Reply #171: Sorry, but you're wrong on this one. [View All]

[americanstranger]

First, I don't expect any candidate to be 'ideologically pure' - it's impossible to be a major candidate without compromising your principles somewhere along the line.

Second, I wasn't 'fixated' with this. I was a little worried that he'd cave to the hate-mongering bigot Donohue, but he's proven me wrong (see my apology, which I promised yesterday if I was wrong on this, posted elsewhere on this forum).

Third, the people that the hate-mongering bigot Donohue speaks to constitute about .5% of all Catholics in this country (the Catholic League, at present, has about 275,000 members). Most Catholics I know who have even heard of this crank think he's a nut case. Most Catholics I know would put Donohue's rantings about Edwards' bloggers in the same box as his 'Hollywood likes anal sex' comment and make up their own minds. And most Catholics who belong to the Catholic League probably were'n going to vote for Edwards (or any other Dem, for that matter) anyway.

Donohue and Malkin have no business and no right to tell Edwards or any other Democrat how to run their campaign. I think Donohue was testing Edwards to see how easily he'd cave to pressure. Good on Edwards for not doing so.

As for your contention that I was 'Swift Boating' Edwards, you're a few miles off the mark. It was the bigot Donohue and Michelle Malkin who were trying to do that. I was merely expressing my concern that he might cave, on which point I was wrong. As I mentioned above, my apology is posted here on GD.

- as