Saturday, February 10, 2007

More on Edwards' Whopping Mistake

So, Edwards refuses to fire Amanda Marcotte, a blogger who has viciously mocked Catholic beliefs in the past (see the previous post) after she issues a mealy-mouthed non-apology. And it seems that massive pressure from left-wing bloggers, outraged that Edwards would cave to the likes of Bill Donohue, saved their jobs. What the liberal bloggers fail to understand is that the only people outraged here are not merely conservative blowhards, but Catholics in general, including those closer to the Democratic end of the spectrum. Eduardo PeƱalver over at Commonweal gets it just right, when he notes:
"Look, I can understand that we shouldn't let Donohue set the agenda for our discussion, but it makes no sense to take the reactionary stance that if a charge comes from a hypocritical thug like Donohue that it has no merit whatsoever and is not worthy of discussion. You can admit that the blog posts in question gratuitously evinced overt hostility to Catholics, and were therefore at least problematic for someone attached to a presidential campaign in a communications capacity, without crediting Donohue's idiocy. Reacting as the liberal blogosphere has, by simply closing ranks and denying that there is anything wrong with defaming the religious symbols of the largest (and most Democratic) Christian constituency in the country simply feeds into the stereotypes that keeps people like Donohue in business."
But does anybody see this? A few bloggers do, as noted by Penalver. Nancy Scola from MyDD asks if "we [have] made the Democratic tent big enough to welcome religious activists without constantly snickering behind their backs?". And the influential Huffington Post fronts a piece by Melinda Henneberger noting that Marcotte's comments are harmful to liberal Catholics as well, as evidenced by Commonweal's reaction. She draws attention to a comment at the Commonweal blog noting that "Marcotte's comments were viciously anti-Catholic. The fact that many on the left failed to realize that explains very clearly why the GOP (a party that violates Catholic social theory over 90 percent of the time) seems to attract legions of Catholics." Who wrote that last comment? Why, a commentator named Morning's Minion!

But these observations are few and far between. The liberal blogsophere is content to stand by Edwards and downplay any sense of offense, secure that its honor has been maintained. Is the liberal blogosphere so trapped in its own self-congratulatory and narcissistic worldview that it fails to see the harm done? Is the loathing of Catholicism so great that they are quite happy to see a natural constituency enter the arms of the Republicans rather than show them a modicum of respect? This issue goes way beyond Donohue. It even goes way beyond Edwards. It gets right to the heart of how many on the secular left regard religion.

5 comments:

Michael said...

While I don't disagree with your analysis, you omit one thing: any sign of weakness on the part of any Democrat is treated by Republicans as blood to a shark. Given that most Republican complaints about, well, anything, are vicious and self-serving efforts to gain political advantage, any Democrat would be a fool not to think thrice about how to respond.

Morning's Minion said...

I think that's pretty accurate. Democrats will never forget the impeachment of Bill Clinton, effectively for marital infidelity, followed by a "see no evil" approach to the mendacity of the Bush administration. There is also the feeling that Republicans will usually win by shouting loudest. Just look at some examples: a docu-drama puts words in Reagan's mouth. It is cancelled. A docu-drama puts words in Clinton's mouth. It goes ahead anyway, and is still being hyped by Fox News. During Clinton's first term, the media went crzy over inane stuff like Clinton's haircut. Now we have Pelosi's jet and Edwards' house. Where was the outrage over Delay and forced abortions in the Northern Mariana islands? Over Cheney and war profiteering? Over making up evidence for a war?

Michael said...

MM, that outrage would require a sense of decency. Today's Republican Party hasn't one, and the so-called Catholic bloggers (in fairness, it's mostly the commenters) who blindly support the Republican Party are useful idiots, who allow their decent pro-life longings to put them in the service of a pro-death agenda.

Franklin Jennings said...

And you both act like there's a major party in this country without a pro-death agenda.

Or that Democrat complaints are anything but vicious self-serving efforts to gain political advantage.

Face it, when you boil it down, yourecognise partisan republicans masquerading as good catholics so easily because you know exactly what that stench smells like.

Because we can almost see the stink lines of the democrat version wafting off of you.

This blog isn't about advancing the Kingdom of Heaven, but the Democratic agenda. In this respect, you really are no different whatsoever than Donaghue or Hudson, or whoever you're denouncing at the moment.

Franklin Jennings said...

"MM, that outrage would require a sense of decency. Today's Republican Party hasn't one"

Absolutely! That's why the GOP's VP candidate in '04 defends employing a disgusting little bigot for Com. Director in his upcoming presidential bid.

Oh wait! This post is about Democrats' lack of decency. But just like some reps, dems have to get their digs in on the other party, regardless of the topic.

Does anyone who hasn't sold their soul to sodomy and infanticide take this crap seriously?

(In the interest of fairness, point me to a blog as deep in the GOps pocket as this one, and I'll go annoy them too.)