That’s how it goes: no regrets as of Feb. 4, “I am sorry” as of Feb. 8. Associated Press has more. Edwards’ statement is here. Earlier, in what a Shakespeare’s Sister commenter dubs a “Dewey Defeats Truman moment”, Salon had erroneously reported that the two had been ousted. (P.S.: Salon stands by its story, saying the two were in fact sacked but that the decision was then reversed.) Earlier coverage on this site here, here and here.
More: Ted, in comments:
“I am sorry that you were offended” is a rather non-apologetic apology by Marcotte, so she isn’t being quite inconsistent with her earlier “Je ne regrette rien” position, other than that her statement doesn’t refer to “tone-deaf wingnuts.”
What’s amusing is that even this tepid politic gesture by Edwards is causing the Angry Blog Left to howl for his head. It’s an entertaining deal with the devil Edwards has made by courting this crowd, and shows his general unfitness for governing.
And from reader Hans Bader:
Apparently, Edwards is ethically clueless after all.
The only remarks that offended him were Marcotte’s religious insults, not Marcotte’s defamatory, malicious, and ignorant remarks about the Duke student defendants….
And: “Asked whether the campaign had sufficiently screened the two women before they were hired, [Edwards spokeswoman Jennifer] Palmieri said it was difficult to find and read every word a prolific blogger had written over a period of years.” (John M. Broder, “Edwards Learns Blogs Can Cut 2 Ways”, New York Times, Feb. 9). That’s an exceptionally lame excuse as regards Marcotte, whose abusiveness of tone seems to have been a standing, definitional aspect of her online presence: it’s hard to sample any random week’s worth of her posts at Pandagon without being hit over the head by it. As mentioned earlier, her post on the Duke case appeared while she was actually under consideration for the Edwards team, which would hardly have required anyone to dig through “years” of her work.
8 Comments
“I am sorry that you were offended” is a rather non-apologetic apology by Marcotte, so she isn’t being quite inconsistent with her earlier “Je ne regrette rien” position, other than that her statement doesn’t refer to “tone-deaf wingnuts.”
What’s amusing is that even this tepid politic gesture by Edwards is causing the Angry Blog Left to howl for his head. It’s an entertaining deal with the devil Edwards has made by courting this crowd, and shows his general unfitness for governing.
I commented on this myself. It’s really too bad Edwards didn’t show the courage to either support them or fire them.
http://www.herdwatching.com/items/date/2007/02/08/netroots-support/
When Bill Donohue taking offense garners the same air-raid siren reaction as Abraham Foxman or Jesse Jackson taking offense, I’ll call it even. Honestly, I’d prefer not to wage wars like this on the battlefield of who can TAKE the greatest offense, but on who can GIVE the greatest offense.
Until then, take offense.
Apparently, Edwards is ethically clueless after all.
The only remarks that offended him were Marcotte’s religious insults, not Marcotte’s defamatory, malicious, and ignorant remarks about the Duke student defendants, whose families have been financially drained by $80,000 per month in attorneys fees fighting an unethical prosecutor.
The prosecution of the people that Marcotte smeared as being rapists has been criticized across the political spectrum, including by former Dukakis campaign manager (and law professor) Susan Estrich, and Professor K.C. Johnson, who has supported Obama for president, not Bush.
It’s very clear that the prosecutor, Nifong, has violated multiple ethics rules, including hiding exculpatory evidence, such as DNA evidence; lying to the courts; bullying witnesses who provided truthful statements that conflicted with his claims; and making prejudicial, deceitful, and baseless public statements.
Governor Easley, who appointed Nifong, has belatedly disowned him after a long silence, calling Nifong the worst appointment he ever made as Governor.
But Edwards has been dead silent about Nifong’s misconduct, which has occurred almost in his own backyard.
Edwards’ failure to fire Marcotte shows that he is indifferent to her libels and defamatory conduct, and indifferent to ethical and legal violations.
His defective moral sense is apparently shared by the knee-jerk left-wing ideologues at Salon and Daily Kos, who defended Marcotte, not based on the substance of her statements (which were truly indefensible), but because of the ideological leanings of some of those who belatedly began criticizing her for other reasons (the religious-right figure Bill Donohue).
Their reasoning was summed up by a left-wing blogger who commented at Daily Kos: “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” What small minds these left-wing bloggers possess.
If people sharing such sentiments make up a big fraction of the Democratic Party’s base, then that would be one possible reason to hold your nose and vote Republican in 2008. (It’s the base that tends to end up with patronage appointments in any new administration).
“I 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.”
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you have read almost anything of Amanda Marcotte’s postings (available to the world), you know that to be utterly and compltely obviously untrue.
Here’s a coupl of quotes from just ONE posting (http://pandagon.net/2006/06/14/pandagon-goes-undercover-the-lazy-way-on-a-catholic-anti-contraception-seminar-pt-ii/):
“Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit?
A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.”
“Just remember, false witnessing is okay if done in the service of knocking women up against their will. Like it’s perfectly okay to say, “I had a vasectomy years ago, baby,” if you didn’t. God loves that sort of thing, since he’s a sadistic bastard.”
Yeah, never meant to malign their faith. What a load of BS.
Edwards is not a serious 2008 candidate, and he knows it, and this incident confirms it. He is, rather, the stalking horse for She Who Shall Not Be Named, who needs radical left-wing cover from within the Party to position herself as a “centrist” candidate.
“Their reasoning was summed up by a left-wing blogger who commented at Daily Kos: “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” What small minds these left-wing bloggers possess.”
Actually, that was the basis many right-wing bloggers utilized in trying to get people to vote Republican in this last election. I wouldn’t get too high and might about the lack of merit of this strategy if I were a right winger.
Hans Bader, you stated it better than I could have.