Score one for the good guys: To put an end to the bloggergate non-scandal, John Edwards announced that he is keeping Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan on board. His brief statement, which can be found here, discusses his views on the bloggers' past writings and closes, most importantly, with the candidate saying, "We're beginning a great debate about the future of our country, and we can't let it be hijacked. It will take discipline, focus, and courage to build the America we believe in." No truer words, and words I'll discuss in further detail later. While Team Edwards is moving on at full power, this entire episode, which is really just beginning, offers the progressive movement an object lesson in how we must operate as a unit in anticipation of 2008 - and beyond. "They wanted a fight," I wrote Wednesday. "Let's give it to them." And with this fight, the next era of clenched-fist politics has begun.
Having been given the carefully crafted and well-worded version of the middle finger by Edwards, the two key instigators of this entire outrage eruption - paragons of civility Bill Donohue and Michelle Malkin - have reacted ... predictably. Donohue, who attacked Marcotte and McEwan from the religious fringes, promptly issued a press release that, to say the least, leads one to wonder whether or not the concept of hypocrisy has ever occurred to the man. "When Mel Gibson got drunk and made anti-Semitic remarks, he paid a price for doing so," Donohue said. "When Michael Richards got angry and made racist remarks, he paid a price for doing so. When Isaiah Washington got ticked off and made anti-gay remarks, he paid a price for doing so. But John Edwards thinks the same rules don't apply to him, which is why he has chosen to embrace foul-mouthed anti-Catholic bigots on his payroll." Edwards aside, I'm really not sure Donohue, given his history, should wade into the waters of demanding punishment for making anti-Semitic, racist or anti-gay remarks. Especially considering that, just one paragraph earlier, Donohue trotted out the oft-used, thinly veiled anti-Semitic stereotype of the deep-pocketed "Hollywood gang." No further clarification needed there.
Donohue wasn't all talk - he did promise a backlash, including a "nationwide public relations blitz" to take place in, among other outlets, the New York Times and the Catholic press. "What Edwards did today will not be forgotten," he closed by saying. Malkin, meanwhile (and perhaps least surprisingly), wasn't nearly as civil. While Donohue plotted a course, Malkin made vague threats. After characterizing the "nutroots" as "waving their guns around in triumph," Malkin wrote, "John Edwards ought to pray ... that he doesn't get hit." Nice. Following up, she added, "Hear me now, believe me later, Johnny E.: If you lay down with nutroots, it will be hard to get back up." If Malkin's past and the potential for outraged extremists to resort to physical violence are any indication, it would be wise for someone within the Edwards camp to note, for the record, what's been said and what's been threatened. The unhinged right wingers saying hateful, violent things today may very well be the same unhinged right wingers doing hateful, violent things tomorrow.
In explaining his decision to retain the bloggers, Edwards said, "We're beginning a great debate about the future of our country, and we can't let it be hijacked. It will take discipline, focus, and courage to build the America we believe in." The key portion of those two sentences is his use of the "hijacking the debate" frame. That, in my mind, is a brilliant bit of messaging and a delightful little swipe at the Donohues and Malkins out there trying to distract everyone - as Republicans do - from the important issues. But make no mistake (and take notice, stenographers in the servile press corps), hijacking the debate is exactly what these people are attempting to accomplish. In his statement, Donohue said the following in response to Edwards: "I have news for him - the Catholic League - not Edwards - will decide what the debate will be about, and it won't be about the nation. It will be about the glaring double standard that colors the entire conversation about bigotry." There, in plain language, is all the evidence anyone needs of what Donohue and, by extension, his right-wing co-conspirators, plan to do in the run-up to the 2008 election. Distract. Cloud. Hijack. Shameful, don't you think, that Donohue plainly admits not wanting the debate to be about the nation? Equally shameful, however, would be if we let him off the hook without a fight.
Now when I say fight, I'm not by any means suggesting we use the gutter tactics employed by the likes of Malkin and Donohue. To win, we don't have to publish addresses or hit the airwaves with hate speech. We have to take on these anti-democratic and anti-American extremists where they make an impact. Take the media, for instance. Something you can right now to fight back is take part in this wonderful BlogPAC campaign to tell the media who so breathlessly reported the right-wing angle of this story that simply regurgitating what conservatives feed you isn't, contrary to the norm, journalism. Let those who parroted Republican talking points know that America deserves better. After that, contact these outlets' advertisers and tell them you will no longer support companies that help the media traffic in lies (and do the same for those who bankroll Malkin and Donohue). After that, contact your legislators and re-assert your desire to see a return of the Fairness Doctrine. Be polite in your dealings, but be persistent. You will be surprised how much grease thousands of coordinated, determined squeaky wheels can get.
Those of Malkin and Donohue's ilk don't disappear from the public sphere until and unless sane, right-minded people stop letting them shape the debate and give those enabling their behavior a reason to stop enabling it. By chipping away at the edges of their power, we can erode their foundation until they no longer have one from which to make their petty, hypocritical attacks. These aren't impossible-to-undermine monoliths. These are people and groups requiring the same things other people and groups need to survive and thrive in the political debate and wield power - organized money, organized people and organized ideas. And, I would add, organized attention (from the media) and the veneer of respect it lends. Take away any of these and the Malkins and Donohues of the world cease to matter. Bankrupt their organizations. Alienate their followers. Discredit their ideas. Do these and they become nothing more than unhinged extremists ranting in the town square. Don't give the media an incentive to cover their rantings and they won't.
What this fight requires of all of us - all of us - is that we step up, as one, and use our strengths to pinpoint and attack their weaknesses. And this is a fight, I remind you, that all of you can help wage. We can all write letters and make phone calls. Those who can afford to donate to the organizations that support people-powered online activism, like BlogPAC, should do so. Those who are effective researchers should do that. Bloggers can and will do what they do best in exposing the right wing's motives and holding those who give them far too much respect accountable. As progressives we must also watch our elected Democrats and make sure they follow Edwards's lead and defend the base and those who helped put them in office. And, along those lines, I'd like to see the religious left step up as well to keep Donohue from being the only "voice of faith" on matters like this. The man is a bigot. Speak out and brand him as one. Our pressure works. It worked last year when, in anticipation of the election, we as progressives banded together to help ensure a Democratic tidal wave. And it will work now.
When I first read Edwards's statement about Marcotte and McEwan, I had thought to write about how, all in all, the candidate deserved good marks for his response, but that I would hesitate to give him the highest grades simply because he accepted the right's frame of this entire non-story. By not fighting fire with fire and pointing out the utter hypocrisy and dark nature of Malkin and Donohue, Edwards let them set the rules. But the more I think about what happened Thursday, I am realizing that it's good enough to accept this for what it is, a big win. The bottom line of the matter is this: Edwards did the right thing. He kept Marcotte and McEwan - two talented, driven individuals - and didn't back down in the face of the first (and surely not the last) attempt by the right wing to interfere with a Democratic presidential campaign and the progressive movement. He did his part. Now we must do ours, both by getting his back and by going on the offensive against those weak-willed, so-called "allies" refusing to stand up for the netroots and, most especially, against those conscience-free right-wing operators masking venom and vitriol behind a mask of "civility" and "religious tolerance". We've got to not only be ready for the next attack, but we've also got to be ready to win it in the trenches. The right isn't going to back down. Bullies don't. Not until they get bullied back. Let's show them that we know how to play their game. Not dirtier. Better.