Edwards Was Right, Sort Of

By Jesse Lava

So John Edwards has refused to fire two bloggers who, prior to writing for his website, made crude and offensive comments about Catholics and Catholic beliefs.  He’s right — sort of.

The bloggers in question are Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwen.  Right-wing blowhard Bill Donohue ripped into them after finding quotes such as the following in their history:

“The Catholic church is not about to let something like compassion for girls get in the way of using the state as an instrument to force women to bear more tithing Catholics.”

“The Pope’s gotta tell women who give birth to stillborns that their babies are cast into Satan’s maw.”

“What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit?… “You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.”

[Bush’s supporters are his] “wingnut Christofacsist base.”

These comments are pure trash.  They’re not political arguments; they’re condemnations of people who hold certain religious beliefs.  They’re not funny; they’re sardonic; they’re mean; they’re contemptuous.  And calling out Marcotte and McEwen is entirely appropriate.

The problem is that the guy doing the calling out — Bill Donohue — is not an objective political observer who merely wants to stop anti-Catholic bigotry.  He is a mean, spiteful man with a political axe to grind.

His most famous spewing of bile appeared on MSNBC’s Scarborough Country:

“Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It’s not a secret, OK? And I’m not afraid to say it. … Hollywood likes anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children. They like abortions.”

As Media Matters details thoroughly, there’s more:

“I’m saying if a Catholic votes for Kerry because they support him on abortion rights, that is to cooperate in evil.”

“Name for me a book publishing company in this country, particularly in New York, which would allow you to publish a book which would tell the truth about the gay death style.”

“[Addressing former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL)]: “Most 15-year-old teenage boys wouldn’t allow themselves to be molested. So why did you?”

And so on.  Donohue also seems to take a sick pleasure in ruining people who happen to be political opponents.  In 2004, he thoroughly distorted the views and background of Mara Vanderslice, who was John Kerry’s religious outreach director at the time — and routinely brags about it despite having been discredited.

Meanwhile, Donohue usually fails to call out conservatives for anti-Catholic bigotry — again well documented by Media Matters — and thus should have little-to-no credibility as a purveyor of anything besides a right-wing political agenda.

Edwards was right to resist pressure from this particular source.  Kowtowing to the likes of Bill Donohue is a never-ending exercise in futility.  He’s the Energizer bunny of bile, and nothing will defang him except for standing up to him.

That said, we progressives would be foolish to simply accept disturbing comments such as those that Marcotte and McEwan seem to make a regular part of their blogging routine.  If their slimy remarks had been directed at African-Americans, gays, Muslims, or other minority groups, progressives would be (rightly) up in arms.  For both moral and strategic reasons, the progressive coalition should welcome — enthusiastically — a diversity of religious views.

Thus, Edwards didn’t go far enough when he said that the two bloggers “have both assured me that it was never their intention to malign anyone’s faith, and I take them at their word.”  Anyone who can read and casts their judgments accordingly should understand that maligning people’s faith was precisely what Marcotte and McEwan aimed to do.  Just tell it like it is: the bloggers said offensive things, there was nothing accidental about it, they both should grow up, and Bill Donohue still isn’t worth listening to.

Now there are legitimate questions out there about how we in the blog world should best spend our precious (if metaphorical) ink.  Should we be attacking the likes of Bill Donohue, or assailing a couple of bloggers who had no prominence before this flap began?  I’m inclined to say that the former is more important, all things considered, given the volume of Donohue’s bullhorn.  We live in a target-rich environment, and message discipline has its place.  But the twin goals of cultivating religious respect and building a wide progressive coalition are important endeavors.  They matter.  And we ignore them at our peril.