Don’t Speak for me, Cloacina

The execrable Amanda Marcotte resigned from the Edwards campaign today, under what she and the other Lefties describe as pressure from religious bigots. If you have a strong stomach, go read the:

Announcement at Pandagon.

Notice the frequent insistence that “Religious bigots like Donohue don’t speak for all Catholics.”

Then this:

Amanda Marcotte Feb 12th, 2007 at 10:00 pm

Todd, I 100% agree that this was a targeted hit on atheists in politics.

Well, tell ya what, I am an atheist, and spigot-bigots like you don’t speak for me.

Update: Mark Coffey is just cruel:

Remember last week, when Chris Bowers was strutting around like Mike Jagger in his prime talking up his mighty power over the Edwards campaign?

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. JackLewis.net on 13 Feb 2007 at 10:42 am

    Foul-mouthed Lib bloggers “resigns” from Edwards campaign

    After gloating over media stories reporting her firing, Amanda Marcotte ahs now announced that she has quit the Edwards campaign. I’m very familiar with these "resignations" that come amidst political scandal. I was once fired from a job aft…

Comments

  1. Mark Coffey wrote:

    Wait, weren’t her defenders talking up what a good Catholic she was? Or was that the other whozit that’s still working for Edwards? Marlowe’s Sibling, isn’t it?

    Ah, some days it’s fun, ain’t it?…

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 12:14 am

  2. Alon Levy wrote:

    The standard position of most of her defenders is that Amanda is an atheist and that anyone who thinks that’s inherently wrong, as Donohue seems to, is a bigot. The “Good Catholic” label applies not to Amanda but to some defenders, who show how not all Catholics care for Donohue.

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 12:52 am

  3. tas wrote:

    I never saw what the huge problem was here. (Of course, there really wasn’t a problem — a “problem” is never needed to make a political hit on somebody.) The Religious Right goes out of their way to attempt to make life a living hell for anybody who isn’t like them: homosexuals, feminist women who aren’t afraid of speaking out, etc. So when one of their victims is vocal about the Religious Right’s actions, suddenly everybody is shocked that people are angry? Please. Maybe if the Religious Right stopping trying to tell us who we can f-ck, if we can marry, what we can read, what jobs we can have, and we we can and can’t do with our bodies, then there would be less animosity against them. File that one under “Duh.”

    And where were Bill Donohue, Michelle Malkin and the rest of the rightwing attack machine to rise a storm about the Catholic Church harboring pedophiles? I guess diddling little boys is bad but dropping a few f-bombs is 10 times worse in the eyes of the Lord’s chosen a–holes.

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 1:43 am

  4. Che Muchacho wrote:

    We are duly impressed at your ability to have virtual nobodies fired from your political opponent’s campaigns. If only you could keep your own politicians from being fired at the ballot box we would have a game. Your time in the big leagues was short (thankfully) and eventful (regrettably for you).

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 6:56 am

  5. minorripper wrote:

    Edwards is shedding the softie,breck girl image though…here’s video proof:
    http://minor-ripper.blogspot.com/2007/02/john-edwards-gets-tough-with-matt-lauer_08.html

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 7:44 am

  6. DavidC wrote:

    tas,

    ” The Religious Right goes out of their way to attempt to make life a living hell for anybody who isn’t like them: homosexuals, feminist women who aren’t afraid of speaking out, etc. … Maybe if the Religious Right stopping trying to tell us who we can f-ck, if we can marry, what we can read, what jobs we can have, and we we can and can’t do with our bodies, then there would be less animosity against them.”

    This kind of hostility and fear makes me laugh. Who are you so afraid of? What is this great Religious Right bogeyman that you’ve built up in your own mind?

    I’m a pro-choice atheist who supports gay marriage. In addition I favor drug legalization, have no problems with porn, and like recreational gambling. That would make me a lot different than the Religious Right. But somehow they haven’t attempted to “make life a living hell” for me. I guess they must have just overlooked me.

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 9:53 am

  7. Alon Levy wrote:

    “I’m pro-abolition. But those slaveowners haven’t tried making me a slave! They must have overlooked me.”

    On another note, can you explain the “Cloachina” reference?

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 9:56 am

  8. Ali wrote:

    Atheist huh?

    You couldn’t hate something that much without having loved it once.

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 12:46 pm

  9. Grim wrote:

    “You couldn’t hate something that much without having loved it once.”

    Not true. I have a particular hatred for psychology, but I don’t think I ever had any affection for it. The more I learned about, however, the more it struck me as a pernicious influence in our society and culture — and indeed, even in government, given that courts regularly consult psychologists before issuing rulings, and many agencies and departments require psych evals before hiring (worked out great for NASA, eh?).

    I think that a lot of atheists are people who have just come to the conclusion that they really believe that there is no god. The ones who hate religion may be former members of a faith who felt hurt or disappointed; but they may also simply feel the way I feel about psychology. It may be that they are annoyed that it has so much influence in our society, culture, and government. Insofar as it prevents them from doing things they really love to do, that can justify hatred — to the degree that hatred is justifiable.

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 1:33 pm

  10. DavidC wrote:

    ““I’m pro-abolition. But those slaveowners haven’t tried making me a slave! They must have overlooked me.”

    Nice attempt to miss the point, which was that hysterical ranting about the Religious Right is silly.

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 2:25 pm

  11. Che Muchaco wrote:

    DavidC wrote:

    ““I’m pro-abolition. But those slaveowners haven’t tried making me a slave! They must have overlooked me.”

    Nice attempt to miss the point, which was that hysterical ranting about the Religious Right is silly.

    I agree with David C.

    Hysterical ranting about Islamofascists is ridiculous and silly.

    Posted 13 Feb 2007 at 10:07 pm

  12. DavidC wrote:

    Che,

    “Hysterical ranting about Islamofascists is ridiculous and silly.”

    Yeah, because murderous Islamic fanatics who are killing people in large numbers are just so similar to the U.S. Christian Right. With all those suicide bombings and terrorist attacks perpetrated by Christians here in the U.S., you’d think it was just like the Middle East.

    Is there some sort of requirement that left-wingers have to come up with the most ridiculous analogies possible? First it’s slaveowners, now Islamofascists. Maybe fear of the horrible evil threat posed by the Religious Right is coloring their judgement.

    Posted 14 Feb 2007 at 9:06 am

  13. Alon Levy wrote:

    Once in a while they bomb abortion clinics or federal buildings. The FBI is fortunately pretty good at preventing domestic terrorism, unlike the Palestinian security services.

    Posted 14 Feb 2007 at 3:12 pm

  14. John the Marine wrote:

    The old “false equivalence” is the solace of the stupid and a favorite of the dishonest,
    and let us not forget false equivalence’s hand maiden “half truth” this pair is called propaganda.

    It is always a lot easier to hate others for your own misery than get on with business of living. However, once you lived you’ll find you have little time to hate.

    Political parties always give their sheep a boogy man. For the Left it is the Religious Right, Corporations, Rednecks, Guns, and Morality. For the Right it is Pinkos, ****, Communists, Hippies, Minorities, and pacifists.

    The whole argument of which side is worse is like fighting about weather Hilter or Stalin was the bigger monster. Think for yourself and stop whining about how tough it is being gay or an atheist. I mean really, don’t you think it is time to climb down off the “Cross”? Besides how is the Right responsible for the happenings in the Edwards’ campaign? Why didn’t the white knights of the Edwards’ campaign confront the evil Rightwing Bigots?

    Posted 14 Feb 2007 at 4:07 pm

  15. SeanH wrote:

    Atheist huh?

    You couldn’t hate something that much without having loved it once.

    Also not true because very few atheists hate religion or God. Personally, I couldn’t care less about religion or God one way or the other.

    I don’t believe in UFOs or Bigfoot either. That doesn’t mean I’m harboring some hateful grudge against space aliens and sasquatches.

    Posted 14 Feb 2007 at 6:05 pm

  16. The Commissar wrote:

    The post was about internal (in this case, Leftie) political extremists. Clueless Commenter Che pulled in Islamic terrorists.

    Can we all get real?

    1) External, Islamic terrorists obviously pose a more severe threat.

    2) Internal extremists and hate-mongers and vandals exist on both sides. And, relative to radical Islamists, are not a significant threat. And reasonable Conservatives denounce abortion-clinic bombers. And reasonable Liberals denounce Sixties-style bomb-throwing radicals. Sheesh, guys. Just keep it real, okay?

    Now if you want to slag the Right Wing Noise Machine or Left Wing Moonbats, have at it. :)

    Posted 14 Feb 2007 at 6:16 pm

« The Bright Glow of Farsi-Shine
The Passion of Amanda - A Feminist Gospel Rock Opera »