Creative Destruction

February 7, 2007

Amanda and the Christians

Filed under: Election 2008 — Robert @ 3:10 pm

In response to Amp’s preference that nobody editorialize about a straight-shooting respecter of the bounds of civil discourse like Amanda Marcotte, I won’t editorialize in this post. (Other than in the previous, snarky, sentence.) I’ll just quote.

“What’s changed is not the desire for this sort of power but the willingness of people to roll over and have this sort of propaganda shoved up their asses and nicknamed “God”. A combination of lost economic opportunities plus apocalyptic thought that’s escalated since 9/11 is what’s fueling this. While I agree with the campaign strategies in the article, I suggest that election returns are not enough. People need real things to hope for so they quit buying into this crap.” – From “Jesus is a capitalist tool”

“Suffice it to say, it’s time that people understand that the advocates for abstinence-only do not give a flying fuck if people get sick or even die because of their bullshit. Odds are most of them figure that’s what you get for fucking.” – From “Zip it up still not working”

“Christmas is a secular holiday, which is why this War on Christmas nonsense is really out of control. That some people celebrate the religious holiday on the day doesn’t make it any less of a secular holiday, and frankly, the religious part has shrunk to almost nothing for most religious people—usually just one Christmas mass.” – From “Next you’ll be telling me the “War on Christmas” is a myth designed to make the religious majority go on a pity trip”

“It’s important that the Democrats realize that they’re chasing a moving target by embracing the evangelicals and taking their religious blather at face value. Like Digby says in the post, the supposed surgence of religious fervor is mostly hype. Building on that, I would say that god is just the latest excuse for pushing social conservatism. It cannot be emphasized enough, apparently, but it’s important to understand that the consistent theme of social conservatism is maintaining a racist, patriarchal social hierarchy and that the flavor of the week in social conservatism is just distraction and window dressing.” – From “The characters and plot may change, but the underlying theme is eternal”

More to come.



  1. Go Amanda, all true.

    Comment by ohwilleke — February 7, 2007 @ 5:26 pm | Reply

  2. I suggest you keep digging, Robert. Numbers 1 and 4 aren’t even insulting.

    Hell, number 4 might even be true!

    Comment by Off Colfax — February 7, 2007 @ 6:37 pm | Reply

  3. If so many of the people here like Amanda’s comments, I wonder if any of them would like to hear my opinion of the far-left welfare state liberals and see if they find shooting from the hip quite as amusing when I do it.

    Comment by Glaivester — February 7, 2007 @ 8:51 pm | Reply

  4. Meh. Go ahead and put up a best-of and post the link, dude.

    But knowing me, I might still agree with them as well. Or I’ll think them off-kilter with reality. Or there’s even an off chance I’ll be insulted.

    Who knows.

    Comment by Off Colfax — February 7, 2007 @ 9:31 pm | Reply

  5. Stay tuned.

    Comment by Glaivester — February 7, 2007 @ 10:38 pm | Reply

  6. And, as a general rule, I think that people have a right to know what political candidates, and their paid communicators, actually believe, on matters that are likely to be questions of public policy…Everything I have written about is plainly political. Robert, taking the high road. Apparently he thinks Edwards will need a plan to fix the War on Christmas: do we need more troops? Should we try to bring in Iran or Syria?

    Comment by hf — February 8, 2007 @ 5:21 am | Reply

  7. “More to Come”?

    -Why, Robert? Why?

    The quality of CD is not going to skyrocket by having more of these kind of discussions about Pandagon.
    Also, the actual Pandagon can be found from the internet if that is your cup of tea.

    While I am obviously also guilty of participation in a pointless waste of time, how about at least setting some kind of deadline for this kind of stupidity. You have started several threads about Amanda Marcotte, and now Off Colfax is infected too and writing posts about her.

    When people write deliberately provocative things in comment threads in order to fish for angry reactions and cheap laughs, most people dismiss them casually.
    So how is it any more interesting if someone does it with a whole blog, and what is there to debate?

    What is certain that people who like that kind of sites have different kinds of personalities than people who like civil discussions.
    They are also probably more intelligent than those of us who don’t prefer to insult people we don’t know, since we often quickly appear to be “stupid” to them.
    (I suppose that since this frequently happens to people who in my opinion present reasonable opinions, it goes for me too.)

    In any case, I propose that at some point in the future CD returns to regular schedule of silence interrupted by occasional good discussion.

    Is Amanda Marcotte’s writing style offensive to mainstream America indeed.

    How about: Do Conservative pundits such as Ann Coulter offer important information about politics?
    Obviously there are writers who use the same kind of tactics in both sides, and since conservatives rarely if ever condemn the kindergarten antics by her, it is hypocritical to expect that liberals will be shocked, shocked if someone in their side will employ similar ways. Let alone denounce her.
    -It will only happen if they indeed are better, more honest people. What I expect instead is that it will be just:
    “Heh heh. Look how angry those conservatives are now.”

    How about forgetting about Pandagon now that everyone has stated their opinion?

    Comment by Marcus — February 8, 2007 @ 7:45 am | Reply

  8. I’m waiting-and-seeing at the moment.

    Comment by Robert — February 8, 2007 @ 12:38 pm | Reply

  9. Marcus wrote:

    I propose that at some point in the future CD returns to regular schedule of silence interrupted by occasional good discussion.

    I agree wholeheartedly. But in the backstage area, our blogs hits have risen considerably since involving ourselves in this little shitstorm. It’s easy to conclude what drives traffic: controversy. All the self-serving, venal, fame-obsessed pundits know it.

    My own quiet little blog, The Spiral Staircase which aims at good discussion without being provocatively controversial, usually gets fewer than 20 hits per day (many days fewer than 10). I certainly know how to drive that up, but I’m more interested in maintaining my personal integrity. Clearly, Edwards will never have any use for me.

    Comment by Brutus — February 8, 2007 @ 3:41 pm | Reply

  10. Clearly, Edwards will never have any use for me.

    Well, he’d probably like your vote. And/or money. Money is always welcome.

    Comment by Robert — February 8, 2007 @ 3:43 pm | Reply

  11. Off Colfax –

    Here you go.

    Comment by Glaivester — February 8, 2007 @ 10:48 pm | Reply

  12. Glaivester:

    Here you go.

    You’re no Amanda Marcotte, that’s for sure.

    Comment by Daran — February 9, 2007 @ 3:40 am | Reply

  13. My own leftist friends have been looking particularly haggard, nervous and discouraged lately. I typically find them sitting silently together in common-rooms lit only by ashen winter windows, and they barely stir when I enter. “What’s the matter then?” I ask, “is it the war in Iraq or global warming that’s getting you down so much these days?” “No,” comes the choked reply, “it’s that Glaivester. He’s been writing horrible things about us on his blog again…”

    Comment by Tom Nolan — February 9, 2007 @ 9:07 am | Reply

  14. Mr Edwards has shot hiself in the foot.

    Having Amanada on his team and saying giving her a fair shake.
    When will we see the Grand Wizard of the KKK on Edwards sight giving him a fair shake?

    I first heard the story about Amanada and I didn’t want to believe to be true.

    So I read her words and it was true.

    What was Edwards you thinking?

    He just one swipe trash every Christian in this nation and wants them to come to him for support.

    Unless these to apologize and retract their earlier statements or gets rid of them.
    Edwards is gone.

    Comment by Mark — February 12, 2007 @ 10:00 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: