I can well imagine that Edwards campaign had hoped that the controversy had blown over, that other employment could be arranged with one of their donors, and that a quiet exit could be arranged at a suitable time. Such things have been done before. O'Reilly's mention of the exact words used rendered such a plan obsolete.
Marcotte's problem was and is finding another job. Anyone thinking about hiring her today has to consider the effects her employment, however obscure a position she is given, will have on their business (if a private enterprise) or their contributions (if a non-profit organization).
Almost everyone who blogs or comments on the internet has said intemperate things that they would rather forget. Fortunately for most of them, few will ever read those comments or care about them. Marcotte's problem in this regard is two-fold:
She attained a position of influence and importance in a national campaign and became an object of widespread interest.
She has an extensive record of deliberately vitriolic writing that the vast majority of Americans would consider both vulgar and obscene.
Marcotte chose her own path. IMO, she has every right to say whatever she wants. To pretend that she is not personally responsible for her predicament is the height of sophistry. She is.
To be sure, others, many with base motives, drew attention to her writing. But, as anyone who has read Marcotte's actual writings can attest, they did not have to invent anything, or stretch the truth to call her character into question. Amanda Marcotte did that all by herself.
"Live by the sword. Die by the sword."
(This post first appeared as a comment on Althouse )