« Someone Should Have Stayed In Rehab... | Main | So galling, you'd think they were French »

If you make your own f'ing bed, you better be g-d ready to lie down on the f'er

I think we need to see pictures of Amanda Marcotte in a bikini. Since we can't have some cheese, then we'll have to settle for some cheesecake to go with her whine.

And let's be honest: that's what she is doing. She's whining.

She can talk all she likes about being "smeared," about being the victim of some evil right-wing conspiracy, about being persecuted for committing the offense of being an outspoken gyno-American, But it all boils down to one thing:

All the "smears" involved simply repeating things she said and wrote, of her own volition, and freely published and put out for all to see and hear.

Ms. Marcotte could stand to learn a few lessons I learned a long, long time ago:

  • Never say anything you would not be willing to repeat under oath.
  • Never say anything you would not want to see plastered across the front page of the newspaper.
  • Never write when you can speak.
  • Never speak when you can nod.
  • Never nod when you can wink.

I'm coming up on my third anniversary here. I've passed 2,500 postings. And I can't think of a single piece I've written that I wish like hell I hadn't.

Yes, I've been notably wrong on numerous occasions. But I've learned from each, corrected myself, and made appropriate apologies. And I've used some very inflammatory language a time or two, but each time I carefully weighed the pluses and minuses, then followed my own best judgment.

And yes, that means that the times I used terms like "sand niggers" or "nips" and "Japs", it was not the careless slip of a bigot, but an attempt to express and capture the racist attitudes of the people I was discussing.

I've also been free with profanity at times. Again, it was deliberate, and I have no regrets about calling Dan Rather a "miserable lying sack of shit," because that was a fair reflection of the outrage I felt at the moment I wrote it. And yes, I dropped the f-bomb a couple of times when it wasn't strictly called for, but just made my point so perfectly I had to use it.

Life is all about choices, Ms. Marcotte. You chose what sort of image you wanted to project, and by all reckoning you were remarkably good at it. You seem to take pride in being "edgy" enough to make the mainstream uncomfortable, at best; it should come as no surprise that after all your work to make the mainstream so edgy that they hesitate about embracing you.

A lot of people like bomb-throwers. But bomb-throwers are lousy houseguests. Lyndon Johnson's aphorism about it better to have certain people "inside the tent pissing out than outside pissing in" does NOT apply in every case, only in the case of those who are going to be very, very close to the tent in the first place -- and you, Ms. Marcotte, are no Hubert Humphrey.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference If you make your own f'ing bed, you better be g-d ready to lie down on the f'er:

» Maggie's Farm linked with Some Saturday Links

Comments (60)

"I think we need to see pic... (Below threshold)

"I think we need to see pictures of Amanda Marcotte in a bikini."

I got the goods. Content warning! She is scantily clad.

I doubt she really realized... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

I doubt she really realized what she was doing.

Among those on the left, the rule is that it is wrong to offend someone with prejudiced, bigoted, and or racist statements, UNLESS the person is being offended because they are either (1) Caucasian, (2) male, (3) Christian, or (4) heterosexual. If the offensive racist-bigoted-prejudiced statement is based on one of those 4 things its O.K. as far as the lefties are concerned.

I learned this back in my college days. They actually instituted the anti-free speech codes wile I was attending in the late 80's in response to some incident (I don't remember specifically what it was, but I do remember protesters marching). You could actually be expelled for making an offensive statement unless it met one of the 4 criteria above. If the statement did meet one of those 4 criteria, it was protected free speech. If it did not, your 1st amendment rights were suspended and you were expelled.

And no, the speech codes di... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

And no, the speech codes did not specifically state those 4 conditions. It was one of those unwritten rules.

For someone living in fanta... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

For someone living in fantasy land, the truth hurts. So stop quoting her, you meanie.

Bunyan, according to some w... (Below threshold)

Bunyan, according to some who comment here, that would be censorship.

I think it's closer to fasc... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

I think it's closer to fascism than censorship.

Perhaps I didn't make it ob... (Below threshold)

Perhaps I didn't make it obvious enough -- I was trying to employ irony.

Perhaps he didn't make it o... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Perhaps he didn't make it obvious enough -- you failed.

I got it wavemaker and I'm ... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

I got it wavemaker and I'm sure the one posting above me did as well.

Lee, why don't you post "your" definition of censorship and explain to everyone else how the right is censoring miss marcotte.

Couldna failed completely, ... (Below threshold)

Couldna failed completely, you showed up.

Just ran across this piece on Marcotte from Cathy Young.

Jay, as I recall when you c... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

Jay, as I recall when you called Dan Rather a "miserable lying sack of shit," you meant it in the best possible way. right?

as for Amanda Marcotte, her problem is not that she WAS censored...but that she was NOT. Poor baby, a victim of the LACK of censorship that might have prevented her words from coming back to, well, HER!

No one is attempting to cen... (Below threshold)
Lee:

No one is attempting to censor Marcotte that I'm aware of J.R.-- nobody that I can see is trying to keep her from saying what she wants to say.

I'm offended by the use of ... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

I'm offended by the use of the word "f'ing".

P. Bunyan --I'm co... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

P. Bunyan --

I'm completely with you against censorship. If you can only say inoffensive things, you don't have free speech.

Amanda had the right to say what she said, and Edwards had the right to fire her, and you guys have the right to criticize her. Free speech should be met with more free speech...not silencing.

I recommend a book:

"Free Speech for Me, but Not For Thee", by Nat Hentoff.

Yeah, Nat is politically on the left...but he exposes censorship on the left as well as the right. In fact, I think more examples in this book are about censorship on the left. (Basically, whoever has more power institutes the censorship, and the left had more power when his book was written.)

In any case, it's very good reading.

Back in my college days, th... (Below threshold)
tyree:

Back in my college days, there was a group of communists on campus that posted flyers that said "unlimited free speech on campus" and "no military recruiters on campus" on the same piece of paper. They also wanted to "smash racisim and the KKK" in suburban Southern California, where the only people I have seen stage race based marches are not white.

I don't get it. Maybe beca... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

I don't get it. Maybe because I can tell the difference between censorship and consequences.

Its not hard to see that the Left in general doesn't believe in consequences. But the thing is, freedom is a two way street. You can say or do anything you want within the law, but I don't have to listen to you and I don't have to hire you. Edwards looked at her liability to his campaign and let her go. A liability that Marcotte created and not anyone else. Bloggers simply pointed it out. That's a consequence. Tough.

For example, Jay Tea has successfully alienated the Dan Rather fanbase. There are consequences for that. Somewhere. I'm sure. No really. But, I'm sure Jay Tea can live with them.

One thing about freedom of ... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

One thing about freedom of speech - it doesn't guarantee an audience. It especially doesn't guarantee that, no matter how popular you might be at the moment with your fan base, they'll always love you or that 'love' will translate into a broader appeal.

Seems to me she figured she could spout whatever drivel she wanted, and folks would just lap it up, and now she's offended when a wider range of people don't appreciate her the way her fans did? Well, welcome to the real world. What you say CAN have consequences.

Great post Jay. Ms... (Below threshold)
metprof:

Great post Jay.

Ms. Marcotte now has the opportunity to learn from the old adage "Live by the sword, die by the sword"

metprof,Don't you ... (Below threshold)
a4g:

metprof,

Don't you mean "live by the S word, die by the S word"?

One thing about fr... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
One thing about freedom of speech - it doesn't guarantee an audience.

True, although the consequence in this case is a much bigger audience for Amanda than in the past. She's all over the internet, and has been invited to post at Slate and elsewhere. Even here at Wizbang, there's been two posts in 2 days about her.

She may be unhappy about the criticism she's received, but it's raised her profile and reach now exceeds beyond what she had at Pandagon or would have received blogging for Edwards.

She may be unhappy about... (Below threshold)
John Irving:

She may be unhappy about the criticism she's received, but it's raised her profile

Now that's searching through the dark cloud to find the wispy thread of silver.

Freedom of speech doesn't m... (Below threshold)

Freedom of speech doesn't mean there's some vacuum. Marcotte and even Tim Hardaway have a perfect right to say what they want and of course, we have a perfect right to refute/argue/lampoon what they say. Just try that at a college campus though.

She may be unhappy... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
She may be unhappy about the criticism she's received, but it's raised her profile

Now that's searching through the dark cloud to find the wispy thread of silver.

Actually, it's just an observation of one of the consequences of the attacks on Ms. Marcotte. I think that Slate, and other outlets now publishing Amanda's commentaries, reach more people and is "picked up" more than Pandagon.

Shooting stars may blaze br... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Shooting stars may blaze brightly for a time - but they tend to either burn out quickly or make a crater when they hit. I doubt that she'll be visible for long.

The word 'censorship' has b... (Below threshold)

The word 'censorship' has been bandied about by so many confused lefty commenters in Wizbang threads over the past few days, I thought they would benefit from this modest primer on the subject:

When a government official says you can't publish your book, or you have to take your song to some government agency to get their ok before you sing it in public, or you get arrested because of something you wrote, or said, or sung, that is censorship.

When no one reads your blog, or when someone says mean things about something you have written, or if a bunch of people gets together for the purpose of not buying your songs, and tells others to do the same, or if some corporate entertainment entity decides not to distribute your songs, that is not censorship. It may be unethical, it may be disgusting or distasteful, it may be unfair, but whatever it is, it ain't censorship.

There. I hope this clears things up.

Actually, it's just an o... (Below threshold)
John Irving:

Actually, it's just an observation of one of the consequences of the attacks on Ms. Marcotte.

So when Mel Gibson gave his drunken rant, and "raised his profile," it was of benefit to him?
I don't have a problem with either of the former Edwards team members, but it seems like there is a vast amount of spin going on by their more loyal supporters.

So when Mel Gibson... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
So when Mel Gibson gave his drunken rant, and "raised his profile," it was of benefit to him?

I think the consequences for Gibson were different than for Marcotte. Gibson wasn't asked by numerous high-profile outlets to publish editorials.

As an aside, I disagree with many things Mel Gibosn has done, but I enjoy many of his films. And I certainly don't hate him or wish him harm just because his opinions are different from mine.

if some corporate ... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
if some corporate entertainment entity decides not to distribute your songs, that is not censorship

True. And sometimes you find a gigantic new fan base and win lots of Grammys.

She may be unhappy... (Below threshold)
ohiovoter:
She may be unhappy about the criticism she's received, but it's raised her profile and reach now exceeds beyond what she had at Pandagon or would have received blogging for Edwards.

Sorry - couldn't help but be amused by the side issue raised in this comment.

Marcotte will do better than she would have working for Edwards? Yikes! That doesn't say much for Edwards as a Presidential hopeful, does it?

Maybe Marcotte and McEwan getting out of the Edwards campaign really had little or nothing to do with what they experienced and everything to do with what they learned about Edwards and the quality of his campaign efforts once they got closer to it.

Yeah for Marcotte I think t... (Below threshold)
David:

Yeah for Marcotte I think this is 15 minute thing.

This is such a non-story, b... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

This is such a non-story, but what is great is the way Bloggers are so thin skinned. Reading the blogs are like a soap opera. The best is Sullivan against NRO, but other good ones are John Cole, Juan Cole Malikin, Sst. Toldja, Redstate, and on and on. Each and all can't rise above pettiness.

Instead of supporting this great media and each other, you act like a bunch high-school cheerleads.

...or if some corp... (Below threshold)
Anon Y. Mous:
...or if some corporate entertainment entity decides not to distribute your songs, that is not censorship.

That depends. If the corporation decides not to distribute your music because you've alienated your fans, and nobody wants to buy your music, no, that's not censorship. But, if Sony says to all it's artists, "We will no longer distribute any music that contains the word 'nigger', regardless of the context in which used.", well that's censorship. They have every right to conduct themselves in that way, but it is censorship, nonetheless.

Anon, that only works if So... (Below threshold)

Anon, that only works if Sony is the only label willing to pick up artists who use the word 'nigger'. In such a capitalistic society, other record labels would swoop in like vultures to pick up the artists who would get dropped from Sony for not complying with their (very stupid) demands. In the end, those artists might wind up with more exposure due to the upheaval and media attention.

That would be like saying the RCC's banned books list is censorship - maybe 500 years ago it worked, but not today and not in America. It tends to have the opposite effect.

Hmm, I misspoke my last com... (Below threshold)

Hmm, I misspoke my last comment. What I meant was that Anon's example only works if all the other labels follow Sony's example in dropping artists who use the word "nigger".

And just to add to it a bit, governments have a monopoly on force (or should if they want to stay in power), but recording companies don't have a monopoly on the market (at least not in America). It takes a monopoly to create censorship.

A quick obvious and unargua... (Below threshold)
Carl:

A quick obvious and unarguable point: freedom of speech is not free and does have limits.

Amanda Marcotte is obviously a delusional, arrogant, self-righteous boor with little to actually contribute to intelligent discourse.

But I'm stating the obvious again, aren't I?

But, if Sony says ... (Below threshold)
But, if Sony says to all it's artists, "We will no longer distribute any music that contains the word 'nigger', regardless of the context in which used.", well that's censorship. They have every right to conduct themselves in that way, but it is censorship, nonetheless.

Uh, no. No, it's not. There's no legal force behind Sony's policy. Nobody is telling those musicians they're going to get jailed, or fined, or executed because their songs contain a forbidden word. They're free to make music all the day long with the word 'niggger' in it. No one is stopping them.

If Amanda Marcotte submitted a a profanity-laced, anti-Catholic screed to Ignatius Press, would their refusal to publish it constitute "censorship"? I think not.

BTW --For those of... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

BTW --

For those of you who don't know, Marcotte is "anti-Catholic" in the sense that she opposes the Catholic church's position on birth control and related issues.

If Amanda Marcotte submi... (Below threshold)
Mark L:

If Amanda Marcotte submitted a a profanity-laced, anti-Catholic screed to Ignatius Press, would their refusal to publish it constitute "censorship"? I think not.

Amanda would probably consider it censorship.

But, then again the clue fairy hasn't visited Amanda in a long, long, lo-o-o-ong time.

Censorship is like when dem... (Below threshold)
Jo:

Censorship is like when democrats & Bill Clinton wrote a threatening letter to ABC about perhaps not renewing some licenses (or whatever it was they threatened) if they didn't edit "The Path to 9/11.

Now THAT is censorship. So apparently, for all their whining about it, in certain circumstances, the left is all for it.

Uh, no. No, it's n... (Below threshold)
Anon Y. Mous:
Uh, no. No, it's not. There's no legal force behind Sony's policy. Nobody is telling those musicians they're going to get jailed, or fined, or executed because their songs contain a forbidden word.

Might I suggest a dictionary?

Censorship can take place without the force of government.

There is a legal definition... (Below threshold)

There is a legal definition of censorship (as to what is actionable court) and a non-legal definition. Depends on what you're discussing. Anon, which definition are you using? Please don't say wiki.

"I'm coming up on my third ... (Below threshold)
jp2:

"I'm coming up on my third anniversary here. I've passed 2,500 postings. And I can't think of a single piece I've written that I wish like hell I hadn't."

Of course you don't regret - it's the neocon way. Even when you said the insurgents were in their last throes...

Just like Tony Snow said the other day that he wasn't sure if any mistakes were made in Iraq. Just like it took years and years to get some mea culpas from this administration.

You have been wrong, repeatedly. On top of this, you have been attacking the people who were right for 3 years. It's called lack of shame - and your continued definance is called a lack of guts.

jp2, kindly READ before you... (Below threshold)

jp2, kindly READ before you comment. You're only embarrassing yourself.

If you actually READ my piece, you'd have seen that the very next line I said I'd been wrong on many occasions.

I regret my errors, of course, but any single piece that I regret to the point where I wish I'd never written or published it? Not a one. They all served a purpose, they were all honest reflections of my thoughts and feelings of the time.

You, on the other hand, are a knee-jerk schmuck who seems to prowl postings here to find a single word or phrase that you can twist to suit your agenda, and then run with it -- usually right off a cliff.

At least be a little more entertaining in the process, will ya?

J.

Shameless, gutless, rightle... (Below threshold)
epador:

Shameless, gutless, rightless - now that describes jp2's dopplegänger very well. You know, the one who used to post incoherent rants all the time. The one jp2 is confusing JT with.

Sad.

[wink wink]

You, on the other hand, ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

You, on the other hand, are a knee-jerk schmuck who seems to prowl postings here to find a single word or phrase that you can twist to suit your agenda, and then run with it -- usually right off a cliff.

Pot, meet kettle.

good stuff!... (Below threshold)
lox:

good stuff!

Scroll up, Brian. Prior, yo... (Below threshold)

Scroll up, Brian. Prior, you answered the question "Does anyone actually care what you think?" with "according to the most recent election, yes."

That's your ENTIRE answer, in its entire context. So I (admittedly snidely) asked just where you were on the ballot when you won that ringing endorsement.

Christ, even by the current batch of trolls' standards, that was weak.

J.

Well, while everyone here i... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

Well, while everyone here is cheering the supposed self-destruction of Amanda, she's appearing on MSNBC, Slate and other high-profile venues.

More to her credit, she rejected an invitation to appear on Fox "News" (sic.)

"If you actually READ my pi... (Below threshold)
jp2:

"If you actually READ my piece, you'd have seen that the very next line I said I'd been wrong on many occasions."

Hey, we all know you have made multiple errors Jay. Anyone who spends a day or two reading here is very aware of that.

What is crucially missing from your writings though is how wrong - at a core level - you have been. We all make mistakes. Yours, however, are systemic. Your support of this admistration (and especially the war) has been woefully misguided. I don't know what's driving it, if it's drunk or depressed or scared - but
sure wouldn't trust it behind the wheel.

Instead of taking jp2's wor... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

Instead of taking jp2's word or Jay Tea's word on the accuracy of past entries, why don't we look ourselves? We might start with:

Why We Just Might Be Winning in Iraq
http://wizbangblog.com/2005/09/16/why-we-just-might-be-winning-in-iraq.php

How about this one, about h... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

How about this one, about how the left should shut up and admit that Saddam had wMDs?

Is It Time for the Anti-War Crowd to Sit Down and STFU?
http://wizbangblog.com/2005/11/09/is-it-time-for-the-antiwar-crowd-to-sit-down-and-stfu.php

Word of the day, Publicus:<... (Below threshold)

Word of the day, Publicus:

"Conditional."

Reading comprehension tip of the day, Publicus:

I never said I was never WRONG, just that I never wrote anything that I regretted so much that I wish I'd never written it -- or wanted to go back and delete it.

One more straw man, and I'm going to tell that farmer you're stealing from his fields. And his shotgun's loaded with rock salt.

J.

Jay...I understand... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

Jay...

I understand. I was addressing jp2's allegation that you are fundamentally wrong, at a core level.

Personally, I think you are intelligent and coherent...which is why I post hear and listen to what people like you post. I (frequently) respectfully disagree often.

I suspect that jp2 would say that you're being wrong about big things, like that we're winning the war or that Saddam had WMDs, makes you SO wrong that he thinks you SHOULD regret what you wrote.

I can't expect anyone to be right about everything, especially someone as prolific as you have been. But I wouldn't try to predict the future by reading "Tea" leaves, either...

One more straw man... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
One more straw man, and I'm going to tell that farmer you're stealing from his fields. And his shotgun's loaded with rock salt.

THAT is funny! You do turn a nice phrase, Jay!

"pubic-hair" those links yo... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

"pubic-hair" those links you posted are so over used that the type is fading. How about interviewing Saddam now and ask if he thinks he won the war. Or maybe ask if he would liked to redo his thinking on how to handle the tiger he had by the tail. Stale stale stale liberal sound bytes. Bet he wished he had made a differant bed to hang-er- bed to lie in.

Actually, it's just an o... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Actually, it's just an observation of one of the consequences of the attacks on Ms. Marcotte. I think that Slate, and other outlets now publishing Amanda's commentaries, reach more people and is "picked up" more than Pandagon.

No. But it IS finally killing the entire concept of hate crime and hate speech.

If what Amanda did does not qualify, then nothing can possibly qualify.
-=Mike

Okay, I propose a gentlemen... (Below threshold)

Okay, I propose a gentlemen's rule for all future snarking:

There shall be no further use of the phrase "pot, meet kettle."

ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Scroll up, Brian. Prior,... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Scroll up, Brian. Prior, you answered the question "Does anyone actually care what you think?" with "according to the most recent election, yes."

That's your ENTIRE answer, in its entire context.

Uh, no. The "entire" context would include the previous comment, Aahhh, more commentary from attention starved libnuts. Followed by the question, "Does anyone actually care what you [liberals] think?", and then my accurate response, "according to the most recent election, yes." That's the "entire" context.

So I (admittedly snidely) asked just where you were on the ballot when you won that ringing endorsement.

Right, so you admit you took my response out of context just to be snide. I don't really care, but it just seemed to so well fit your description of a "knee-jerk schmuck who seems to prowl postings here to find a single word or phrase that you can twist to suit your agenda, and then run with it -- usually right off a cliff."

Christ, even by the current batch of trolls' standards, that was weak.

I'm sorry you feel that way. However, your response of "oh, that thing that I previously said, now that you've called me on it, you should really have interpreted it to mean this other thing that I didn't say" seems right on par with your previous such responses.

One way that some of the po... (Below threshold)
ohiovoter:

One way that some of the posters here and Jay differ is that Jay went on record with an opinion on whether or not action should be taken prior to the "end of the story" (or percieved end of the story - as some of those same posters appear to believe).

He had the guts to clearly state that sometimes he was wrong. We can point to posts because he stated his opinion and took the chance that he would be wrong.

Which is makes him different from the second guessers here.

For example, hate the Iraqi War, but don't believe that there is never a war the US should become involved in? (In other words, you are not an isolationist.)

So, when should the might of the US military be used?

Which past conflict were we right to use that might? Which ones should we have used that might but didn't? Which current situations (North Korea, Iran, Zimbabwe, Darfur, etc.) should we be focusing on now?

Let's see some of those quick to criticize take a stand.

So, are do those who criticize believe the US should take an isolationist stance?

Which past conflicts were OK?

Which past conflicts should we been involved in but weren't?

Which potential conflicts should we be involved in next?

And, please don't hide behind "oh, we can't do anything elsewhere because of BushHitler's Iraq fiasco..." That's the cowardly response to a theorectical question.

When (with specific examples) should the might of the US military be used?

Hmmm. Wonder where all the ... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Hmmm. Wonder where all the lefties went after Ohiovoter's post?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy