commenter-thread

This reminds me of a discussion I overheard on the importance of height in an NFL quarterback. One party cited great short QBs like Fran Tarkenton, Russell Wilson, and Drew Brees to make the point that height wasn't all that important. The other said: "Yeah, there are great short quarterbacks. And you can name almost all of them off the top of your head."

If you promise not to push for the firing of James Damore based upon his views, conservatives can agree to not ask you to be fired or disciplined for your views.

Who on your side can deliver that? Who on your side -- who counts -- even wants that?

The rest of us have all heard a lot of things elsewhere that have nothing to do with the subject at hand. If you want to have that conversation, have it with someone, somewhere who is interested in having it. You've brought it up twice here when nobody HERE said anything that would have made it relevant.
Or funny.

You keep bringing that up when nobody makes that claim. Does it disappoint you that no one is taking the bait? Or is it enough that you can talk to yourself in public?

There were Communists. Nixon caught one. McCarthy didn't.

McCarthy neither knew nor, probably, cared who was or wasn't a Communist. Unlike Richard Nixon, he never caught one.

Now that's an argument.

You heard them in your own sources. And if prominent black pastors who were not at all shy about calling out racist acts thought otherwise, one might have heard from them.

People don't usually tell lies that hurt their own interests.

Telling the world that you're exceptionally bad at the job you're resigning from damages your reputation and severely limits your prospects for further employment.

He could have said any number of other things that would have hurt his reputation and prospects for further employment far less, such as "I stand on the decision to publish the piece on principle" or "A newspaper has a right to decide what it wants on its op-ed page and who should be in charge of those decisions on a day-to-day basis. My newspaper has made its decision and that's an internal matter about which I have no comment." Or he could have said nothing.

He chose, instead, to say something that made him look foolish and incompetent.

It's conceivable that he would say such a thing simply because it's true. It's implausible that he would tell the very lie that would do him the most damage, especially if better lies were available, as they clearly were.

You know enough to know that it's different. The Johnson Amendment doesn't limit its effect to churches that endorse Republicans.

You might want to read your own sources.

That certainly clears things up.

You should read your own stuff. You said he "chose 1," Pretend to not have read it. That's the alternative you chose. You stated as a fact that he "pretended" not to read the piece. He said he didn't read the piece. That's a firing offense. You say he lied when he said he didn't read the piece. You know that how?

And you know that how, again?

What, exactly, has happened to Col. Schoeller? An online petition demanding her firing has been circulated. Has she been fired? Has she been disciplined? Will she? Will she, perhaps, have to sit down with someone who will explain basic facts of social life to her, like, if you say something stupid -- or stupidly, if your meaning gets lost -- people will get upset and you ought to think about that? Your mother probably told you the same thing. Mine did, but it didn't take, so I developed a thick skin.
If something tangible comes of this, then that's a different matter. Let's wait and see.

"Cancer," an interesting choice of words.

A Times op-ed page editor getting a Senator to write a piece for the Times op-ed page is about as much of an accomplishment as Halle Berry persuading me to have sex with her.* If Bennett actually thought snagging Tom Cotton was a feather in his cap that might lead to promotion, he was too stupid to hold the job he had.

* My wife and I have a One Celebrity hall pass. Whether this is just a joke or real will be determined when either of us gets a realistic shot at a celebrity.

No, they weren't fun times. Far from it. But we aren't repeating them. What's going on today pales in comparison. If someone whines at you on line, ignore it or hit back. If you don't want to be caught out doing something that could, predictably, embarrass your employer enough to make it want to fire you, either don't do it or do it with your eyes open and take the predictable consequences. If someone doesn't want to give you a platform for what you want to say, welcome to the world, where most people don't want to hear what most people have to say. Why should you be any different? If you want to say provocative things, then do it and don't whine when the people you provoked don't like it. Free speech means you can say what you want. It also means that other people can point and laugh. Or call you names. Or not want to associate with you.
If it gets worse than that, I can lend you my legal services. If it gets even worse than that, I have a shotgun in the attic. But I get tired of free speech advocates who made their bones trying to get professors they disagreed with fired, and incompetent editors who give them jobs and don't do their own, whining when they say or do disagreeable things and drop to the fainting couch when someone disagrees.

I’m old enough to remember when there really was a cancel culture, and who was behind it, when academics had to take loyalty oaths in order to teach math or biology, let alone history or philosophy, when studios blacklisted actors who had been bankable movie stars* or writers who had created great movie scripts because they signed some petitions or went to some cocktail parties associated with left-wing organizations, when adolescents who ground out the mildest satire on a mimeograph machine would be expelled. In those days, it took actual guts — I was going to use another body part, but I’ve learned a few things over the years — to say things actually unpopular among people who could make your life genuinely miserable. Now people who say things actually popular among the powers that be get yelled at now and then and sometimes face consequences when they embarrass their bosses. They should grow a pair. Oops, I guess what I learned doesn’t always stick.

* It should go without saying, so I'll say it anyway, that a studio is under no obligation to hire an actor whose views make him box office poison. If people don't want to come to the ballpark, you can't stop them.