Pandagon

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

I'm talking about Marcotte, specifically. Her critques, comments and writings go well beyond stuff happening only in the USA. For example, while she is very fond of wailing about the Catholic church being "misogynist", she is quite silent wrt similar or worse things in Islam. That, my friend, is borne from cowardice and/or bigotry.

As for Donahue. I don't know about him and could really care less. His involvement came long after Marcotte said what she did and long after her trying to cover it up. Simply because he got in front of the media on this doesn't make what she said any less offensive and doesn't make her any less of a coward or bigot.



For some reason, I just don't see it catching on...but I'll try.

B, Donohue has been in front of the media long before this mess- click on the mediamatters link and you'll see he's a regular on Scarborough, Hardball, etc. He reaches far, far more people than Marcotte and the other woman put together, and the stuff he spouts is pretty awful. Read the quotes. Just because you don't care to know about the guy doesn't mean you shouldn't- if you're going to discuss him, know what he's saying.

The Catholic Church has considerably more power in the US than any Islamic organization. Why is it cowardly for her to focus on the big gun and not the peashooter? If anything, it takes less courage to lambast (lambaste?) Islam here, since oodles of your average Americans are perfectly happy to fling around the term "towelhead." I've seen it on this forum. But they aren't so likely to yell "Papist" at a Catholic these days. (Though I have a Floridian friend who makes no bones about the fact that she thinks Catholics are going to Hell. She's Presbyterian, I think.)

(For the record, I think both the Catholic Church and Islam are pretty backward in their views on women and am perfectly happy to see either one taken to task for it.)

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

He is merely tangential to my point. See above.



I said she is a coward and/or a bigot. Maybe she isn't a coward. Just a bigot. And as I said before, she is interested in topics far more reaching that what is going on in the US.

Right, but B, you're essentially defending his position and I'm saying, just look at who you're defending. He's a lackey for the GOP, and seized on things the woman posted BEFORE she started working for Edwards as an opportunity to put the Edwards campaign at a disadvantage (and all his claims that Edwards is a good man doesn't disguise what his real agenda was- to cause trouble for the campaign of a Democrat). Yes, she's responsible for what she's written, but then I guess one has to say, should that affect the job she does for Edwards? If she started posting inflammatory rhetoric under the auspices of his campaign, fine, but these things were posted separately from her job for Edwards.

Clearly conservative Christians had no problem letting go of the fact that Reagan was a divorcé when they voted for him, despite divorce being a sin in their religion. I think the question is, how much should a person's actions or words separate from or prior to a job be allowed to affect whether they keep that job?

And I cannot figure out why a blogger that (rightly, in many cases) points out hypocricies in right-wing church organizations is automatically obligated to do the same with Islam. Why is she required to do that?

Look, ultimately we're all bigots about something ("Bigot" being someone intolerant of opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from one's own). I have no understanding for the Muslim hajib (headscarf) because I consider it a symbol of a culture that believe men aren't responsible for controlling their sexual desires (I'm just as bigoted about people who say a raped woman was "asking for it" because she was in a short skirt). I think we all have something we're intolerant about. But to say that she's a bigot, and choose to completely ignore and in fact, expressly avoid reading, bigoted comments by the man you are in essence defending, seems a wee bit disingenuous, wouldn't you say? What is it you're afraid to learn about Donohue?

As John Cole said, there's room to hate them both. Learning what a complete a*shole he is doesn't mean you'll automatically start reading Pandagon.