To ask two people to drop everything for you and then drop them at first attack can only mean that we can't trust him to fight for us either.

:)

Will you, John Edwards?  Will you stand up?

The bar fight primary goes down today?

Breathe people.

than MyDD, but I think they should keep them.

Yeah. Edwards is in deep shit if he flunks this test.

Agreed. If Edwards caves on this, there's no way I'll vote for him, primary or general (I'll vote Green if I have to).

So what's it gonna be, John?

My point is that candidates don't have to take responsibility for what their bloggers or staffers say while not under their employ unless they make the decision to do so.

That is a good point. But your point in your previous point came across as,

The Edwards campaign is sinking because they are a bunch of amateurs and Edwards is a phony who said something I didn't like about Iran even though EVERYTHING he has said since then has been great. Also, I talked to lots of people and I won't tell you who they are or what agendas they might have, but they think Edwards is sunk.

We criticize the MSM all the time, but for all that criticism, we sure do act like them in times of "gotcha".

that whether Edwards fires them or not, the meme has already been advanced. That "bloggers are out of the mainstream and that they are liabilities for political campaigns".  

I wonder if the right-wing bloggers like Malkin had that in mind when they offered up "one of their own" (in a very loose sense) to the MSM for a beatdown. I am sure it was never even a thought.

It would seem that right-wing bloggers have no interest in a sustainable future for blogging or internet activism in general.  

I disagree on your point that online support for Edwards will go "hard" one way or the other.

I agree that if he drops the bloggers and caves to the Right, it will go hard in a negative direction.

However, if he DOES support the bloggers, I think he might get a relatively minor bump, but Edwards (particularly after the Iran flap) still has plenty to prove and I doubt seriously that it will end the Edwards/Obama competition in Edwards' favor. Sure, he might get some positive kudos in his poll rankings, but I doubt if it will be as "hard" a shift as you suggest. Rather, it will only serve marginally improve his ranking in the status quo.

Does it matter what happens now? Obviously it's greatly preferable that he keeps them on, but are we supposed to be happy that they only almost buckled to this lunacy (assuming he doesn't fire them)?

I hope for Amanda and Melissa's sake they get to keep their jobs, but the damage to the campaign has already been done.

They should have immediately mocked the idiots leading this charge, further marginalizing them while simultaneously energizing their own base. Instead, their tepid response has had the (shocking!) opposite effect.

You would think of all politicians, one who experienced the Kerry campaign disaster first hand would understand this.

Wow, I'm in a sour mood.

At first I was kind up upset like a lot of people around here, but I think that what the bloggers wrote and the manner in which they wrote it definitely falls outside the lines of what I deem acceptable. The behavior of supporters and campaign workers reflects directly on the candidates themselves, and in this case if Edwards does NOT remove the bloggers from his payroll I definitely won't support him.

the salon article was posted at 13:21 Eastern. You have to wonder why it takes 2.5 hrs + to confirm or deny.

that being said -- are there any circumstances that would warrant this action? What if campaign donors were leaning heavily on the campaign? Is it realistic to believe that he'd go to the mat for two bloggers?

if he keeps the bloggers.

i will concede the hypocrisy.  i will concede every argument one wants to come up with, but this country is primarily judeo christian of some flavor or denomination.  It's a question of sheer numbers.  Right Wing candidates get to have bloggers who say shitty things about 10% of the country.  Left Wing candidates do not get to have bloggers who say shitty things about 90% of the country.

it's as simple as that.  if you want edwards to lose, keep up the pressure on this issue.  it'll be great for hillary to be campaigning against someone with this kind of baggage.

rock and roll.

Well, then the clear favorite for the netroots becomes Obama, until he disappoints us...

But really - to hire someone, then fire them immediately, because some rightwing idiot pushes on you?  

Not a brave stand, but the opposite.

This tempest shows a blip of what could await in a general election.  Maybe it is good he irons some of these issues out now, before things really get going, but this stuff is nothing compared to what will be flung later on.  If he is in troubled waters now (his polls seem to have faltered into single-digits lately) can he last through the major attacks of a general election?

It makes me question if he could survive an actual swiftboat smear, something false cooked up by the right with faux "witnesses" coming out of the woodwork, swearing they saw him/ worked with him/got involved with him on some "shady" dealings related to NC politics or legal matters (in his capacity as a lawyer?)  

The paramount issue is whether Edwards will stand up to the people who have so badly degraded political discourse that this is even an issue.

In a sane society, Donohoe and Malkin would never even get the time of day.  No politician would want anything to do with them; no self-repsecting reporter would take them seriously enough to get quotes from.

No, it's not about religion.  It's about the (mis)use of religion to declare certain subject matters off limits in debate; it's about psuedo-religious nutbags using religion in ways religion should not be used, to the detriment of both religion and politics.

I'm not even a Edwards supporter but still I'm shocked by his right wing appeasement. There is nothing to "weigh", isn't he supposed to be the left nominee?

I think those leaning to Edwards (and I am one) would either go in the "don't know" category or start looking at Richardson and really start hoping that Al Gore gets in

Edwards is a threat to so many, especially the RWNs.  I've been saying that for months.  They are more afraid of Edwards than Hillary or Obama.

Meantime, while My DD and Kos and other are expecting to hear right away when there are so many other considerations in the campaign, I suggest we all back off and look at other MSM crap that is going on with the other side.   Otherwise, you are inviting more RWB's to swarm the nest with you.  If that's the case, this blog has been against Edwards all of the time and is joining hands with Obama and Madam Clinton (who are relived that they are out of the news for a moment)to push them on and this is blog-boating if I ever saw it.

Personally, I think this will all sort itself out, and JRE won't lose my vote over it.  

As Atrios and Media Matters note, if we're going to put campaign bloggers under a microscope, John McCain's hired gun wouldn't come off looking too well.  

And looky here -- ABC's Terry Moran writes an article bashing Edwards and Amanda and Melissa, yet doesn't mention that his own brother has a right-wing blog that sets new lows for vileness.

I don't think Edwards should fire the bloggers.  The Catholic League are a bunch of blowhards who do not speak for Catholics everywhere, BUT what Marcotte said WAS OFFENSIVE to me.  I hope Edwards does take some time to think about it, but in the end forgive and move on.

Most of you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the bloggers past.  Blogging should be tough and witty, but not offensive.  That's what the other side does.

I once used a naughty word on DKos, a word that many do not approve of but which is in the dictionary. This horrible, naughty thing was brought up by DKos mafia morons every time I said anything.

So, the left does it just as much.

Wolf Blitzer just reported the story on CNN. I think Edwards is really in a no win situation right now.

http://blog.johnedwards.com/story/2007/2 /7/162644/9167

Amanda gone back to Panda-gon.

I believe that progressives need to establish some ground rules. What is the progressive political movement willing to accept from people running for office? Are we going to be reactive or proactive when it comes to policy?

For a long time progressives have suffered as wimps, in their attempt to be adults. While we argued in good faith, tried to listen to both sides on complex issues, and find common ground, conservatives have been hitting us with a pool cue, hard and often.

For the past twelve years conservatives have framed the issues, managed the debate, hit below the belt, and played with an "end justifies the means" attitude about the rules of the game. It is only conservative overreaching that has allowed progressives to grab a gulp of air.

Conservatives can talk compromise all they want but, make no mistake, they believe they are in a win/lose war. You may think that our democracy is the art of compromise. Unfortunately, democracy, in these past twelve years has changed. The officials have been pulled from the football field. Now the teams are out there with a few useless rules and a winner take all, fight to the death, attitude. This is not the democracy I remember. Perhaps it has always been this way. I think that Matt may be right about how we move forward.

Looks like the bloggers were just fired:

http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/51288aa7- 930b-4ea4-af58-575d060214ed

Anyone else notice that the Catholic League is not actually associated with the Church?  Its a lay organization.  Clergy can join, but the League itself is not an official arm of the Church.  Not only that, but their board of directors does not feature any prominent liberal catholics, though it includes numerous hard-right wingers of prominence.  

Seems to me that the Church should take steps to demand reorganization of the League (since it bears the Church's name) or forcibly disassociate itself (make the League change its name).  Does the Church really need Bill Donahue making its already damaged brand look any worse?

The beauty of the internet  is that people can speak their mind at will and many people can read what they have to say.  I don't agree with everything Amanda says, nor would I use the tone she has occasionally used on her blog in every day discourse.

That said, we are on the same side more often than not, and she was hired for her expertise and abilities.  No one in this world is entirely innocent in what they say, and that includes Mr. Donohue, Ms. Malkin, Mr Dobson, Mr Falwell, and the Vice President.  As far as I'm concerned, if she is doing her present job well, she will continue to be a part of this campaign.

See, that's not so hard..

We need some right-wing scalps, right away.  Suggestions?

Remember how Tim Kaine axing an Oliver Willis blogad (or something minimal) doomed him?

I think it's important to take a step back to think things over before you doom someone for something like this.

From what i've read of Amanda's posts, this is pretty close to confirmation that saying too much can work against you.

John Edwards is taking fire from the other side, and candidates from his own side. Who benefits from Edwards losing the primary?

It's not some coincidence that Edwards has been under fire for weeks constantly. While some frontrunners haven't recieved any fire for his/her previous positions and current problems.

In the scheme of things, think about who is directing fire here. It's more groups than you all would expect.

The candidates on our side are not all well-meaning boy scouts. Ya know.

I have newly registered, and have a few comments. Some will call me a concern troll. So be it.

1. Jimbo posting at Edwards blog is a conservative, having some fun, a troll,if you wish.

2. That Townhall story (as of 5:00PM ET) just re-hashes the Salon story. (I thought you Lefties didn't fall for the "circle jerk of the Right WIng Noise Machine" repeating itself.)  Repeat - no new info on Townhall.

3. Whatever Edwards does, even if he is on a plane, this issue (a distraction from his campaign) has been allowed to fester.It's a 24/7 world, dude!  On top of the poor vetting (if you grant that was a mistake), this compounds it. As a matter of tactics & handling the press, etc. Edwards has flunked today's test --- WHATEVER he does with the bloggers.

"Concern Troll Out!

I don't think this will doom him. BUT, I do thinkt his sends a signal to the GOP that they can manipulate the process as much as they did in 2004, and get away with it. These attacks, not policy, not Iraq, not anything else, are the definition of how the GOP beats us, and whether or not we win depends on our ability to be strong in the face of a bullshit storm over nothing. Rather than defining the narrative we are letting them control it.

and asked them if they had fired the bloggers.  The young lady on the phone said that the information had not been released.  I asked if was going to be on air or over their website and she said she did not know.

I failed to asked if they had made up their minds - damn it!  But by saying that info has not been released sounds like they have.  I wondering what it will be.

You can also contact John Edwards for President at:

Phone: (919) 636-3131

Another piece in the NYT and the attitude is hardening on Edwards at the moment.  Jerome Armstrong and myDD gets a prominent mention.

Well, I certainly hope Edwards keeps Amanda on board. Now that Kerry has skulked away, we on the Right have suffered a terrible loss. Tons of great material, all wasted now.

Amanda's joining the Edwards campaign gave us new hope.

Please, John Edwards, keep Amanda employed. Free her to rant at will, don't make her hold back a bit. She gives us so much to work with!

The idea a Michelle Malkin spoof could freak out the Edwards campaign is both shocking and disappointing.

"I have a pretty vicious rant and an important action alert lined up"

Get over yourself Chris. Or rant away. Whatever, but you come off as a pompous ass. Do you have any idea how stupid you make the less of us look? Seriously, what's wrong with you people? If Edwards keeps those losers we will never win the election. We will chase away all the normal decent people who make up the majority of the votes. We need normal people on our side.

k1 k2 k3 k4 k5 k6 k7 k8 k9 k10 k11 k12 k13 k14 k15 k16 k17 k18 k19 k20 k21 k22 k23 k24 k25 k26 k27 k28 k29 k30 k31 k32 k33 k34 k35 k36 k37 k38 k39 k40 k41 k42 k43 k44 k45 k46 k47 k48 k49 k50 k51 k52 k53 k54 k55 k56 k57 k58 k59 k60 k61 k62 k63 k64 k65 k66 k67 k68 k69 k70 k71 k72 k73 k74 k75 k76 k77 k78 k79 k80 k81