I agree with PZ Myers on this one. Edwards has just accepted the "resignation" of Amanda Marcotte after she had been pilloried by the Christian right for speaking out against Catholic stupidity on her blog. That shows a lack of courage on Edwards' part and it means I've stopped hoping that he become President (I don't have a vote).What a shame, since Edwards looked so promising only a few weeks ago. Edwards was getting lots of praise for understanding bloggers and the internet. Clearly that praise was misguided. He doesn't get it at all.
Obama is now at the top of PZ's list. Dennis Kucinich tops mine.
I was thinking about contributing to Edwards' campaign, but after he caved to the religious wackos, he has shown himself to be just another weasel.
ReplyDeleteI liked your touch of putting his picture upside down.
That shows a lack of courage on Edwards' part and it means I've stopped hoping that he become President (I don't have a vote).
ReplyDeleteThank goodness. The last thing we need is another moonbat in the U.S. In fact, I think we should trade our moonbats for your Albertans.
I think we should trade RO'B for... wait, damn, nobody would trade even a bag of garbage for that loon.
ReplyDeleteEdwards was getting lots of praise for understanding bloggers and the internet.
ReplyDeleteWell ... I had been looking at the two blogs in question for a bit when the whole thing became news. Although I have no sympathy for the "Christian" twits who've been whining in shrill tones, I don't understand how Edwards thought he could hire the two of them and not have it blow up in his face.
And if he did understand, you'd think he would have been prepared to face down the reaction. Either way, he looks bad ...
Far more serious then the alleged anti-Catholic remarks by Ms. Marcotte is her irresponsible comments on the 3 accused in the Duke so-called rape case. As an example, consider the followingcomment from her which was made after it became obvious that the rape case was a work of fiction.
ReplyDelete‘Last month, Marcotte wrote of the Duke University rape case: “Can’t a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it? So unfair.”‘
Edwards was getting lots of praise for understanding bloggers and the internet.
ReplyDelete... which in hindsight was misplaced, I suggest. I had been looking at the two blogs in question for a bit. Although I have no sympathy for the twits who've been whining in shrill tones, I don't understand how Edwards thought he could hire the two of them and not have it blow up in his face.
That "defense" just reframes the issue to be the Edwards campaign's utter incompetence in not doing the most rudimentary background check before hiring them. Does that suggest that he's capable of running a successful general election campaign, let alone a country?
ReplyDeleteI think we should trade RO'B for... wait, damn, nobody would trade even a bag of garbage for that loon.
ReplyDeleteYou might want to stop inhaling formaldehyde Gil.
slc writes,
ReplyDeleteLast month, Marcotte wrote of the Duke University rape case: “Can’t a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it? So unfair.”
Are you one of those people who don't get sarcasm?
slc writes,
ReplyDeleteLast month, Marcotte wrote of the Duke University rape case: “Can’t a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it? So unfair.”
larry moran writes,
Are you one of those people who don't get sarcasm?
I think he got the sarcasm, but his point is that given the information that has come out in the last couple of months, it seems that there was a huge rush to judgement against the players, and Marcotte seems to be joining in that rush.
PZ rushed to judgement. I just posted a bunch of relevant links about this....
ReplyDeleteKucinich tops my list as well. I was one of about four Americans who voted for him in the primaries last time 'round.
ReplyDeleteBut since he has no shot, I keep hoping Al Gore will decide to run. A Gore/Obama ticket would make me really happy.
Robert, is your main goal in life to try and pass "moonbat" as intellectual discourse? Typical of a conservative, since you don't have any ACTUAL arguments for anything you support. I suppose you are nothing but another pointless troll who is offended by people who possess intelligent and insight.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the Duke case.
ReplyDeleteIt is still not clear that the woman in question was not raped or abused. Besides that there were a lot of aspects of the case worth pursuing, and there still is. There is the infamous email where one of the jocks fantasizes about killing women, written the day after the event.
And why is it that the same people who bash Amanda for assuming the guilt of the players are strangely silent when it comes to the many people who immediately assumed that the woman was lying? They were in fact assuming her guilty of the crime of false accusations, but that seems to be ok?
So JasonT how is it you are not a bigot if you demand of Amanda that she should never accuse anyone of a crime, whilst you are strangely silent on the many people who accused the woman in the case of a crime?
Oops I posted the comment above, sorry 'bout the anonymous tag
ReplyDeleteI'm not assuming anything, and that's why I'm not a bigot, thanks for asking. For someone visiting a science blog, you seem awfully quick to jump to conclusions yourself. From what I've read recently about the case, the physical evidence doesn't support the charges against the 3 that were originally accused and her statements have been contradictory. It is not assuming that she is lying to suggest that the players were being unfairly treated given what evidence is available to support the charges.
ReplyDeleteThe truth of what happened is an either-or situation. Either she was assaulted by the players, or she is lying. But "I'm not sure" or "the evidence seems to suggest . . ." are perfectly valid ways to look at the case as an outside observer without making someone a bigot.
Jason, you said:
ReplyDelete"I think he got the sarcasm, but his point is that given the information that has come out in the last couple of months, it seems that there was a huge rush to judgement against the players, and Marcotte seems to be joining in that rush."
There was and is a huge rush to pass judgement against the woman in the case, but somehow all the people who are so concerned about passing judgement are strangely silent about this.
If it was wrong to pass judgement against the players, then isn't it just as wrong to pass judgement on the alleged victim?
And it isn't about what we know now, but about what was known at the time when the judgement were made.
What has happened now is that the charges has been dropped, but no charges have been put against the woman, indicating that at least the police do not have evidence to support that she is guilty of falsely accusing.
So why is it Amanda is such a great sinner for having condemned the rape of a stripper, which haven't been proven, but so few condemn the people who still, without evidence, accuse the woman of lying?
And by the way, you are aware of what Amanda wrote in this post?
http://pandagon.net/2006/04/10/breaking/
Re Soren Kongsted
ReplyDeleteApparently, Mr Kongstad is unfamialiar with the evidence in the Duke so-called rape case. The following information was available to Ms. Marcotte when she made her so-called sarcastic statement.
1. One of the accused, Reade Seligmann has irrefutable evidence that he was not present when the alleged assault took place.
2. The other exotic dancer has stated that she was unaware of such an assault taking place.
3. The accuser has changed her story numerous times.
4. The DNA evidence indicates that the accuser had a sexual encounter with at least 4 different men, none of whom was a Duke lacrosse player, much less one of the defendents (if there was a rape, maybe one or more of of these guys was responsible).
5. The photo identification lineup was invalid because non-members of the Duke lacrosse team were not included. This is contrary to North Carolina State law and to FBI guidelines.
In addition to all this, there is the misconduct of the district attorney which would make it impossible to convict any of the three accused, even if they were guilty.
I suppose you are nothing but another pointless troll who is offended by people who possess intelligent and insight.
ReplyDeleteIf that were the case, then you and I should get along splendidly, since I could not possibly take offense to you.