form of political intervention."

You're the best :luvya:

How interesting! It seems that the shouting blowhard has clearly overstepped his bounds. It would be nice to actually see Edwards punch back and *ahem* send the message to RW Submariners that he's not going to tolerate this crap.

Read this. It is one reason the post at Daily Kos caught my eye. It is not about religion, but about the role 501's should play. The group mentioned is a 501. It has been going on for so long on both sides, but I do think the religious grounds are the hardest to fight.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/992

"The 'D' in DLC Doesn't Stand for Dean (David Von Drehle, May 15, 2003, Washington Post)

More than 50 centrist Democrats, including Virginia Gov. Mark R. Warner, met here yesterday to plot strategy for the "New Democrat" movement. To help get the ball rolling they read a memo by Al From and Bruce Reed, the chairman and president of the Democratic Leadership Council. The memo dismissed Dean as an elitist liberal from the "McGovern-Mondale wing" of the party -- "the wing that lost 49 states in two elections, and transformed Democrats from a strong national party into a much weaker regional one."

...."We are increasingly confident that President Bush can be beaten next year, but Dean is not the man to do it," Reed and From wrote. "Most Democrats aren't elitists who think they know better than everyone else."

Actions speak louder than words and it seems the DLC has spoken often with their actions. Only a group of elitist snobs would throw around the label "elitist" as a slur like that. They should consider that "Leadership Council" is a banner screaming 'elite'.

doesn't it?

...."We are increasingly confident that President Bush can be beaten next year, but Dean is not the man to do it," Reed and From wrote. "Most Democrats aren't elitists who think they know better than everyone else."

I still like Gov Warner though.

I stand by my first reaction--politicians should not use established bloggers for their campaigns. It only invites trouble. I've loved reading Amanda Marcotte since before she was Pandagon. But there's just no room for irony and satire on a campaign ballot.

The good news in here is that John Edwards is getting hit by fake non-scandal after fake non-scandal. This is a sign that he's poised for tremendous success next winter.

even at DU. I am glad he is not firing them, I would have had many doubts had he done so.

I just wonder why all the attacks right now.

and it seems have taken the focus off of Edwards comments on Iran.

EDWARDS IN HIS OWN WORDS

As to the American people, this is a difficult question. The vast majority of people are concerned about what is going on in Iraq (WAR). This will make the American people reticent toward going for Iran (the American people are NOT reticent about diplomacy or sanctions so what does that leave……. WAR). . But I think the American people are smart if they are told the truth, and if they trust their president. So Americans can be educated to come along with what needs to be done with Iran."
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Edwards_Iran_must_kno ...

------
Anyway, I wouldn't really worried. The corporate media is still pushing your boy. For example, Tweety was on Hardball the other day pushing for Edwards, describing him as the most electable candidate.

to both of us and to Edwards.

Your quote:

"Anyway, I wouldn't really worried. The corporate media is still pushing your boy. For example, Tweety was on Hardball the other day pushing for Edwards, describing him as the most electable candidate."

First off, I don't have a candidate. I am open to most everyone. Not all though.

I find myself in the role of defending candidates who are being treated unfairly here.

You can always tell their purpose and mindset by the words they choose.

Ignore the snottiness of those still living the 04 primaries, you're doing a fine job refuting pure bullshit MF.

Julie

I can be very objective and see all the pure BS, and there is lots and lots of it. Hi Julie.

:hi:

It is a lot of satire, not very reverent to the bloviators on the right...but neither am I.

They are good writers and excellent bloggers who are not everyone's taste. But when you settle for someone who pleases everyone....you get nothing but bland.

not to create policy for the campaign (any content they provide on Edwards site I'm sure is thoroughly vetted by the higher ups), so they really shouldn't be held to the same standard that someone with policy impact should be.

I'm glad Edwards took this road. I would have been very disappointed if he had fired them.

This is fair. Now he can talk about the McCain style of blogging-for-bigots.

MF we have certainly butted heads but your defense of our Democrats against BS has been unwavering

:applause:

had this not been the decision.

The precedent that firing them would have set would have been harmful to the future...which appears to include the Internet more and more. Vetting all connected to a campaign to that kind of a degree would be ridiculous. It's bad enough how much vetting is done on the candidates themselves.....

So, I'll be the first one to say.......Kudos for Edwards on this particular decision!

have an impact on policy. These girls weren't hired to creat policy for Edwards, they were hired to run his blog, and I'd be willing to bet that from day one when the began working with the Edwards campaign that everything they post on the blog is vetted by the higher-ups to ensure that it's consistent with the Edwards campaign.

:kick:

You can't get all alarmed and embarrassed every time the wingnut noisemakers feign outrage over some non-issue. Their strategy is to get you off-message, and to stop your momentum in the media. I'm encouraged by Edwards's response, despite its coming after an aparent false start or two.

Guess they are still going strong.