Sadly, No!

Bryan at Hot Air is busy parsing the meaning of the term, ‘smeared,’ in order to help excuse himself from, you know, the consequences of his latest escapade as part of a crew of out-of-control, yet hilariously incompetent right-wing smear merchants:

When you hear that someone’s been “smeared,� what do you think has happened? Do you think

a) someone took something the person in question said entirely out of context and mischaracterized it; or
b) someone took something the person in question said and just quoted it, word for word?

I could be wrong–what do I, a simple godbag, know?–but all along I’ve thought that a smear is more related to a) than b). Which is to say, that a smear is when you take someone’s words out of context and make those words mean something that the person never intended, or when you just accuse a person of doing or thinking a thing that they have never done or thought.

Wokay. Instead of joining one of those flagpole-balancing discussions about what words mean, here’s a poem by Hot Air’s Allahpundit, verbatim and unabridged:

“Shari’a” For Amina Lawal

Jews are evil, Hindus are snooty,
Christians stink worse than your father’s socks.
Buddhists are stupid and their robes look fruity.
These people must be smashed with rocks.

Do not forget, when dispensing derision,
The Shinto and Taoist and Confucianist blocs.
There’s so many goddamned Asian religions.
All of them must be smashed with rocks.

Then there’s the women, who stall insurrection
With their lips and their curves and their frilly Jew frocks.
You can’t wage jihad when you’ve got an erection.
These snakecharmers must be smashed with rocks.

Homos and breeders, negros and whitey,
Fatties and Flockharts and bookworms and jocks:
Praise Allah, or your heads we’ll be goin’ upside-y.
All of you fucking people must be smashed with rocks.

News flash: As gamely anticipated (see below), Patterico tries to accuse us of not understanding satire:

Sadly, No! Publishes the Most Clueless Blog Post Ever Written (UPDATE: Make That Two!)

In his zeal to uncover alleged conservative hypocrisy, a blogger at a “humor� blog mistakes an old Allahpundit parody for a serious post. Hilarity ensues.
[…]
I predict Gavin will try to recover by claiming that he knew Allah’s post was a parody. But this interpretation reveals Gavin’s post to be utterly incoherent — unless he were truly trying to sell the ludicrous notion that Amanda Marcotte’s ravings on religion were nothing but parody and satire, as she claimed in her weak, mealy-mouthed non-apology apology.

You mean he isn’t really Allah, the Muslim deity?

Allahpundit of Hot Air is outraged over Amanda’s disrespect toward Christianity, and what it says about John Edwards:

It wasn’t their intention to malign anyone’s faith? By referring to religious conservatives as “godbags� and “Christofascists�? Quote:

Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit?

A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.

Either he’s a gullible moron or he takes us for gullible morons. Bad news either way.

For a different view, here’s Allahpundit:

Do Catholics really believe they are eating Christ when they take the host? Allah knows that your priests have a taste for flesh–the younger the better, it seems–but this is ridiculous. And you have the gall to mock Muslims for believing that Satan lives in their nostrils at night? Allah will admit that we have our eccentric beliefs like any other faith, but at least cannibalism is not part of the core curriculum. Stop chewing on Jesus, you ghoulish fucks.

Back to you, Allahpundit:

Like [Michelle Malkin] noted recently in a not-dissimilar context, sunshine is the best disinfectant. The best way to fight the nutroots is to raise their level of exposure. Edwards helped do that. Thanks, Silky Pony.

Golly. One imagines that the next notion down the pike is going to be that Allah was merely writing satire. And indeed, normally, we’d be down with that. But when you read the Hot Air piece in all its switchbacks and updates, you find that Allah and Bryan have already carefully blocked that exit, doing a #2 woo-woo war dance of outrage over the notion that Amanda’s writing should be taken at anything but than face value. Along the way, they resort to quoting Crazy Jeff Goldstein, who provides the following logical equation:

[W]ere it really never Marcotte’s intent to malign anyone’s faith, she probably wouldn’t have dedicated so many hate-filled blog posts to, you know—maligning anyone’s faith.

Fair enough, then. Were it really never Allah’s intent to malign anyone’s faith, he probably wouldn’t have dedicated so many hate-filled blog posts to, you know—maligning anyone’s faith.

But maybe there’s an exculpatory rationalization still to be hashed together. It’s a mistake to sell these guys short; they’re clever in at least that one way.

[Hanx! Liberal Avenger]

It’s been a long, lonely day around here, as Malkin hunted around for a sophistry with a few miles left on it, in order to wish her latest failure into another fake victory.

Then finally, the post appeared!

The Pandagonization of John Edwards is complete
By Michelle Malkin

From John Edwards’ blog:

[long quote from the announcement that Edwards is not, in fact, firing Amanda and Melissa]

I’m with Allah:

The best way to fight the nutroots is to raise their level of exposure. Edwards helped do that. Thanks, Silky Pony.

And with Bryan:

The guy can’t face down a howling mob led by Vanuatu protege Chris Bowers, yet he wants us to think he’s strong enough to face down the mad mullahs and Kim Jong-Il. Riiiight. File this netroots victory under the heading “pyrrhic.�

So if Edwards thwarts an attack by Malkin, Bryan, and their perennial mob of wrathful whiners, it actually proves that he’s weak. Because instead of caving in under pressure from a bunch of increasingly desperate failure-artists who hate everything that Edwards stands for, he decided to listen to people on his own side.

You know, that’s pretty good. We would never have imagined that as an argument that someone would make.

Meanwhile, the nutroots are waving their guns around in triumph.

John Edwards ought to pray (softly, because you don’t want your staffers muttering about you being a “godbag” behind your back, right?) that he doesn’t get hit.

Hear me now, believe me later, Johnny E.: If you lay down with nutroots, it will be hard to get back up.

Believe it or not, that link leads to this post:

…Which also features the quote from our pal Rick Moran, of Right Wing Nut House:

[Amanda Marcotte] is a rank bigot, a nauseating, die hard dogmatist whose sickening screeds against people she disagrees with (including most non-emasculated men) have sullied the debate between right and left for far too long.

Unfortunately, Marcotte’s type will always have a home on the left. She will be welcomed back with open arms and continue her unbalanced rants, raging against people whose only transgression is that they fail to fit their beliefs into her own narrow, warped, and cockeyed worldview.

Following Malkin these days has become like watching Cops, with a perp who gets pulled over on the highway and tries to make a run for it — crashing into things, going the wrong way up an exit ramp, barrel-assing through stoplights…

This is pretty much the stage where her tires are blown out and she’s running away on foot.

Over at The Rant The New Media Journal, Joan Swirsky decides to play the poor man’s Charles Krauthammer:

I suspect that at the core of liberal “thinking� is the same kind of pathology that characterizes other mental disorders, i.e., a glitch in the brain that produces “feelings� and behavior over which liberals have no control.

From then on it’s pretty much turtles all the way down:

In an unprecedented stellar economy – with the GDP, employment, housing sales, and consumer confidence up, and inflation, the trade deficit, and crude oil down – liberals see only the “threat� of recession. [Emphasis added.]

When even the winguts forget how amazingly great the Reagan Years® are supposed to have been, you know they’re in trouble. As for the trade deficit: I guess if you look at last month’s, sure, otherwise Sadly, No! looks pretty good here. Crude oil? Same thing. Consumer confidence?

US consumer confidence dipped again in November as pessimism about the economy and jobs mounted,  the Conference Board said today.

Housing sales? Not quite. [He lives in a bubble!]

The real estate industry group expects sales of new homes to hit 961,000 units this year and 971,000 in 2008, both below the 1.06 million sold last year. […] NAR is however more cheerful about existing home sales. The group projects sales of previously owned homes to reach 6.44 million units in 2007, down slightly from 6.48 million units in 2006.

Inflation rate? Hmm.

Rick Moran of Right Wing Nut House today:

But I cannot leave this subject without examining the role of those of us on the right who flogged this story into the mainstream media and may have cost Marcotte her job. Certainly our motives lacked nobility. I will be the last to argue that anything more than “scalp hunting� animated this effort. And the questions I raised in the quote at the top of this page remains valid: Is this all we are? Is this what we have become?

In the heat of battle, it is easy to lose sight of those questions. This is not an excuse but rather an explanation. And whatever the outcome of this latest blogosphere dustup, it may be well to ask a third question: Is there anything we can do to change this dynamic? The constant back and forth of charge, counter-charge, revelation followed by the inevitable attempt to alter the discussion by pointing to the sins of the other side – all of this has become an all too familiar pattern of behavior that any rational person would have to say cheapens us all on both sides of the aisle and doesn’t solve anything. Instead, it actually breeds resentment so that the next rhubarb will follow exactly the same course with perhaps even more intensity in the use of language and invective.

Well, that seems reasonable. I think we can all agree that… Hey, hold on one second here, bub.

Rick Moran of Right Wing Nut House yesterday:

[Amanda Marcotte] is a rank bigot, a nauseating, die hard dogmatist whose sickening screeds against people she disagrees with (including most non-emasculated men) have sullied the debate between right and left for far too long.

Unfortunately, Marcotte’s type will always have a home on the left. She will be welcomed back with open arms and continue her unbalanced rants, raging against people whose only transgression is that they fail to fit their beliefs into her own narrow, warped, and cockeyed worldview.

One more try at this particular Jeckyll-and-Hyde stunt, and we might begin to wonder if you guys are entirely on the level.

Whoops, I seem to have spoken too soon…

John Edwards comes through:

EDWARDS STATEMENT ON CAMPAIGN BLOGGERS AMANDA MARCOTTE AND MELISSA McEWEN

Chapel Hill, North Carolina – The statements of Senator John Edwards, Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwen in reference to their work as independent bloggers before joining the Edwards campaign are below.

Senator John Edwards:

“The tone and the sentiment of some of Amanda Marcotte’s and Melissa McEwen’s posts personally offended me. It’s not how I talk to people, and it’s not how I expect the people who work for me to talk to people. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that kind of intolerant language will not be permitted from anyone on my campaign, whether it’s intended as satire, humor, or anything else. But I also believe in giving everyone a fair shake. I’ve talked to Amanda and Melissa; they have both assured me that it was never their intention to malign anyone’s faith, and I take them at their word. We’re beginning a great debate about the future of our country, and we can’t let it be hijacked. It will take discipline, focus, and courage to build the America we believe in.”

Amanda Marcotte:

“My writings on my personal blog, Pandagon on the issue of religion are generally satirical in nature and always intended strictly as a criticism of public policies and politics. My intention is never to offend anyone for his or her personal beliefs, and I am sorry if anyone was personally offended by writings meant only as criticisms of public politics. Freedom of religion and freedom of expression are central rights, and the sum of my personal writings is a testament to this fact.”

Melissa McEwen:

“Shakespeare’s Sister is my personal blog, and I certainly don’t expect Senator Edwards to agree with everything I’ve posted. We do, however, share many views – including an unwavering support of religious freedom and a deep respect for diverse beliefs. It has never been my intention to disparage people’s individual faith, and I’m sorry if my words were taken in that way.”

Now let’s talk about Bill Donohue, the president of the fringe-right Catholic League who was so offended by Amanda and Melissa.

Recognize any names from their Board of Advisors?

Brent Bozell III
Gerard Bradley
Linda Chavez
Robert Destro
Dinesh D’Souza
Laura Garcia
Robert George
Mary Ann Glendon
Dolores Grier
Alan Keyes
Stephen Krason
Lawrence Kudlow
Thomas Monaghan
Michael Novak
Kate O’Beirne
Thomas Reeves
Patrick Riley
Robert Royal
Russell Shaw
William Simon, Jr.
Paul Vitz
George Weigel

Resolved: Getting rid of Amanda and Melissa will totally appease the right, which isn’t crazed and frothing about John Edwards this week for other reasons, and projecting its own anger onto him in a plain 1:1 ratio.

Then again, here’s GOP.com, the official Republican Party website:

’04 Golden Boy Tosses Sunshine Demeanor For ’08 Agenda Of Aggression And Attacks

Edwards Lashes Out Against Clinton Administration For Giving Him Bad Intelligence On Iraq:

Edwards: “[I] went back to former Clinton administration officials who gave me sort of independent information about what they believed about what was happening with Saddam’s weapons programs. They were also wrong. And based on that, I made the wrong judgment.” (Fmr. Sen. John Edwards, “Meet The Press,” 2/4/07)

Edwards Attacks Sen. Obama’s Experience In Response To Iraq Question:

Edwards: “I will say [Sen. Obama] wasn’t burdened like a lot of us with the information that we were receiving [regarding Iraq] on the intelligence committee and as members of the United States Senate. … Senator Obama I think, what did you say, was a State Senator at the time, so he obviously wasn’t in the Congress and wasn’t part of the decision making.” (Fmr. Sen. John Edwards, “Meet The Press,” 2/4/07)

Edwards Won’t Answer Whether Hillary Has Been “Open And Honest” In Regard To Iraq:

NBC’s Tim Russert: “Do you believe that Senator Clinton has been open and honest about her support of the war in Iraq?” John Edwards: “I don’t know the answer to that question. Honestly. I don’t know what’s inside her head and her heart about this. I can’t tell whether there are political calculations going on. I just don’t know.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 2/4/07)

PREQUELS: EDWARDS’ NEW AGGRESSION IN ’08 CYCLE

Journalists Pick Up On Edwards’ Turn To The Dark Side:

“In 2004, John Edwards Rarely Had An Unkind Word To Say About His Rivals For The Presidency. But It Isn’t 2004 Any More.” (Roger Simon, “Edwards ’08,” The Politico, 1/31/07)

Now Edwards “Embodies The Darker Tone.” (Howard Fineman, “Dem Candidates Come Out Swinging,” Newsweek, 2/12/07)

Episode I: In Mid January, Edwards Attacked…

Coming: “Edwards’ Mad Aggression Reaches A New Crazed Frenzy: ‘Gosh, I think this pen is leaking,’ shrieked Edwards while madly clawing his pockets in a berserker rage.”

Terry Moran of ABC News ponders the questions raised by the Get Amanda Marcotte! affair, and what they might teach us about the rough-and-tumble nature of the political blogosphere:

What, if anything, does it tell us about Edwards that he’s joined up with this blogger? Is Edwards’ association with a person who has written these things a legitimate issue for voters, as they wonder–among other things–whom he might appoint to high office if he’s elected? If a Republican candidate teamed up with a right-wing blogger who spewed this kind of venom, how would people react?

Rick Moran of Right-Wing Nut House, brother of Terry Moran of ABC News, helps answer:

She is a rank bigot, a nauseating, die hard dogmatist whose sickening screeds against people she disagrees with (including most non-emasculated men) have sullied the debate between right and left for far too long.

Unfortunately, Marcotte’s type will always have a home on the left. She will be welcomed back with open arms and continue her unbalanced rants, raging against people whose only transgression is that they fail to fit their beliefs into her own narrow, warped, and cockeyed worldview.

Back to you, Terry…

Update: TBogg comments:

Waiting on the rimshot….

Rick “The Lesser” Moran writes about Amanda:

Her writing is full of so many half truths, manufactured criticisms, dead-wrong assumptions, and a child like ignorance of the emotional universe inhabited by normal men and women that trying to decipher her scribblings – once you can get by the obscenities and work your way through the incoherence – is a task best left to a psychiatrist.

…and then he invites his readers to go see the ever-sensible Michelle Malkin and Dan Riehl.

I could have stayed up all night and not come up with anything near that funny…

Above: Don’t hate us just because we’re beautiful

See, it’s funny. If you turn the sound all the way up and go stand nervously in the kitchen, it’s almost like a typical evening around the Malkin house.

…Except she isn’t yelling about how you put the keys on the other counter purely to spite her, and so forth.

I just came from Blogs For Bush, and there was nothing silly going on over there.

Oh, who am I fooling. Matt Margolis was whining like a baby again.

February 06, 2007
What Happened To The Rights of the Minority Party?
By Matt Margolis at 08:05 PM

Oh what a difference majority status can have on your party’s outlook on the rights of the minority.

When Democrats obstructed President Bush’s judicial nominees, they argued that without the filibuster the minority voice would not be heard. We got lip service about rubber stamps and all that crap. Never mind they were actually preventing themselves from carrying out their constitutional duty.

Anyways, now that Republicans have turned the tables on them, and they are suddenly outraged… outraged!

[Update: To collapse any ambiguity here, ‘outraged…outraged!’ refers to Harry Reid saying that the Republicans “can run, but they can’t hide” from a debate on Iraq.]

Well, that’s certainly one way to look at things. Here with a different view is Matt Margolis of Blogs For Bush:
Read the rest of this entry »