Now he has jumped on the 'tax the rich' bandwagon. How long will the rich stand for this BS before they move all of their assets and companies overseas. I hear another giant sucking sound from south of the border.

So this is an article by a blogger, about how another blogger wrote an article about a different blogger who apparently has nothing to do with Edwards house (with IS mentioned), but has something undisclosed to do with Edwards campaign, which isn't mentioned?

Is there a point, or do you just want us to play "Whack-a-Mole" with your links?

So you got called stupid, eh? Well, as Forest Gump says....

Obtuse is the word I would have chosen.

Other (and-less-savvy) John, Marcotte is a campaign blogger for John Edwards.

Sorry, John. When I said Amanda Marcotte was "associated with the Edwards campaign," then provided the links, I figured that was sufficient. I guess some readers just need additional direction. Try following the links, then if that doesn't explain things, I don't know if anything I say can help. It isn't really that complicated. If it is that hard for you to follow, you might want to just skip this one.

If Mandy's only foible was a truck-drivers mouth, then her hiring as Edwards blogmistress would be interesting but not noteworthy.

However, St. Amanda is a female-supremacist bigot.

One can rightly question the judgement of the Edwards' camp that either failed to vet her writings or found nothing wrong with them.

Looks like when Breck Boy steps in it, he steps in with both feet.

John:I LUV U, MAN!/ Lorie: I'm discounting the final paragraph of your post as an afterthought and a kow tow to reality, but: are you a female version of Caspar Milquetoast or what? Do you even proofread what you write? Have you heard of Janus? For Whom the Bell Tolls? The Mote In the Eye? Describing your opposition to Edwards campaign staff and methods as "concern" is vaguely psychopathic, don't you think? I.e. They don't care what you think about them; why do you care what they think about you? WAY too many "I"'s in a post about somebody else. Instigation by "suggestion"? BAD! Evil Nun! Instead, and to maintain full dignity (and risk!): follow T.Paine, K.Marx, or even C.Hitchens. i.e. Say "Yea" when you mean Yea, and "Nay", etc. etc.

bryanD, you are even more incoherent than usual. Did you enjoy the Super Bowl?

John Irving, gave up at half-time. Or should I say: Made a graceful exit, i.e. could not care less! No, wait! I HATE pro football! (Give me Daniela Hantuchova playing tennis, or the pixies of International Gymnastics, or a Golf Major, or Sasha Cohen on ice, that's my limit with sports on teevee.)

gave up at half-time

So did Rex Grossman. . .

John Irving: "heh!"_ Glenn Reynolds

I was just wondering.

The two Dem. candidates likely to cause the most trouble for Hillary are Kerry and Gore. Kerry has backed out even though he has lots of money. (I am thinking they waterboarded him).

Looks like Gore is going to get a Nobal and an Oscar, plus book and movie fees. I don't think he's going to run this time.

The two remaining best contenders are Edwards and Obama who have both left the blocks in a stumble I think it is fair to say. Biden too.

Looks like Hillary wins in a walk, saving money for the general.

It would be better for Republicans if Edwards or Obama could gear it up a bit. Biden will shoot himself in the foot, that is certain.

My, My, bryanD is giving everyone the benefit of his worthless edukation. What liberal arts college did you get kicked out of? A major in underwater basket weaving won't earn a lot of money but it may be interesting.

So sorry if I didn't use proper english it's 6:15 AM and I just came in out of 10 degree below zero chill factor after fighting a forest fire for a few hours. No doubt some city slicker liberal set it.

Lorie: you don't think Edwards knew what he was buying when they signed her up? She IS their target audience for the primaries. They're looking for her to deliver votes and support of people just like her..

Tax the rich, eh? Did he think the rich might just start turning themselves into Subchapter S corporations, as a tax dodge, like he did?

Re: Prince playing in the rain.

The sound system and guitar were wireless. It was really weird to have to admit that he did a great job, while Billy Joel was nearly at Roseanne Barr levels of suckitude for the national anthem.

YEA COLTS!

Sorry wrong thread.

Must now repeat 100 times "I will preview my comments" and punch myself repeatedly.

"However, St. Amanda is a female-supremacist bigot."

Well then that explains why this conservative female blogger is all a twitter over this development, and writes a wandering, unfocused rambling post like this... That and the fact that the Republicans do not have a single, viable candidate they can point to as a decent option. Instead we'll be treated to hit pieces on Democratic candidates' staffers?

Yawn. Bring on the Republican candidates, Lorie, and tell us what they stand for and why they should be elected -- so we cant tear your arguments into shreds and make fun of your lousy, pitiful choices.

I can't imagine why you wouldn't want to....

Right on, Lee. Funny how Wizbang must have forgotten to post this much more insightful bit of news this morning......

Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) regrets voting for the Iraq War resolution in 2002:

"The resolution was a resolution that authorized the president to take that action if he deemed it necessary. Had I been more true to myself and the principles I believed in at the time, I would have openly opposed the whole adventure vocally and aggressively. I had a tough time reconciling doing that against the duties of majority leader in the House. I would have served myself and my party and my country better, though, had I done so."

Byrd brain must have missed it. She only watches Fox News.

Lee and Maggy--Try to stay focused, please. Lori's piece was on Edward's campaign blogger Ms. Marcotte, and why it was a mistake to pick her.

....-- so we cant tear your arguments into shreds and make fun of your lousy, pitiful choices.

Well, look. Lee decided to launch a personal attack against Lorie rather than respond to what she said.

Yawn.

It would might actually be amusing to see you attempt to refute an argument ('tearing it to shreds' is a bit beyond your abilites, I think), I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for it.

The point you missed is that Edwards is deliberately choosing someone who has alientated a fair number of voters/voter groups already. Not smart for a politician who claims to want to win the election.

Nikkolai:

Lee and I are VERY focused. It's the right wing that's lost it's focus, and that's why they publish stupid posts like Lorie's above.

John Edward's chances of being nominated are slim to none - this is a non-issue.

Can right wingers please get back on track and talk about the real issues facing our country today, and stop trying to change topic? You've become extremely whiney and boring. LOL.

Thanks! Have a great day!

some of my typos are funnier than others... heh. "cant" above should be "can".

but then can't may be more appropriate because a check of the archives shows Lorie just doesn't write about Republican politicians. I hadn't noticed that before today. Instead we're treated to post after post after post outlining Lorie's reasons everyone should hate their fellow Americans. When she does mention a conservative it'll be Rush, but she will comeback then with several posts as to why everyone should hate Katie Couric or Nancy or Hillary.

Not a single, positive "Here is who we Republicans are and what we stand for" post among the list, judging from my quick scan of her blog headlines. Just hit piece after hit piece on Democrats. Priestap isn't any differnt.

Conservative bloggers are definitely are on the defensive. They aren't saying a single thing about their candidates -- they just keep pushing their platform of hate and sliming lies against the Democrats and the MSM. It kind of makes sense -- when your mentors and role models are Michelle Malkkkin and Anne "don't you just hate liberals" Coulter, it shouldn't be a surprise that all this never-ending stream of vile bile for their fellow Americans should spew forth from conservative bloggers.

Apparently we will never know what Republicans stand "for" -- only what they stand "against".

Armey's confessions are indeed interesting - more here.

Maggsyturn and Lee ....

Rather than attempt to dictate what people write on THEIR blog, why don't you just start one of your own? Then you could control all speech to your hearts' content.

Edwards is a candidate for President of the United States. He has hired a person to represent him with a history of hate speech.

That's news.

"o" above is me. I hit the wrong key.

Not attempting to dictate -- only to comment and what Lorie posted -- just like you and ohio voter and nikkolai and scrapiron and John Irving are commenting on ---

WAIT A MINUTE! The only comments about Lorie's post have been by liberals -- all the conservative commenters are writing about is the liberals. LOL - This is too funny. Conservatives are vilifying liberals in the comment thread of a conservative post that vilifies liberals for using hate speech. Lol!

Is this all there is to conservatism today? Just "why we hate liberals"? Attack after attack? Don't you people have any thoughts other than "hate"?

Actually, Lee and Maggy - it does look a lot like you're trying to force Lorie to cover the things YOU want covered. Or perhaps...

Right on, Lee. Funny how Wizbang must have forgotten to post this much more insightful bit of news this morning......

Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) regrets voting for the Iraq War resolution in 2002:

"The resolution was a resolution that authorized the president to take that action if he deemed it necessary. Had I been more true to myself and the principles I believed in at the time, I would have openly opposed the whole adventure vocally and aggressively. I had a tough time reconciling doing that against the duties of majority leader in the House. I would have served myself and my party and my country better, though, had I done so."

Byrd brain must have missed it. She only watches Fox News.

Posted by: maggysturn at February 5, 2007 09:29 AM ... was more in the way of a 'suggested topic' instead of an attempted derail.

Lee

Your last comment was great.

OhioVoter

"He (Edwards) has hired a person to represent him with a history of hate speech."

The ultimate practioners of "hate" speech are your conservative herd of hate-harlots, Malkin/Slattern, Anne, goddess of hate and slime, Coulter, along w/ Melanie Morgan and Laura Lingam.

Lee, Lee, Lee ....

Anybody who actually read the posts that you referred to know that ...

The only comments about Lorie's post have been by liberals -- all the conservative commenters are writing about is the liberals.

... is untrue.

Now, were I a Democrat, I would be reading posts like this one to see where I am losing out on potential voters. Edwards choice of a blogger who specialized in the worst kind of hate speech will turn off many voters - not just the voters who have been attacked, but those liberals and conservatives who believe it is possible to disagree without namecalling.

Calm down and read what was actually said and you might find views that don't match yours exactly - rather than be terrifying to you - can still be instructional.

aRepukelican ...

Fascinating ....

If a woman disagrees with you, she must be a "harlot"?

That tells us all a lot about you, doesn't it?

Edwards hired a blogger who has a history of hate speech. Not a wise political move in anybody's book.

I happened to watch Edwards on Russert this weekend.

No mention of the multi-million estate vs. fighting for "the poor"

Also, Edwards wants universal health care, because its too expensive for "the poor" -- no mention that one of the reasons its so expensive is that trial lawyers drive up the price of doctor's insurance. . .

Oh well, maybe someone will ask him these questions, but don't hold your breath.

The comments by defenders of Lorie's post are very, very funny.

George Nero Bush fiddles while Iraq burns, but you're more concerned about an election TWO years away.

I'm not trying to control anything, merely pointing out that Lorie, Michelle Malkin, and their ilk don't want you to discuss what's happening NOW, they want you to be redirected to something that's basically unimportant.

Don't you think that if Iraq were a success, Lorie would be screaming about it from the rooftops?

We all know that if Bush's administration were the triumph Little Dick Cheney claims it is, Lorie wouldn't be able to stop talking about it. Again, LOL.

Conservative bloggers are definitely are on the defensive. They aren't saying a single thing about their candidates

Worked for the Libs in the November elections....

2kibofun

"no mention that one of the reasons its so expensive is that trial lawyers drive up the price of doctor's insurance. . . "

Get off your wingnut Wizpuppy repetition of the above BS. That's a line wingnuts have been handing out for years, apparently because they hate the fact that lawsuits have forced their corporate lovers to cough up for responsibility for harm.

Try a little google search for "trial lawyers cause health insurance increases" and you'll get these results.

Then check out several of the results and you will find that it's not as simple as your Pavlovian cant above.

"johnie" you never have told us where you got your "schooling" so you could be part of the "media". LOL
Old "pucker puss" (lee lee) (resident turd polisher) (resident moron) is out early with his "ditto" key. same old same old
"bryanDumbass is a dumbass as usual.
old "pukeface' gets more puky everyday.
"maggysturn" is every turn to make an ass of herself when she opens her mouth. (her? he?)
John Edwards has about as much chance of being President as I do. Then again the democraps are stupid enough to elect someone like him to run. I say let Hillary (a John F$%king sKerry with tits) have the honor so she can get her lying ass kicked back to Ark.

Liberals really don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot, do they? .

"Worked for the Libs in the November elections...."

So, the conservative strategy for 2008 is to copy what they perceive won the election for the Democrats in 2006? No conservative agenda or platform? Just "get elected" by an means possible?

Wow, no wonder idiots like jhow66 are conservatives. This way he doesn't have to think.

Armey's confessions today are telling. He's not running for office, and can speak freely now. He's disassociating himself from the lying hate-monkeys. Good for him. Welcome back to America, Mr. Armey.

Some of the comments here at hysterical!

For instance, since '03 the Democrats platform has been "Bush is bad. We're not Bush". And here we have the resident moron (Lee) offer this gem:

Lee:

Not a single, positive "Here is who we Republicans are and what we stand for"