Another day, another lefty blog, another instance of hypocrisy

Posted by: ST on August 15, 2007 at 10:41 pm

Over at Memeorandum, I see that Jane Hamsher’s uber-lefty feminist blog Firedoglake is calling on Maine Senator Susan Collins to fire her official campaign blogger for alleged “sexist” and “misogynistic” remarks he (gasp) made towards the Firedoglake gang. For the record, here were the remarks (in response to the stories about Collins’ Dem opponent Tom Allen hiring a “tracker” to essentially stalk her every move):

” …the foul-mouthed fem-blog FiredogLake …”

The response from the fem-blog:

“I’m deeply offended that Senator Collins would speak about professional women in such a degrading and offensive manner” said Hamsher. “It is well beneath the dignity becoming a sitting Senator to engage in such coarse and misogynistic rhetoric.”

Strange. So a Republican calling a feminist a feminist is “misogynistic”? Ah well. Color me guilty as charged. Oh, how I hate women!! :((

Christy Hardin Smith, featured FDL blogger, said: “The sexist undertones used on Sen. Collins’ blog are appalling – the use of “fem-blog” is erroneous and dismissive.”

No, it’s what they call “descriptive” – kind of like what the Firedoglake crowd does when they describe the right as “wingnuts” (amongst other descriptive terminology they use there).

Smith went on to say:

“Citizens in this country have a right — an obligation — to hold those who ask us for our votes accountable. Women have just as much right as men to speak up for their country and their families, whether Senator Collins likes that or not.”

Note the faux indignancy as well as the strawman attack. She’s accusing Susan Collins – a vocal woman serving in the US Senate – of not wanting women to have the right to “speak up for their country and their families.” Makes sense, eh? Not. There is nothing in that one little sentence that indicates Collins believes that, nor is it an indication that her camapaign blogger believes it, either. I repeat: Susan Collins is a vocal female Senator of the US Senate. Why on earth would anyone assume that she doesn’t want other women to speak up for “their country and their families” – unless, of course, the person making the accusation wanted to get as much emotional momentum out of the charge as possible and therefore constructed a strawman for maximum effect?

For the record, I think if you’re working in an ‘official’ capacity for a candidate, you have to be very careful of what you say, because inevitably, what you say is going to be pinned on to the candidate whether or not the candidate personally stands behind what was said. So in this sense, Lance Dutson (Collins’ blogger) erred.

What Dutson should have done was to have done this unofficially on his own time as a supporter of Susan Collins, just like Firedoglake Commander Jane Hamsher did when she followed around Nutroots favorite Ned Lamont last year by “unofficially” (uh huh) promoting his candidacy against the “traitor” Joe Lieberman in Connecticut, by doing things like posting a picture of Joe Lieberman in blackface, standing next to Bill Clinton, at the liberal Huffington Post blog. Then I’m sure the crowd at Firedoglake wouldn’t take issue with it. And pigs will start flying tomorrow, too.

Now, as far as the “coarse” “sexist” and “misogynistic” charges, the lady doth protest too much, methinks. Let’s take a look at real examples of coarse, sexist, and misogynistic commentary (language warning):

Re: National Review writer Kate O’Beirne:

“The bitch is dead meat.” -1/12/06 – 9:46 PM

and

“He [Chris Matthews] likes to get cozy with ol’ Sandpaper Snatch Kate O’Beirne …” – 1/19/06 – 6:04 PM

Who said that? None other than Jane Hamsher herself, as detailed here.

And if Hamsher and other fem-bloggers at her blog were so concerned about “coarse” and “sexist” comments, then they wouldn’t link up favorably to John Edwards former blogger Amanda Marcotte, who we all know has some, shall we say “issues” with men, not to mention Catholics. She even left this little love note for me after reading one of my posts dissing (gasp!) feminists. In response, she babbled (warning: strong language):

Since you have a full on case of both slow wits and projection, it’s no wonder you felt compelled to leave the reality-based side of the aisle and join the Wingnutteria. No, you didn’t hit “close to home”. You were funny; we made fun.

But we’re sisters, so a word of advice that I offer all women who kiss sexist ass in hopes they’ll be spared: The men kissing your ass now call you a cunt behind your back. They think you’re a simp who kisses their asses, and you are.

At least they tell it to my face.

Man-hating ‘successful’ female bloggers are to be praised and defended, but so-called “sexist” remarks coming from Susan Collins’ blogger are so awful he should not merely be reprimanded, but instead “fired!!!!!!!!”

Newsflash, fem-bloggers: The term “sexist” doesn’t just apply to men making derogatory remarks about women. It covers both sexes. See? Look at what we have here (emphasis added):

1. Discrimination based on gender, especially discrimination against women. 2. Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender.

Nothing in there that excludes one sex over the other.

Asking Collins to fire Dutson is just mind-numbingly dumb. The attitude I took towards the whole Edwards blogger drama was that the two bloggers in question not be fired:

I’ve seen some blogposts today from bloggers on the right who clearly thought John Edwards should ‘do something’ about these bloggers (presumably: fire them). My question is: why? I believe it was Napoleon who said never stand in the way of anyone from the opposition who is shooting themselves in the foot (or something along those lines). That’s how I’m viewing this. Is it fair game to bring to light someone’s past statements or actions as a way of scrutinizing or confirming their credibility? Absolutely. If you’ve put yourself in the public eye, you can and better expect to be scrutinized, especially if you’re angling for and/or accepted a political job of any kind. But if a candidate from the opposition is shooting themselves in the foot, I’m not going to stand in his or her way, outside of helping to point out that that is what he or she has done. There’s nothing wrong with exposing someone for who/what they are.

Think about it. If fem-bloggers really believe Dutson is a ‘woman-hater’ then the best thing they could do would be to call him out (as they’ve done), perhaps ask for a reprimand at worse (which they have not done), but in the end hope that he stays on blogging for Collins (which they don’t want), as it would be shooting herself in the foot to keep him on staff. A potential win-win situation for Maine Democrats. But as we’ve already seen this week, the Nutroots left aren’t exactly geniuses when it comes to political strategy.

Something else I wrote in that post is worth repeating here as well:

Morals of the story?

1. If you keep it clean, you can’t go wrong.
2. If you plan on working for a politician, expect to be heavily scrutinized and be prepared for it.
3. We need to police ourselves better.
4. If the opposition is shooting themselves in the foot, let them, and you can assist them by bringing to light that they are, indeed, shooting themselves in the foot.
5. Liberal bloggers have no credibility whatsoever on this issue.

I’d say I just proved number 5. Again.

Related: Make sure to read this one: Kos Falsely Smears GOP Senator With Leftist Troll’s Words, which is about a notorious lefty troll who pretends to be a right winger posting comments on right wing blogs.

Thursday Update: Dan Riehl delivers his own can of smackdown on the DFLr’s. American Mind weighs in as well.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

10 Responses to “Another day, another lefty blog, another instance of hypocrisy”

Comments

  1. Great White Rat says:

    So calling LiarDogFake a “fem-blog” is misogynistic now? My question is, what part of the term do they object to?

    “Blog” might not be completely accurate, to be sure…most blogs have higher standards. Dutson was giving them more credit than they merit. So I’ll assume this isn’t what set them off.

    “Fem”, then? Is this supposed to be derogatory? If, so, then any blog using “fem” in the title, and meaning “woman” (or, if you live in an alternate universe, “womyn”) must be misogynist as well.

    So I’m sure we can find all kinds of objections over at LiarDogFake to Feministing or Feministe, just to name two, right?

    “I’m deeply offended that Senator Collins would speak about professional women in such a degrading and offensive manner” said Hamsher. “It is well beneath the dignity becoming a sitting Senator to engage in such coarse and misogynistic rhetoric.”

    Because, you see, coarse and hateful rhetoric is Hamsher’s job, and she doesn’t want any competition.

  2. Drewsmom says:

    Great White, you took the works outta my mouth.
    Good Lord.:-@

  3. Big Bang Hunter says:

    “….which is about a notorious lefty troll…”

    – This little adventure in “the big lie”, coming from Hamsher and her brown shirt brigade, is not only stupidly transperant, its made her the laughingstock of most of the leading bloggers.

    – This is simply because unless you’ve been living under a rock you’d be aware that from almost the opening day of her LiarDogFake blogsite, her merry little band of Eichmans hover over each and every post, and anything that even remotely resembles a counter view to her flamming hate-filled diatribes against all things Conservative, is removed. So this whole BS idea that anyone could “pose” in her comments is just another “control” the narrative of this gang of Marxist nitwits.

    – When they can’t outright edit, such as anothers blogsite, they attack. Her and Marcotte are classic examples of OCS personalities, springing from a deep well of penis envy and self hate. Ask any psychologist and they will tell you whats going on here. These people are personal messes when it comes to their self-image issues. Control freaks that drive everyone around them crazy. They try to exorcise the demons by occupying their days “sticking ut to the man”. the blogsute, the words they use, watching the effects of their hateful words causing their target victims discomfort, all of that is their “therupy”.

    – The very vocabulary they write with, the manner of their attacks, all dead givaways.

    – Aside from the OCS, a portion of this group is also Bi-Polar, which of course means that every thought and idea they imagine, is absolute gospel, and imperious. they cannot, will not, actually engage in a give and take debate. their ego’s are simply to fragile for any such situation. So they arrange things such that they live in echo chambers, insulated from any sort of critique, or counter idea’s, and surround themselves with like thinking syncophants.

    – All of this is why I never would write anything that gave them voice or the spotlight, because the one thing they need in absolute desperation to avoid, aside from any real conversation, is being totally ignored.

    – If Hamsher, or those like her, were isolated from her contrived glass bubble, she’d probably go mad in a very short time. She knows this, and she knows what she is doing, she just can’t help herself.

    – You don’t engage people in this group, you try to get them serious professional help whenever possible.

    – BBH – **==

  4. Terrye says:

    I think calling Collins a woman hater is absurd, but then again I have noticed that a lot of conservatives have called her a RINO and all sorts of things as well. It seems that people just can not be courteous on the internet.

  5. PCD says:

    Hamsher is just a Feminazi in full denial of her derangement.

  6. benning says:

    What amazes me is that these people are serious! The simply cannot grasp reality. Facts elude them. Common sense is a fantasy to them.

    It simply amazes me.:o

  7. Because, you see, coarse and hateful rhetoric is Hamsher’s job, and she doesn’t want any competition.

    Great point, GWR =p~

  8. G Monster says:

    Kos and Hamsher are proof that anybody can be somebody in this country.