News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile


About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.



Caving in to the right wing never works

by: Pam Spaulding

Wed Feb 07, 2007 at 16:00:00 PM EST


It didn't take long for the Edwards campaign to get schooled on Swift Boating -- by proxy, no less. And the two newly hired bloggers are in the crossfire -- depending on where you're surfing, they have either been fired -- or fired and rehired

The right-wing banshees of the blogosphere hopped on the smear train as soon as they learned that Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon and Melissa McEwan of Shakespeare's Sister were hired by the former NC Senator and 2008 presidential candidate to work as, respectively, blogmaster and netroots coordinator. The fact that the righty blogs went on the attack is no surprise, as this is what political sport has come to.

All the bloviating on the winger blogs can be taken with a big grain of salt -- there are a lot of mouths on both the left and right that shoot off indiscriminately, if passionately, about politics -- and that has no bearing on the ability to write well in a professional capacity, which is why the two were hired to begin with. Melissa has written as a journalist for Raw Story, for example. Her work there in no way reflects her writing style on her personal blog. Alas, that doesn't matter when hardball politics get in the way.

Glenn Greenwald, as always, hits the mark (my emphasis):

I do not know of many bloggers, or citizens generally, who do not have some views that would be offensive to large groups of people and who periodically express those views in less than demure ways, but if that is going to be the standard, we ought to apply it universally to all bloggers who are affiliated with political campaigns.

Let's begin with Patrick Hynes, the paid consultant for John McCain's presidential campaign.  Hynes continuously blogged about political matters, including ones involving McCain and the GOP field, while concealing that he was on McCain's paid staff.  That was not the first time Hynes has been caught using deceitful tricks to manipulate the blogosphere into writing content on behalf of his undisclosed clients.

...Hynes' public writing is devoted to pure religious divisiveness -- he focuses almost exclusively on the claim that Christianity is superior and that those who attend church live better lives, and specifically to the belief that the Republican Party is the true party of those who believe in God and that Democrats are "anti-Christian."  He wrote a book entitled In Defense of the Religious Right, and in an interview about that book in July, 2006, this is what he said:

Miner: Is it fair to call America a "Christian nation"?

Hynes: Yes. America is a Christian nation. As I write in my book, "Is America a Christian nation? Of course it is. Don't be ridiculous. What a stupid question.

Does McCain agree with that view, or think it is acceptable to label as "stupid" objections to the notion that "America is a Christian nation."  Is that not as divisive and offensive, at least, as anything Marcotte wrote?
Glenn also talks about more online behavior by Hynes involving insults toward Henry Waxman that would qualify as "vulgar" by any measure.

The big mistake, quite frankly, was for the Edwards campaign to place any legitimacy at the door of arch-hack William Donohue of the Catholic League. For this man to call anyone "trash-talking bigots" is laughable, considering his history of talking head and written chicanery. The Catholic League is a far-right organization, and Donohue is so extreme that he's taken Bill O'Reilly to the woodshed. Let's take a look at the wisdom and mainstream ideas of Donohue in his column, "What's the Matter With White People." Read after the flip.

Pam Spaulding :: Caving in to the right wing never works
First gays wanted tolerance. To tolerate is to put up with, and that's what homosexuals wanted from heterosexuals - to publicly acknowledge their presence without rancor or discord. Having won that battle (deservedly so), they proceeded to reject tolerance altogether. What they did was to raise the bar: they wanted social affirmation. Nothing less than social approval of who they are -- including their lifestyle -- would satisfy. Now they want us to say it's okay for a guy to marry a guy.

Americans are a tolerant people. That's good, just so long as tolerance doesn't slide into amorality. For example, it is one thing to put up with immoral behavior, quite another to say we no longer object. Not only is there nothing wrong with registering moral outrage at morally outrageous behavior, there is something immoral about remaining silent. And no segment of society fails this test more than white people; in particular, well-educated white people.

...The Pew Hispanic Center found that 72 percent of Latinos believe homosexual sex between adults is "unacceptable"; 59 percent of whites feel the same way. In New York State, in a poll of Democratic voters taken by Edison Media Research, it was determined that 27 percent of Hispanics thought gays should be able to marry; 47 percent of whites approved. In Florida, a survey by Schroth & Associates found that 20 percent of Hispanics were pro-gay marriage, compared to 29 percent of whites.

The same phenomenon exists worldwide. Virtually every nation in the world where the right of two men to marry is being seriously advanced is white: it is in Canada, the U.S. and Europe where the gay rights movement is flourishing. It is not flourishing in Asia, the Middle East, Africa or Latin America. Just in nations that are predominantly white.

This pattern is evident in the United Nations as well: non-white nations are busy resisting the tide of the gay rights movement that is being foisted upon them by rich white countries.

Case closed (if it's not yet for you, then take a look at this bit of Donohue). How, pray tell, can this be considered a reasonable man worth coddling?

Whatever opinions Melissa and Amanda hold on a variety of political issues, they are completely their own. The fact is that they have used profanity in their posts, and wrote rants that many disagree with, but their forums are about personal expression and opinion, not journalism or op-eds for a major paper. They were selected by the Edwards campaign to put on a different hat, a professional hat -- as if no one else out there does the same thing each and every day if they have a personal blog and work in a venue that is dependent on writing copy or business correspondence. They know the difference, but that's clearly not the issue at work here. It's about getting someone in the kill zone, and trying to knock off John Edwards in the process.

The biggest mistake of all is that a campaign with a long way to go to get to the finish line is so easily spooked by elements on the right that aren't worth the time of day. Team Edwards, the votes you want aren't going to come from the crowd that reads Malkin or pays attention to Donohue when he shows up foaming at the mouth interrupting other guests with intolerant comments on a chat show.

You can drop a line to the Edwards campaign to let them know what you think. Frankly, dismissing these two women wouldn't help in any damage control they perceive they need to do. The "scandal" doesn't deserves the attention it's been given, particularly when you have the Bush administration wasting billions in Iraq, countless lives have been lost, a health care system that is broken...and, well, that's the tip of the iceberg.

The Edwards campaign is taking its eye is off the political ball; the right-wing blogosphere smells  blood in the water. Team Edwards must be an easy mark if it's unable to roll with the punches to address a tempest in a teapot.

See:
* All Spin Zone
* Message to John Edwards: Don't Back Down

Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
If Edwards fired Amanda and/or Melissa...
...because of the lunatic rantings of Malkin and Donohue, he isn't worth voting for to begin with...

If you aren't tough enough to handle the chihuahua-yipping now, how are you going to be tough enough to handle the REAL smears that will begin in earnest in '08?

Have some balls/ovaries now, or face oblivion...


Exactly
You don't get bullies to leave you alone by giving into their every demand, Edwards should be old enough to know that.

[ Parent ]
Yep!
I said this somewhere else, but if he can't handle this, he can't handle true issues of a national crisis.  Yet, should we be really surprise?  I'm not!  Edwards has danced around the bush (so to speak) too many times to seriously think he has the cojones to stand up to the right wing anklebiters.  If Mr. "I'm just not there yet" thinks this is bad, wait until he gets nominated!

For a change, it would be nice to see a candidate stand up and tell these wingnuts to go crawl back under their rocks and STFU.  But apparently, the Democratic party doesn't like to see candidates that actually have (real or perceived) balls.


[ Parent ]
Things you learn from the religious right
Virtually every nation in the world where the right of two men to marry is being seriously advanced is white

Wow! Granted, he did say virtually, but still, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and South Africa can hardly be called "white," yet in each same-sex unions are either legal nationwide (as in the case of South Africa) or in atleast one province, state or self-rule city. Additionally civil union laws are under consideration in both Uruguay and Brazil while Chile is likely to follow with a civil unions law given that support for one is polling over 60%. And each of these Latin American countires is ofcourse predominantly Catholic.


I told you so
I'm not trying to be mean, just trying to get people to take a good hard look at Edwards. He has absolutely no courage of his convictions, he always makes his decisions based upon which way the wind is blowing.

I know that Sis took his "apology" as meaning that he was honest and trying to improve his judgement, but the ruth is he was lying in his apology.

He wasn't "fooled" about Iraq any more than Sis was "fooled" - he just lacked the courage to vote in a politically unpopular way.

I could carve a better man out of a banana.

I hope that I have to apologise for this post, and I will if I turn out to be wrong.


What I wrote to John.
Firing your liberal bloggers is NOT the way to send the message that you're trying to overhaul the office of the President.

Why give in to the shrill bleats of ultra right wing morons who'll never vote for you anyway?

This isn't a move to the center. It's caving in to the right.

Shame on you.

Blogwhoring @ http://indigestible.nightwares.com/


They want it both ways
The Catholic hierarchy (along with fools like Donahue) are essentially demanding that we all grant them the status of "political party which can never be criticized".

Well, bullsh*t on that.  If they want to throw their weight around in culture war politics, they're going to get it right back at them.  Every other sentence coming out of their mouths is about how such-and-such people are evil destroyers of civilization.  And they certainly make a huffy point of ignoring anti-discrimination law and custom whenever it suits them--in defiance of their own priests and followers, often.

If you're going to base your religion on hate, on having special magical knowledge which justifies your hate, and on having special legal status which privileges your hate, well, people are eventually going to start hating you back.

I was raised and confirmed in the Catholic Church, by the way, back when it was something other than the truly filthy and disgusting organization it has become.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto


Fantabulous
That is well-said and expresses my sentiments better than anything I have read in a long time.  Or, in other words, "Amen."

[ Parent ]
Intolerant Goofs
I'd say Donohue qualifies.

I occasionally read Michelle Malkin - does that mean John Edwards shouldn't seek my vote?

Why try to make this silly flap worse than it already is?


OH PLEASE!!!
This is evidence of a lack of character and conviction.  A lot should be made out of this.  We shouldn't tolerate candidates who can't stand firm against bigots.

[ Parent ]
Guess using
foul language will eliminate most bloggers out there.

But the big question -  How could anyone who's been blogging about this administration for 6 years not use Foul Language?

It's impossible!


Not just bloggers
If we're going to start eliminating people from politics based on use of foul language, can we please, please begin with "Senate Floor" Cheney?

[ Parent ]
Male bloggers & foul language
Male bloggers are rarely criticized for using foul language. After all, guys will be guys. A four-letter word is expected when the male temper flares. Cheney is a good example.

There is a double standard for female bloggers. They are called "potty-mouthed" and "bratty" for using salty language. It isn't lady-like to cuss, ya know.

I use the f-word on my blog. No one has ever written that they find it shocking or offensive. People recognize that my blog is informal and men are allowed to use foul language in most informal situations -- often even in the workplace.

You can be sure that Donohue wouldn't say that he is offended by a man's use of profanity. An "old school" sexist like Donohue wouldn't want to come across as a "pussy" by complaining about another man's use of four-letter words. Because when it comes down to it, a man like me could simply sneer at Donohue and say, "What the fuck is your problem? Did I offend your delicate ears, missy?"

When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will.

- Abraham Lincoln.


[ Parent ]
Sad and true
All of the silly contortions that some trolls over at ShakesSis are engaging in to try to support an argument that Edwards shouldn't have hired Amanda and Melissa are just dancing around this very fact.

Some are trying to argue that people over 40 are upset by swearing. Big "feh" to that. Another claims that the "people with money and power" have sensitive virgin ears. Anyone who has spent three minutes minutes in a room with a corporate executive knows better.

No, I'm afraid you're correct that the sordid undercurrent to all of this is that Amanda and Melissa aren't "ladies" who know their place. That's the only way that Donohue's load of bilous crap could ever have gotten legs.


[ Parent ]
People over 40 and "ladies" are offended by profanity?
Count this 47-year-old woman as one who has been driven to more and more profanity by the maladventures of the Bush administration.  And if William Donohue doesn't like it,he can go Cheney himself.

"If the apocalypse comes... beep me." -- Buffy Summers

[ Parent ]
That's the size of it...
Using profanity in the age of Bushism is only rational.  "Normal" language just doesn't have the power needed to properly express that kind of disgust...

[ Parent ]
Most Catholics don't follow
catholic rules. They use the pill. They cheat on their spouses. Priests have sex (sometime even with consenting adults). Some of them (shhh, don't tell anyone) actually have abortions!!!! These bloggers are only saying what everyone already knows is true. The Papal emperors have no clothes. Big surprise. Edwards is scaring me.

You forgot the most important thing...
They don't let the Church tell them how to vote. That's what frustrates pigs like Donohue the most.

When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will.

- Abraham Lincoln.


[ Parent ]
ONCE AGAIN I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED
I thought religious Catholics tended to vote Democratic and that it was the Protestants who were the Republicans' base. Could someone please educated me further if I am incorrect?

[ Parent ]
I sent the following message to the Edwards campaign:
"I hope and pray to the Goddess that the stories that I have heard about you firing Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan are untrue.

"If this true, it will just confirm to me that the Democratic Party is all but universally spineless, and I will not support Edwards  in any way, shape, or form, and I will be very hard pressed to vote for any Democrat, for what is really the difference between you and the Republicans, except that the Democrats know how to sugar-coat your words?

"For much too long, Democrats have been willing to throw LGBT people, the poor, immigrants, and other underprivileged people under the bus for political expediency.  When the hell are Democrats going to get the balls / ovaries to stand up to the right wing and to stand up for the people that are being hurt by our current right-wing administration.

"How much did the DLC and its homphobic head, Harold Ford, have to do with this?"

Social outrage is power protecting itself; it is not morality. -- Andrea Dworkin


Whoohoo!
Can I just copy that and send it in triplicate to him? ;)

[ Parent ]
I'M SORRY BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND
Paragraphs #1, #3 and #4 are perfect.

Paragraph #2 puzzles me. How did John Edwards' behavior become extrapolated to the entire Democratic Party? I'm sure that not every one of the Democratic aspirants would have responded in the same way. What is it that causes you to make the leap from one person to paint the whole party with the same brush?


[ Parent ]
Because I've seen this happen time and time again with Democrats.
John Kerry was a master at equivocation.

sHillary is the queen of equivocation.  She won't take a solid stand on anything.

There is not a single Democratic candidate that will stand up for SSM.  They all equivocate, and many of them say that it should be left up to the states, and we've seen what has happened with that - 27 states now ban SSM by law or constitutional amendment, many of which also ban civil unions, domestic partnerships, or even the granting of power of attorney to each other.

We have Harold Ford, head of the DLC, who is explicitly homophobic.

When will we see a candidate that will support SSM at the federal level, getting us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, reversing the tax cuts that were given to the rich, forcing companies that make 35Bln in profits in one year to pay their fair share of taxes and stop fleecing the public, and properly fund services for the poor?  When do we see a progressive candidate who will show some spine for what s/he believes in?

I mean, think about it, that Rick Santorum was much better in the spine department than any Democratic politician (with the possible exception of Russ Feingold), and that is really, really sad.

Social outrage is power protecting itself; it is not morality. -- Andrea Dworkin


[ Parent ]
Yep, yep!
But say that to a hardcore Dem supporter and you're a troll.

[ Parent ]
Edwards wasn't going to be the Democratic nominee any way...
...but his cowardly caving to the Mighty Righties cannot do anything but hurt the likely Democratic nominees.

Donohue is a fax machine and Malkin is a racist.  Why Edwards would cave to them is beyond my comprehension.


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?




Join the Blend Chat Room



Report TOS Violations

Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox