Last week, Hillary Clinton issued what she called the “Rutgers pledge” in the wake of the Don Imus firing:

“Will you be willing to speak up and say, “Enough is enough,’ when women or minorities or the innocent or powerless are marginalized or denigrated?” Clinton said in her speech to about 700 people. “Will you say there’s no place — if there ever was, there certainly isn’t now — for disrespect or bigotry to be seen as funny?”

Despite condemning bigotry, misogyny, and disrespect, however, Hillary decided to guest-blog this week on one of the far Left’s most degrading and bigoted sites. The Hillary campaign was quite proud of the appearance. Mary Ann Akers and Danny Glover report:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton caused a minor stir this week with her guest-blogging appearance at Firedoglake, a site where one of the lead bloggers last year painted Sen. Joseph Lieberman in blackface before apologizing and removing the entry at the behest of Lieberman’s opponent.

Clinton, D-N.Y., posted an entry at Firedoglake on Tuesday to mark Equal Pay Day and to tout her legislation aimed at guaranteeing women the same pay as men when they do the same work. Clinton also briefly engaged the blog’s readers in the comments at the bottom of her post.

Mary Ann Akers, who writes The Sleuth blog for The Washington Post, reported that Democratic activists privately questioned Clinton’s decision to appear on Firedoglake because of the tarnished reputation of Jane Hamsher, one of its chief bloggers.

Last summer, while following Democrat Ned Lamont of Connecticut in his bid to unseat fellow Democrat Lieberman, Hamsher posted an image of Lieberman in blackface at The Huffington Post. Although Hamsher never worked in a paid capacity for Lamont’s campaign, she did produce a video for the campaign. Her close connections to Lamont prompted the campaign to contact her about the image.

She deleted it and apologized, but according to Akers, the incident is fresh enough in the minds of some Democrats that they think Clinton should have kept her distance from Firedoglake.

Hamsher’s blackface stunt is the tip of the iceberg.

Hamsher is the woman who criticized conservative author/commentator Kate O’Beirne as “sandpaper snatch” and who snarled “The bitch is dead meat.”

Hamsher’s blog is the site where one unhinged regular blogger (not a commenter, mind you, but a Hamsher-approved guest blogger…like Hillary) attacked Democrat Ellen Tauscher as a “prostitute” and applauded another blogger for calling her “a bribe-taking corporate whore and shit eater who has guaranteed herself a nasty primary in 2008.”

Hamsher’s blog is the site where another unhinged regular blogger referred to conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham as a “cunt,” which he later changed to “Bitch Troll From Hell.“

What was that pledge again, Hillary? Oh, yeah:

Will you be willing to speak up and say, “Enough is enough,’ when women or minorities or the powerless are marginalized or degraded…

…Will you say there’s no place — if there ever was, there certainly isn’t now — for disrespect or bigotry to be seen as funny?

Ask Hillary to take her own pledge: Click for contact form.

***

FRC spotlights another case of Hillary violating her own pledge…by refusing to give back gobs of money raised by foul-mouthed rapper Timbaland:

Hat tip: Matt Lewis@Townhall.com

Ed Driscoll: Don Imus could not be reached for comment.

***

Meanwhile, Hillary tries to spin her bogus black-cent. She really thinks she’s good at this.

Big props to Mary Katharine Ham for calling out the one-eyed, left-wing women bloggers (who still won’t admit their blind spot) and for demonstrating tough, but civil disagreement by example. Brava.

Salon’s Joan Walsh argued on Howard Kurtz’s TV show that it didn’t really matter that she failed to mention female hate-mongers like “Sandpaper sn**ch” Jane Hamsher or the racist, sexist ping-pong ball jokers at Wonkette because I received “plenty of attention” when I’ve pointed out vulgarity aimed at conservative women.

Really? I don’t remember The Guardian asking Kate O’Beirne to pen an op-ed for them about Hamsher’s filthy attack on her. No one put our pictures in the NYTimes for weathering epithets, sexist putdowns and death threats–many of which, unlike Sierra’s, were signed and endorsed by major bloggers–and not just random, obscure, anonymous commenters.

Walsh also argued that the reason she decided to pay attention to misogyny in the blogosphere now is because Sierra is a “techblogger” trying to “make the web a better community.”

As opposed to us Christofascist wingnut women bloggers who deserve what we get because we’re just trying to use the web to spread poisonous conservative ideas…

***

Here’s a review of my “code of conduct” on how to cope with Internet threats:

1) Report the serious threats to law enforcement.
2) Keep blogging.

***

Previous:

A message to the techblogging elite

No mention of hate-monger Jane Hamsher’s “b**ch is dead meat” and “sandpaper sn**ch” attacks on Kate O’Beirne.

No mention of other “feminist” attacks on independent-minded (read: non-left) bloggers–a phenomenon Dr. Helen noted here.

And, of course, no mention of this or this.

Some women are more equal than others, in the eyes of the “progressive” female blogosphere. But that’s how it has always been. As I noted a few years back when Mo Dowd was whining about how difficult it was to be a woman with opinions:

Conservative women aren’t real women according to the liberal feminist establishment’s definition. Remember when Gloria Steinem called Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison a “female impersonator?” Or when curdled NOW leader Patricia Ireland instructed Democrats to vote only for “authentic” female political candidates? Or when Al Gore’s fashion consultant Naomi Wolf described the foreign-policy analysis of Jeane Kirkpatrick as being “uninflected by the experiences of the female body?”

And so it is with conservative women bloggers. Because we have “betrayed” feminism, because we hold unorthodox political views on abortion, government race/gender preferences, education, the war, and taxes, and because we reject identity politics, we’re not “authentic” women, we deserve what we get, and we just don’t count.

As I noted in my column last week, there are no grown-ups on the other side of the aisle.

Flashback: Netroots vs. Rightroots: left-wingers love blackface

Flashback: The vile bile we have to put up with

Allah notes the illogic:

What’s interesting is how the betrayed allegiances at which they direct this delightful little metaphor seem to grow broader each time they use it. Gilliard mocked Steele for betraying black liberal Democrats; Hamsher mocked Lieberman for betraying liberal Democrats; Billmon mocks Blitzer, as near as I can tell, for betraying liberals. You could do a Venn diagram of their logic here. But at this point, who’s left?

Still a week left to go ’til Election Day. They will find someone.

These people can’t express themselves without sinking into the gutter. Here’s Murphy’s response to pro-life actors Patricia Heaton and Jim Cavaziel, posted on his website message board (pardon the language):

Wimps or Pussies- You decide

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nguJQ_dRPXw&NR

Not only do these retards run an ad that is morally and logically unsound, and MOCK Michael J Fox for having a disease, they have set it so that comments must be approved by them. Anything they don’t like, doesn’t get approved. Pure lameness. Are they wimps or pussies?

This is a good opportunity to state that Patricia Heaton is a worthless whore. When Bryan Singer and I were doing APT PUPIL, we made the mistake of offering her the role of the mother. It was a small role, and her career was nothing at the time. She didn’t want to do it. People pass all the time, so fine. She was offended by the role. Okay, fine, fuck you be offended bitch. But no- the worthless whore wrote a letter to Sherry Lansing the head of the studio complaining that the film was evil and would destroy children’s minds. She was ignored and mocked, of course, but can you believe this worthless human shit would have liked to STOP a movie because it offended her lame pussy sensibilities?

I’d vote yes for experimenting on Patricia Heaton cells.

As for Cavaziel, have you seen him in anything lately? Thought so.

The name of Murphy’s production company, appropriately enough, is Angry Films.

My take on the game of Whack-a-Racist, in light of the George Allen incident this week,in my Examiner column today.

The incident happened Friday. Since then, it’s been worth two stories and an editorial in The New York Times and eight stories — three on the front page — three blog posts, one video, and one forum discussion, in The Washington Post. A Google Blog search for the week shows more posts related to “macaca” than Iraq this week, and Israel just barely hanging on for the overall lead.

Liberal blogger FireDogLake posted a photo of a burning cross and said the GOP is a “JC Penney White Sale away from its cross-burning, lynching, Jim Crow roots.” Just weeks ago, FDL’s proprietor posted a Photoshopped picture of Joe Lieberman in blackface on the Huffington Post.

All right, slow down, everyone.

Unrelated but fun, we’ve now got Cox&Forkum on our Funnies page at Townhall, just added to our collection of conservative cartoonists. Love those guys (it is two guys, right? Or, is it tricky like Lynyrd Skynyrd?).

Update: Dear, sweet Lord, what are you thinking?!?

You sound like Dusty Baker.

Update: Hey, look at me. I’m the No. 2 read on Examiner, right behind “Hybrid Mutant Found Dead in Maine.” Well, I can’t very well compete with that.

Reeling from the idiotic blackface stunt pulled by his close blogger confidante, Jane Hamsher, yesterday, Lamont actually told News Channel 8′s Jamie Muro this:

“I don’t know anything about the blogs, I’m not responsible for those, I have no comment on ‘em…Independent blogs, I can’t say anything about it.”

“I don’t know anything about the blogs?”

This is a still from Lamont’s first TV campaign ad. The guy sitting next to him is the biggest left-wing blogger in the blogosphere, Markos “Screw Them” Moulitsas.

“I don’t know anything about the blogs?”

Lamont has his own blog…

…with a nutroots blogroll that features Kos, Hamsher, and every other major left-wing blogger on the scene:

Lamont’s blogger blogged from the YearlyKos convention, where he pumped up attendees with “Nedrenaline.” (And you thought “Joementum” was bad.)

As I pointed out yesterday, Jane Hamsher is more than a mere “independent” blogger sitting on the Lamont campaign sidelines. She filmed Lamont’s first videoblog. She chauffeured Lamont and his staff. She raised money for him. She’s still on his blogroll. And despite Lamont’s claim that he doesn’t control blogs and Hamsher’s claim that she “answers to nobody,” he told her to pull the blackface Photoshop yesterday–and she dutifully complied.

Danny Glover at Beltway Blogroll points out:

[L]iberal blogs such as Eschaton and TalkLeft have criticized the use of blackface in other settings. And even more ironically, Hamsher herself went ballistic last fall when first lady Laura Bush made a reference to comedian Eddie Cantor, who gained a following with his blackface routine.

“Does the first lady not know who Eddie Cantor was?” Hamsher wrote. “Or does she actually think it’s appropriate to invoke a comedian famous for appearing in blackface when talking about minority students, and then crack wise about their erstwhile future as criminals?”

But Lamont doesn’t know “anything about blogs” and he’s “not responsible for those.”

The Hartford Courant reports that Lamont’s campaign manager “asked if Lieberman would distance himself from some controversial supporters, such as conservative commentators Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity or Michelle Malkin.” Are they really that stupid? I can’t recall any of us raising money for Lieberman, organizing Blog Days for Lieberman, driving Lieberman to campaign events, filming video blogs for Lieberman, or publishing blackface Photoshops in support of Lieberman.

Jane Hamsher, on the other hand, has done all that and more for Ned Lamont. And at her blog, her minions are still throwing out stinkbombs. Typical liberal deflection: She does the blackface stunt, yet I’m “Michelle MalKKKin.”

Lamont’s Kool-Aid drinkers argue that Hamsher’s attack on Lieberman has nothing to do with his campaign. But Lamont’s allegiance with, and to, his blog promoters is central to his candidacy. Don’t take my word for it. Lamont blogged it himself at the Daily Kos back in May, paying homage to his “heroes” in the blogosphere:

When no one else would step up to challenge Senator Lieberman and everything he represents, my family and I made the decision that the time was indeed right. I hoped that the fundamental humanity and decency of everything America stands for in its core values would call upon others as it had me to rise up and say no more. And when the final votes were tallied at the state’s Democratic convention, our faith was vindicated. In the face of unbelievable odds and some pressure from the party brass, Connecticut Democrats called out for change. My belief in our party, our delegates, and in the people of my state has never been firmer.

I realize that our campaign would have been much more difficult without the netroots. I never had to make promises I did not want to keep to big donors because netroots citizens gave five, ten, twenty dollars at a time to my campaign with no strings attached. Before the mainstream media were taking us seriously, bloggers told my story with honesty and insight and compassion. The free exchange of comments and ideas in the blogosphere carried the tale and forced the traditional media to take notice. Ordinary people with video cameras, with petitions, with websites volunteering their time and their passion forged an army that no K Street lobbying money could buy. To all of you I am eternally grateful.

We cannot bring about change until we are willing to take up arms for a cause we believe in, and we will not carry the day until we can imagine that victory is possible. Each and every one of you is a hero to me today for daring to imagine that it is so.

***

Mark Finkelstein was watching the boob tube this morning:

Watching the first half-hour of the morning news shows on the broadcast networks today yielded no mention of the incident. Think Today/GMA/Early Show might have found time for coverage if it were a campaign insider supporting a conservative Republican, rather than liberal Dem Lamont, who had, er, tarred an opponent with a fabricated blackface photo?

Dean Barnett guesting at Hugh Hewitt:

I’ll have much to say about the Joe Lieberman-in-blackface controversy in a bit. I’m still reeling, however, from the shock that the progressive netroots have jeopardized one of their preferred favorite candidates with a juvenile and tasteless act. They’re generally such mature and thoughtful people who show such reliably astute judgment.

Am I alone in seeing the dark magic of Karl Rove at work here?

***

Previous:

Blackface: It’s all our fault
Ned Lamont’s favorite nutball
Netroots vs. Rightroots: left-wingers love blackface

Update:

More bile from the Lamonties

I sincerely apologize to anyone who was genuinely offended by the choice of images accompanying my blog post today on the Huffington Post. It’s also important to note that I do not, nor have I ever worked for Ned Lamont’s campaign. However, at their request, I removed the image earlier today.

Unfortunately, Senator Lieberman’s campaign has used this in attempt to hurt Ned and score political points, mustering their own faux indignation in attempt to further distract from the issues important to the voters of Connecticut…

…To the extent that rightwing Republicans like Michelle Malkin are trying to harm Ned Lamont with this ginned up controversy by “defending” his opponent with these absurd charges of racism — I regret it and I invite them to take it up with the person who did it, namely me. I answer to nobody and I operate entirely on my own volition. If you have a problem with something I’ve written, you know where to find me.

Like reader Amy wrote me in an e-mail: “Comedy!”

Tom Maguire notes a defense of the blackface bungle from Hamsher’s Photoshopper, “Dark Black.” Seriously. That’s his moniker:

The comments section at that Huffington Post make it clear that most readers found the graphic to be offensive and inappropriate. But there is hidden gold! The graphic designer, “DarkBlack” (I am as serious as the day is warm), put in an appearance at 2:42 PM to defend his work. I can’t manage a permalink directly to the comment, so here we go:

As the composer of the work in question, allow me to make some broader points clearer. This will be my last word on the subject, but all are free to debate further, of course.

Lieberman has attempted to activate a voting demographic that his strategists believe will aid him in his quest.

To this end, he has imported a figure, Bill Clinton, who has standing with the American black community, and has repeatedly asserted his personal credentials as one who has worked on behalf of that community.

Yet Lieberman has engaged in race baiting (with the Lamont flyer) as a cynical attempt to game this demographic, and he has engaged in other activities which cast doubtful shadows upon this allegiance.

Thus, in my opinion, Lieberman is pretending to be something that he is not for personal gain, exactly like the vile caucasian minstrel show performers of Vaudeville.

And so my artist’s impression stands.

If we as a people run from controversial imagery, we will never stop running. Better to unearth and deal with the unpleasant than to live in fear.

Yes, go ahead: Embrace the blackface.

The Lamont campaign has condemned the Photoshop. Guess they’re still fine with Hamsher’s “bitch is dead meat” threat, though.

The Sixers Blog at NRO reports that Jesse Jackson has no problem with Dems using blackface political propaganda.

Worth noting: While the Lamont campaign stresses Hamsher is not on the payroll, she and Lamont have been stuck on each other like white on rice…or Sheehan on Jackson. An article published in the Hartford Courant today describes Lamont’s trip to do the Colbert Report. He brought a small coterie of confidantes:

Lamont arrived with an entourage: His wife, Annie; their campaign driver, Marc Bradley; a blogger, Jane Hamsher; and Bill Hillsman, the creator of his offbeat ads, one of which was played weeks earlier on `The Colbert Report.’

Hamsher has worked intimately with Lamont throughout the summer. From her blog on July 29:

“We also shot Ned’s first video blog this morning on the set of his new Hillsman commercial.”

Here it is. And here’s Hamsher directing Lamont via Flickr:

Meanwhile, Lieberman responds:

“It’s extremely offensive,” Lieberman said. “I have been the target of the ‘blogs’ on a lot of really offensive stuff, stuff I consider lies and smears, but this picture of me with Bill Clinton and me having my face blackened is offensive to people of all races and colors and just doesn’t belong.”

I’ll give an unhappy blogger at the liberal TPMCafe site the last word for now:

Jane? We have enough problems getting Lamont elected, could you please shut up? You’ve done enough. Really you have.

***
Previous:

Ned Lamont’s favorite nutball
Netroots vs. Rightroots: left-wingers love blackface

Ned Lamont with his favorite race-baiters, Rep. Maxine Waters and nutroots all-star Jane Hamsher

Following up on my blog post this morning pointing out the disgusting blackface Photoshop published by Democratic Senate candidate Ned Lamont’s number one promoter in the blogosphere, Jane Hamsher at the Huffington Post, I’m posting a video of the two cozying up to each other at a recent campaign appearance:

For those of you who aren’t familiar with Hamsher, she’s a bottom-feeding blogger who has been the prime mover and shaker for Lamont in the blogosphere. A wealthy Hollyweirdo, she moved to Connecticut to “cover” the campaign and has raised tens of thousands of dollars for the Lamont campaign. Here she is, elite Hollyweird liberal who loves putting people in blackface, pretending to speak on behalf of black voters.

I’ve written before on her vile ad hominem attacks against conservative National Review writer/author, Kate O’Beirne, whom Hamsher attacked as “sandpaper snatch.” She threatened O’Beirne on her blog: “The bitch is dead meat.”

And Ned Lamont embraces this?

***

Not a surprise that Lamont swims with the bottom-feeders, of course. He’s “Screw Them” Kos’s guy, after all.

***

Update: The blackface Photohop on Hamsher’s blog post at HuffPo is gone. But her credit for the graphic is still at the bottom…

A commenter notes:

What the hell is the deal with the white guy in blackface? I do believe this woman has lost her mind. Not that any liberals will call her on it – that is saved for conservatives who make minor mistakes.

The mind boggles at the hypocrisy of the left.

By: TWM on August 02, 2006 at 12:56pm

Allah:

[W]hat message, do you suppose, was she trying to convey with this bit of ’shoppery? Gilliard’s photoshop of Michael Steele was a comment on how conservatives supposedly see blacks, with the blackface a grotesque symbol of Steele’s perceived willingness to play to racial stereotypes. Hamsher’s image presumably is a comment on Lieberman being a closet Republican who’s posing as a Democrat, her symbol for which is … minstrel make-up?

If you think it’s bad now, imagine how it’ll be if Condi changes her mind and runs for president. They’ll be running cartoons of her with a bone in her nose in the New York Times.

Here’s the screencap before the blackface was removed, via reader Alan:

With so much breaking news in the Middle East, I’ve been neglecting politics on the homefront. So, here are a few links and asides on a few noteworthy campaign developments on both sides of the aisle:

The netroots/nutroots are putting their proverbial eggs in the Ned Lamont basket. They are pulling out all the stops with ad hominen attacks on Sen. Joe Lieberman. Don Lambro looks at the uncivil war faced by pro-Iraq war Democrats. Ian Schwartz has the Lamont-Colbert video. Look at the Photoshop that unhinged Jane Hamsher has posted of Sen. Lieberman at the Huffington Post:

I am so sure the Congressional Black Caucus and the NAACP and the civil rights brigade will be protesting this disgusting use of blackface in political discourse. Oh, wait, never mind. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are campaigning against Lieberman, too.

***

Update - Here’s a reminder of the last time a liberal blogger published a Photoshop with blackface:

***

Meanwhile, “ImpeachPAC” is playing the Nazi card against Lieberman–essentially blaming his support for the war for an infiltration of skinheads into the US military.

Lamont is a millionaire with money to burn. This piece reports he “has now given $3 million of his own money to his campaign and has increased his TV advertising for the final two weeks.” Like so many wealthy Dem elites, he’s spending much of that money trying to convince voters he’s a…”populist.” He’s also whining about criticism of his membership in an exclusive private club. He calls the scrutiny “dirty politics.”

In the Right corner of the blogosphere, there’s a Rightroots effort underway to counter the insanity. John Hawkins has all the details and a slate of candidates is here. Ed Morrissey reports on fund-raising efforts so far and a challenge from Rep. Jack Kingston. Lorie Byrd at Wizbang has more.

I can guarantee you there will be no blackface Photoshopping on our side.

***

Sweetheart of the blogosphere Mary Katharine Ham of Townhall.com is onboard with Rightroots and Chris Muir is commemorating.

We have Mary Katharine. They have Jane Hamsher. Need I say more?