0 
0 Read Time:18 Second
I don't know if you have been following this, but here is Marcotte's side of things. Amazingly, everything bad that happend to her is still because of sexist men who can't handle a world where a woman as (insert fabolous adjective here) as her exists and prospers. Some things never change, I guess!
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
English
Is it just me or does anyone else wish they were brave enough to say she ought to suck it up and take it like a man?
what an annoying site! half-way through it says you have to pay to read the rest of the article.
“During my brief tenure as blogmaster for a Democratic presidential contender, I experienced the right-wing smear machine firsthand”
Not surprisingly, she can identify neither the people who sacked her nor the obvious cause of her sacking.
Let’s be objective here. Edwards wants to be President. He hires 2 staffers who just happen to be anti-Catholic bigots. Not unusual with Democrats. But they posted extremely vile insults aimed at 25% of the electorate. Finally Edwards had to can them or lose any chance of convincing Catholics to vote for him. It’s all politics. They have freedom of speech, but we have the freedom to give it right back to them. Look at it this way, if they had posted remarks like that about any other group they would have been gone long before. Don’t waste any time being sympathetic to Marcotte.
Apparently she still thinks that attacking a very large part of the electorate is a good thing? BTW Catholics are more than 25% of the electorate, we are the largest single denomination in America. Depending on who’s number you believe we might just outnumber muslims by 200,000 or so worldwide?
Typical “poor me” liberal drivel. Everyone has freedom of speech including the people who objected to her columns but of course with liberals freedom of speech is code word for the way they think not any other way. If anyone dares speak back it is always “rightwing smear”. If you speak out you should know that no matter what you say 50% of the people will hate you.
I hate to say this but as a female blogger I am appalled everytime I see a photo of a liberal female blogger and they are exactly what people think of when they think of someone on the internet. Isn’t there atleast one that doesn’t look like someone who fell out of the ugly tree and hit each branch on the way down? YIKES!
Fr. J – “they posted extremely vile insults aimed at 25% of the electorate”
like what, exactly? that they should mind their own business about women’s reproductive freedom? boo-friggin-hoo. cry me a river. she’s right. and bill donohue is the biggest bigot in this whole debacle. by far.
noone – “I am appalled everytime I see a photo of a liberal female blogger… Isn’t there atleast one that doesn’t look like someone who fell out of the ugly tree”
I’m appalled at what a shallow, superficial halfwit you are.
I don’t see what is so “anti-Catholic” about what she said. She didn’t mention the Pope, for example. It is just a humourous way of suggesting that perhaps, just MAYBE there are some sexist ideas in Christianity generally. Why this has to be specifically offensive to Catholics doesn’t make sense to me.
You are allowed to be Christian AND have a sense of humour. Or did I misread the rulebook somewhere? Christians, like everyone, accept that there are more world views out there than what their/our little ideas hold under the umbrella; we must accept that people are entitled to their diffrent views. Is that so hard? I don’t find it difficult.
I think the Catholic League should be ASHAMED of themselves for hounding these bloggers down like that so that they were so hurt and threatened, they stopped what they were doing. It is madness.
and I didn’t find her ugly. She looks like a typical, “smart casuals” had her colours done but doesn’t worry too much about make-up kind of Amercian woman to me. I would even go so far as to say I thought the buttery coloured top looked NICE on her.
justine Says:”I don’t see what is so “anti-Catholic” about what she said. She didn’t mention the Pope, for example. It is just a humourous way of suggesting that perhaps, just MAYBE there are some sexist ideas in Christianity generally. Why this has to be specifically offensive to Catholics doesn’t make sense to me.”
You have not heard the full range of her comments then, or perhaps you are utterly lacking in sympathy for Catholics. There is no denying the offensive nature of her comments. As she probably intended.
justine Says:”You are allowed to be Christian AND have a sense of humour. Or did I misread the rulebook somewhere? Christians, like everyone, accept that there are more world views out there than what their/our little ideas hold under the umbrella; we must accept that people are entitled to their diffrent views. Is that so hard? I don’t find it difficult.”
You are allowed to be, but she is not. She is not a Christian and even if she was, she has no sense of humor. No one is saying she is not entitled to her opinion. They are saying that if she holds such opinions they will not vote for her boss. Explain the faults of that.
justine Says:”I think the Catholic League should be ASHAMED of themselves for hounding these bloggers down like that so that they were so hurt and threatened, they stopped what they were doing. It is madness.”
Rubbish. They did not hound her at all. They hounded her boss, John Edwards and made it clear to him that they would exercise their democratic rights not to vote for him and encourage others to do likewise. Edwards exercised his democratic rights to fire their asses. What is wrong with that exactly? The mistake was Edwards’. If he wants to play in the Major League, he needs to be serious and professional. Which does not mean hiring two clowns to work as his official bloggers.
Holy hell…
noone and HeiGou, steel on target.
Wiggles I find your complete statement lacking so “half wit” back at cha. I don’t care if you think my statement was shallow, the woman is butt ugly and that is the truth. If I looked that bad there is no way I’d ever post a photo of myself.
Apparently some liberals don’t understand what is offensive or just don’t care if they discriminate against a large segment of the population? As a female Catholic I think much more should’ve happened to them. If the same type of remarks had been postred towards blacks we’d be looking at hate crimes being pushed by liberals. Knife cuts both ways people and what is cosidered hate for some groups should apply to all, not just a protected class. I hope the Catholic league goers after their internet hosting sites for hate speech. The laws have already been wrote by liberals judges, let’s enforce them equally people!
We are perhaps forgetting that William Donahue–who incidentally does not represent a majority of American Catholics–likely violated taxation laws in trying to sabotage the Edwards campaign.
Either reorganize the “Catholic” League into a political action committee, or target Marcotte and McEwan directly–not Edwards. But hey, it’s not like theocrats have any respect for secular law.
Behind the Curtain Says:”We are perhaps forgetting that William Donahue–who incidentally does not represent a majority of American Catholics–likely violated taxation laws in trying to sabotage the Edwards campaign.”
I am happy to acknowledge that – not that I care. Because the focus on Donahue is just a typical MSM leftist smear. It was not Donahue who broke this story, nor his group that pointed out what the bloggers were saying. Michelle Malkin (a moderate Catholic married to, >gasp