She was a contract editor at the Times & was apparently fired after that tweet got criticism. Now folks on the left are claiming Glenn Greenwald & a “right wing mob” got her fired & that’s cancel culture, esp they say since other Times people didn’t get fired for misconduct./1
If it’s “cancel culture,” then it’s cancel culture by the left - the Times fired her, not the Right. And, since when does the Times listen to the Right? The criticism of the tweet was justified. It clearly showed bias & a lack of judgement for expressing it. /2
The Times was going to be saddled w:the accusation of bias for everything she did for them going forward. Newspapers can’t have that. It’s antithetical to what they’re supposed to be. It’s a different issue from personal misconduct by employees. That’s not a proper comparison. /3
With misconduct, the employee can apologize, promise to do better, be put on probation & given a chance to prove they’ve changed their ways. Bias doesn’t lend itself to that paradigm. Media people should not be surprised to find themselves being fired for bias. /4
That’s not cancel culture. Finally, Greenwald criticized her tweet - as did I - but I did not see anyone, including him, calling for her to be fired. /5
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So the controversy over the “gendered” language in the new House Rules is as follows.
1. The House Rules contain an anti-nepotism (you can’t hire your own relatives) provision.
2. To make that make sense, there’s a definition of who is included in the meaning of a relative.
/1
3. That definition is found in Rule XXIII, clause 8(c)(3). This👇🏻is what the definition said in the Rules for the last Congress (the 116th). It uses words like mother, father, wife, husband, daughter, son, etc. Words that convey gender. /2
One of the values we need to return to is self-reliance.
You can build self-reliance by first doing it in small ways. Once you start doing it, you realize other ways you can do it & you feel more comfortable & confident in it & you can build more of it into your life. /1
Being self-reliant makes you freer. It gives you options & flexibility when things outside your control go wrong. You’re also less dependent on others & their potential failure, betrayals, mistakes, etc. I’m not recommending isolationism, of course. Just more self-reliance. /2
It becomes a mindset & if you make sure you don’t go overboard either, it’s healthy. Some examples to start with:
1. Spend less; save more & give more to charity. 2. Eat & drink less; walk or play or exercise more. 3. Watch less tv; read more. 4. Be online less; sleep more.
So if the Congress is really going to impeach DJT again, here’s the thing on an “incitement” charge. As I’ve been saying, there is no basis for “incitement” as a matter of criminal law, based on his speech or his conduct overall. It’s not a legitimately indictable case. /1
Like many,(& probably most actually), lawyers, I do not believe impeachment requires that the conduct satisfy the criminal law to be impeachable. That is, just because it’s not a crime doesn’t mean it’s not impeachable. The criminal law is certainly a guide to use, however. /2
So for an impeachment on “incitement,” I suppose you look at the situation a bit more broadly than the criminal law does & say DJT created the environment that led to the storming. I personally think there are too many contributing factors to hold him responsible that way. /3
First, we have to continue to believe in the Union & our republican form of govt. Belief is vitally important.
“One person with a belief is a social power equal to ninety-nine who have only interests.”
John Stuart Mill
BELIEVE in the Constitution & republican govt.
/1
To get perspective on yesterday’s events, I suggest today’s podcasts from @dbongino & @CamEdwards. Both are sober but not defeatist assessments & like me condemn all political violence. Dan is longer; Cam shorter. If you can’t listen today, just fit them in this week. Links👇🏻/2
I know people are angry & upset. I am also. We face an existential crisis in our governance, our institutions & our values. And, it is made worse because our opponents are in denial about this or they know it & are for it. We must face this moment with courage & conviction./1
One thing we must do to conquer this challenge is renew our own commitments to our republican form of government, to our institutions & to our American values. Do not lose hope; do not lose faith in what we believe in; do not lose courage in the face of these adversities. /2
But we also need to be doing some things differently & be doing some new things. Each generation of Americans has had to adapt our great experiment to its times. We can as well. Our values & our institutions are true & good. They will endure if we defend them. /3
@Heretictus@AncientRedwood@Digitalis_Man You sue, you demand investigations, you vote them out, you demand the legislature investigate & write new laws, you run for office, you publicize the issues with press conferences, meetings, & papers, you call & email & write your representatives, you have rallies, . . .
@Heretictus@AncientRedwood@Digitalis_Man . . . you build coalitions, you create programs to teach people about the issue, you keep pushing your point. Do you think it was any less existential that women couldn’t vote, for example? /2
@Heretictus@AncientRedwood@Digitalis_Man Resorting to using the military to resolve legal issues & particularly those involving elections is to abandon the constitution altogether. There is no basis for doing that now. /3