From Michelle Malkin's lips...
Michelle Malkin has no idea how smart Amanda Marcotte is.
If she did she wouldn't volunteer to read Amanda's brilliant New Orleans post. Watch the video.
« Santeria lawsuit update | Main | Sleeping Flamingo »
Michelle Malkin has no idea how smart Amanda Marcotte is.
If she did she wouldn't volunteer to read Amanda's brilliant New Orleans post. Watch the video.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c61e653ef00d83468226c69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference From Michelle Malkin's lips...:
» Amanda and Shakes rock! from A Blog Around The Clock
I think that the whole brouhaha that the extreme wingers are raising about new Edwards bloggers will have a) no effect on Democratic primary voters a year from now, b) no effect on national voters two years from now, and... [Read More]
The comments to this entry are closed.
How did you find them shut?
Posted by: PR | February 05, 2007 at 09:04 PM
This whole kerfuffle is a silly waste of time that means nothing outside the world of right wing bloggers and sensible civil pundits who benefit professionally from anti-netroots hysteria.
That said, it isn't exactly unexpected. I know that I was surprised when Amanda announced this. I don't doubt that it's a job she can do well. She's obviously smart and hard-working, and has a strong grasp of what the blogosphere responds to. That said, a political movement needs lots of different voices, and some are much more effective when not attached to a campaign. Amanda provides red meat to people, and she does so in a way that, while entertaining, can come off as over the top, especially if you're not used to reading her work and taking some statements with a grain of salt. The post she scrubbed, about the Duke case, strikes me as an example of that.
It's not exactly compatible with the sound-bite-happy, gotcha atmosphere that dominates campaign reporting.
Posted by: aeroman | February 05, 2007 at 09:53 PM
Michelle Malkin displays the level of dignity, integrity, and honesty that we've come to expect from the rest of her oeuvre.
Posted by: Julian Elson | February 05, 2007 at 10:15 PM
Oy oy oy ...
Posted by: porgy tirebiter | February 05, 2007 at 10:40 PM
This is truly one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen.
Posted by: Chris O. | February 05, 2007 at 11:49 PM
Aeroman, Amanda did not "scrub" anything. There was a block of archived posts that were lost in to Pandagon's server troubles, but that ain't scrubbing.
Posted by: DJA | February 06, 2007 at 01:28 AM
DJA, we're thinking about different posts. You are, I'm guessing, thinking of the post about Jesse's leaving to work for the Strickland campaign, which some people had falsely and irresponsibly claimed was scrubbed. I'm talking about this one, originally about the Duke lacrosse player controversy, which currently reads:
UPDATE: Since people are determined to make hay over this quick shot of a post, I’m deleting it and here’s my official stance. The prosecution in the Duke case fumbled the ball. The prosecutor was too eager to get a speedy case and make a name for himself. That is my final word.
So, what, it was a server error that created a false message from Amanda explicitly saying that she personally replaced the post in response to criticism?
Charming "ain't" aside, yeah, Darcy, she did scrub something. I don't actually think there's anything wrong with her scrubbing the post. She didn't conceal it. She didn't deny it. I've scrubbed two blogs myself because I figured I'd just prefer not worrying about them anymore and not having them floating dead on the internet forever. There's nothing wrong with that, as far as I'm concerned. Though it's a little disappointing that you'd just assume that I was either lying or mistaken.
Posted by: aeroman | February 06, 2007 at 02:14 AM
Aeroman,
I'm afraid I'm behind the curve on this one. I assumed you were talking about one of the other posts which were widely, but falsely, alleged to have been scrubbed. I didn't know about this one. Last time I checked, the original version of the Jan. 21 post was still up -- though obviously at some point Amanda actually did replace the original post with the updated statement you cite above.
My bad, clearly, and I apologize if I caused any offense -- I don't keep up with this stuff like I once did.
Posted by: DJA | February 06, 2007 at 05:20 AM
One could spend the weekend making this piece (which incidentally makes that shit on current.TV look entertaining) or one could spend the weekend playing with their kids. Where are the family values?
Posted by: Roxanne | February 06, 2007 at 06:25 AM
Ho-ly shit! That is one of the most bizarre things I've ever watched. Malkin really, really hates Amanda.
Posted by: Chris | February 06, 2007 at 09:03 AM
I imagine that the wingnut hiveneuron spent much of the weekend trying to find material that can be used to frag Amanda and (by association) Edwards. Any blogger who is hired by a campaign is going to go throught the same thing.
The basic wingnut operating principle of throwing so much BS that it's impossible to rebut it all is in operation here.
Posted by: togolosh | February 06, 2007 at 10:12 AM
It's not exactly compatible with the sound-bite-happy, gotcha atmosphere that dominates campaign reporting.
I think that's kind of the point. Did you ever see The War Room, where James Carville hashes out an attack ad on HW Bush in a matter of about 15 minutes?
I think Edwards decided he wanted to get his very own attack dog, and it only helps that she has a lot of defenders (including me). Trying to offer the Republican attack dogs a biscuit when they're ripping out your throat isn't working anymore.
And maybe I misunderstand the word "scrub," but doesn't that mean deleting a post and pretending it never existed at all? I've seen other people note that they've deleted posts and this kind of shitstorm hasn't descended on them.
Posted by: Mnemosyne | February 06, 2007 at 11:12 AM
....My God, that woman is offensive.
Surely we're in Ann Coulter it's-all-an-act self-parody territory here?
Posted by: Anthony Damiani | February 06, 2007 at 11:51 AM
Don't worry about it, Darcy. There's little or nothing to be gained from actually following any of this very closely. I'm just addicted to the crazy freak-outs of the wingnutosphere.
Mnemosyne, I don't know the thought processes of the Edwards people. But the hire has a long way to go if it's going to end in an improvement in the Edwards campaign's attacks-waged to attacks-fielded ratio.
Posted by: aeroman | February 06, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Michelle relishes the drama provided by biting into a tasty liberal sandwich. Which I think is the fun part of the blogosphere. I'm not too worried about the sound bites gotcha world of the big media. The blogosphere so rapidly evolves it is unlikely the swift boat tactic can shoot a torpedo into the side of Amanda. It's all a move from static trench warfare to blitzkrieg style Blogosphere, where wit wins and elephants fear to step.
Michelle has a bit of high school air about her performing. I think American Idol is looking for try outs. Send her a note telling where to sign up.
Doyle
Posted by: Doyle Saylor | February 06, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Who is Michelle Malkin??
I have to admit that once I grew so incensed at something those lips uttered I actually sat down and emailed her skankish self and then published her email on truthout -- a colossal waste of time if I had spent any on it. Just a brief diatribe that I am sure she will use in a book one day and then I will OWN her. hehe
I bet KGB saves that pic to his hard-drive.
Posted by: voxpopuli | February 06, 2007 at 01:39 PM
Who is Michelle Malkin??
I have to admit that once I grew so incensed at something those lips uttered I actually sat down and emailed her skankish self and then published her email on truthout -- a colossal waste of time if I had spent any on it. Just a brief diatribe that I am sure she will use in a book one day and then I will OWN her. hehe
I bet KGB saves that pic to his hard-drive.
Posted by: voxpopuli | February 06, 2007 at 01:39 PM
Any blogger who is hired by a campaign is going to go throught the same thing.
They're not doing it to Shakespeare's Sister.
I think it's very definitely Amanda-specific. The most laughable part is the assumption that the Edwards campaign has somehow never bothered to read anything Amanda has written, and they don't know about her penchant for profanity.
People, Elizabeth Edwards is EVERYWHERE.
Posted by: zuzu | February 06, 2007 at 04:09 PM
They're not doing it to Shakespeare's Sister.
I think that, for one, they recognize that Amanda is smarter, more mature, and more effective than Shakepeare's Sister. She can be a very big plus for the Edwards campaign, and thus getting her fired, or at least smearing her relentlessly, can harm the Edwards campaign. What's more, Amanda's certainly a bit to the left of Edwards, or any politically viable Democratic presidential candidate. The fact that such a candidate has hired her, then, has to be extremely threatening to the right wing hacks who feel their ideological and rhetorical dominance slipping through their hands even as they film their cable access news programs.
Posted by: Chris | February 06, 2007 at 05:15 PM
Zuzu's right, Elizabeth Edwards knows what's what online. So do a lot of the other non-blogging campaign staffers.
The Edwards campaign is really internet savvy. They're putting a lot of resources into the web side of their operation.
I would be shocked if this right wing bleating had any effect on Amanda's future with the campaign.
Posted by: Lindsay Beyerstein | February 06, 2007 at 05:50 PM
At least Malkin spelled Pandagon correctly*. That should help drive up traffic there as people click over to see what the fuss is all about, and in the process, get to read a lot more of what Amanda has written.
*From the old line about the politician who wanted to make sure that the newspapers attacking him spelled his name correctly.
Posted by: DaveW | February 06, 2007 at 06:22 PM
At the risk of bucking a trend, I think the Marcotte posting is overheated and over the top, and that it deserves a good parody. But it takes breath-stoppingly unadulterated gall for Michelle Malkin (Michelle Malkin!) to attempt ridicule here.
Posted by: Aaron Baker | February 06, 2007 at 10:21 PM
Overheated, about BushCo's handling of the Katrina debacle and the loss of New Orleans? It's a pretty incensed post, but over twelve hundred people died and an entire American city was lost.
Amanda's post was written while hundreds of thousands of Americans were displaced within their own country. Amanda was helping to take care of some of the evacuees who fled to Texas.
Posted by: Lindsay Beyerstein | February 06, 2007 at 10:30 PM
As I've written elsewhere, I hope Amanda serves as a millstone around Edwards' neck.
Posted by: Robert O'Brien | February 06, 2007 at 10:35 PM
So her heart's in the right place. A good heart doesn't guarantee good writing.
Posted by: Aaron Baker | February 06, 2007 at 10:40 PM