Patterico's Pontifications

I actually liked the fact that the Obama girls seemed to be bored and bothered by having to attend the silly turkey pardoning ceremony. It suggests to me that like 99% of other American teenagers they think their dad is hokey and corny. And it suggests that to them Barack Obama is simply dad, not some miracle worker whose sheer magnificence is to be admired by one and all.

But your point about how Ms. Lauten’s Facebook post seems infinitely more interesting to the MSM than Jonathan Gruber’s forays into truth is well taken.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 7:58 am

This may be unpleasant to watch, but a fascist government would be naked and vulnerable without a compliant media willing to brutalize enemies of the state.

It’s what’s best for the fatherland.

You have to have faith.

happyfeet (a037ad) — 12/3/2014 @ 7:59 am

if the kids are going to be used for the photo ops than they are fair game for how they appear in said photo op. I did think the older daughter was dressed in the wrong manner but i think Lauten used the wrong verbiage.
Agree or disagree the media reaction to the story just follows the regular pattern of any criticism of the present First Family is RACIST and therefore needs to be given all resources possible to fan the flames.

seeRpea (2a32aa) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:08 am

We will know the story has totally gone overboard when the LA Pulitzer winning newspaper devoetes space to the Lautern non-story and ignores http://www.computerworld.com/article/2854616/fbi-visits-la-unified-school-district-ipad-mega-purchase-looks-suspicious.html#tk.rss_all

seeRpea (2a32aa) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:15 am

They got their disdain for the turkey pardoning ceremony from their father, who considered this a few years ago, one of the more ridiculous things he had to do as president. He didn’t use the word ridiculous.

I can’t find the quotation I am thinking about, but there’s this:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-turkey-pardon-it-feels-pretty-good-to-stop-at-least-one-shellacking-this-november/

Flanked by daughters Malia and Sasha in the Rose Garden, Mr. Obama jokingly called the turkey pardon “one of the most important duties that I carry out as president.” He discussed the process for selecting the turkeys earning a presidential pardon, which involves contestants “strutting their stuff” before judges as music plays.

“It’s kind of like a turkey version of ‘Dancing With the Stars,’ except the stakes for the contestants was much higher,” said the president.”Only one pair would survive and win the big prize: life.”

Mr. Obama maintained a lighthearted tone throughout the proceedings, at one point laughing at the notion that the turkeys had been staying at the W Hotel in Washington.

Here is video of that scene:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78ofgmnAj1Q

2011 WhiteHouse.gov history:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/11/23/definitive-history-presidential-turkey-pardon

According to one story, Lincoln’s son Tad begged his father to write out a presidential pardon for the bird meant for the family’s Christmas table, arguing it had as much a right to live as anyone. Lincoln acquiesced and the turkey lived.

In 1963, President Kennedy decided to send that year’s gift from the National Turkey Federation back to the farm where it came from. “We’ll just let this one grow,” he said. Sometime around the Nixon administration, the President began sending the turkey to a petting farm near Washington after holding the traditional receiving ceremony and photo op, although no formal pardon was given.

President George H.W. Bush was the first to actually offer a turkey pardon. On November 14, 1989, he announced that year’s bird had “been granted a presidential pardon as of right now.” He sent the turkey on his way to the perhaps unfortunately named Frying Pan Park in Herndon, Virginia, and with that, a tradition was born.

Since taking office, President Obama has pardoned two turkeys, although in 2009, he admitted Courage, that year’s top turkey, came dangerously close to gracing the White House table. “Thanks to the intervention of Malia and Sasha – because I was ready to eat this sucker – Courage will also be spared this terrible and delicious fate.”

“I’m told Presidents Eisenhower and Johnson actually ate their turkeys,” Obama said. “You can’t fault them for that; that’s a good-looking bird.”

Truman did not pardon a turkey, according to this – he sent the 1948 turkey to Missouri. The official receiving of the turkey started in 1947, but, according to this, no turle was spared until 1963, when President Kennedy sent it back to the farm where it came from. Nixon routinely spared them but never gave them a “pardon.”

Sammy Finkelman (c41e9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:20 am

I don’t care about the Obama girls or Lauten, but I do care about Obama. He uses his family for political and PR purposes when he thinks it will help him. The facts suggest this turkey pardoning is an example of Obama using his girls to help his popularity, since their behavior show they were bored and strongly suggests they didn’t want to be there. In addition, his girls have attended prior turkey pardoning events so they weren’t there for the learning experience. If he’s going to use them for political purposes, why should they be treated any better than the Palin children?

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:20 am

The media are pursuing that which is important, an attack on the monarch, and ignoring that which is unimportant, the perfidy of the monarch’s toadies.

ErisGuy (76f8a7) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:22 am

Greetings:

Well, as we should all be aware of by now, the Process, in this case abuse of journalism, is the Punishment to “encourage the others”, you know.

11B40 (844d04) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:29 am

What’s pathetically remarkable is the Twitter storm over Malia’s figure by Obama supporters. At least Lauten seemed to care about Obama’s daughters’ modesty and behavior. Some Obama supporters on Twitter are clearly sexualizing Malia, and the media should care a lot more about that.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:29 am

Despite their fancy degrees and lengthy CV’s the Obamacrat political/media elites have dragged US in to their teenage world where popularity and gossip reign supreme over reality. It won’t change as long as the targets of their adolescent bullying continue to accept it.

crazy (cde091) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:30 am

“There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.” — Oscar Wilde

Take it in the spirit you gave it, Ms. Lauten. Enjoy your notoriety as much as you enjoyed spitting out your venom.

Ok, there are three sieves and you only have to pass “it” through one:
1. Is it kind?
2. Is it true?
3. Is it useful?

I agree with Patterico that it was not true. The girls dressed and behaved just fine for girls their age. If you guys find what Lauten said kind or useful, who am I to disagree? As for the media storm, yes definitely, they are a bunch of clowns that Thomas Paine would not throw his used teabag at.

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:40 am

as others have said, if you don’t want your children in the public sphere, don’t put them there.

if you DO decide to use them as props, at least ensure they are dressed & act appropriately.

had Obola and the Wookie gone out of their way to shield their kids from the public, i could see why folks would be upset at the comments, accurate or not.

since their putative parents have used them as convenient props for years, they are fair game, IMHO.

redc1c4 (a6e73d) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:40 am

“If he’s going to use them for political purposes, why should they be treated any better than the Palin children?”

– DRJ

To clarify, are you saying that you believe that Palin used her children for political purposes?

Leviticus (f9a067) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:46 am

Is the market sector of “media” or the behavior of producers of media more or less heavily regulated than other market sectors? Put differently, are we closer to the ideal of a “free market” in media than we are to the ideal of a “free market” in, say, the production of food or cars or power tools?

Leviticus (f9a067) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:49 am

Clearly the double standard of PC and ‘Coloring the News’ (2001) by William McGowan http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/coloring-the-news-william-mcgowan/1101449464?ean=9781893554603 –
is alive and well. Contrast the LSM’s focus on Ms. Lauten versus their ignoring Mr. Williams
http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/03/the-hill-staffer-scandal-the-media-doesnt-care-about/ and at the same time the – so called ‘War on Women’.

What struck me about the video is just how bloated, bungling, behemoth, and bathetic the fed bureaucracy/government has become (from FDR thru the present, especially the present) so that Pomp & Ceremony has been reduced to Pomp & Baloney. It was painful to watch the video, especially Barack Obama, going from Hope & Change to this.

Although the daughters (and kids) mostly should be off limits, realize that it was their parents, Barack Obama and Michelle Obama – who put them in that awkward position.

Gary L. Zerman (cab749) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:52 am

About 10 years ago, Margaret Carlson wrote a petty and inane column (for the back page of Time, IIRC) attacking Jenna Bush for not changing clothes on an aeroplane and appearing on a tarmac in a T-shirt and jeans (when traveling with her mother; there was no sort of reviewing line or ceremony on their arrival, IIRC). That’s 1,100 words worth of Margaret Carlson being catty and attacking a private citizen who happened to be a 1st degree relation of the President. She was not forced to resign, because there are standards and then there are standards.

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:53 am

Worse than a joke. They’re on their knees or kneepads for liberals and the liberal agenda (that Chapstick bill there could fund a new aircraft carrier) and are attack dogs against anything else.

Skeptical Voter (12e67d) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:56 am

I cannot think of any better proof of ideological hiring/promotion/pay bias in the media biz than this.

To paraphrase Justice Stevens: “Propaganda is not Press.”

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:18 am

Look, the “Turkey Pardon” is a silly bit of theater entirely directed at children. That Obama’s girls were there isn’t “exploiting them for political purposes;” it is a signal that this is not important. There are appropriate and expected times when a politician’s family should be in stage, and this silly event is one of them.

That being said, I suspect that the media, stung by the criticism that they ignored the Gruber story, have learned their lessons and that explains their laser-like focus upon Lauten. They are trying to redeam themselves.

Pious Agnostic (7eb3b0) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:21 am

That morning, the Washington Post also assigned one of its foreign affairs correspondents

So, some bloggers ought to find that editor, and then go ask his parents if they are proud of what their son is doing to the staffer and her parents.

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:25 am

Excuse me Substitute Kim Jong Un for the Obama girls. My apathy abounds.

PCD (39058b) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:26 am

This was an unforced error on Lauten’s part. Every single day of our lives most of us hold ourselves back from verbally expressing thoughts and opinions in public on things and other people because we just know better. Probably well more than half the people (of any age or political bent) who saw that picture immediately recognized the embarrassed boredom and noticed the typical teen-like clothing on the Obama girls. We might have chuckled or rolled our eyes and pointed it out to a family member, but few would have thought to publicly say something like this, because we would not want one of ours scolded like this by strangers. Lauten did not need to bring this to our attention. There was no reason whatsoever for it beyond raw partisanship.

Yes, there’s obvious hypocrisy and partisanship in the breathless wall to wall reporting of this non-story. And Republicans who say or do stupid things always get called out way beyond proportion by the MFM. Don’t we all know this by now? But one way to avoid or at least neutralize the imbalance is for the Lautens and Mourdocks and Akins of the world to quit saying stupid, inappropriate stuff for the leftist narrative-drivin media to exploit.

Now that it has gone viral and she’s resigned and aplogized, of course it’s completely appropriate to contrast this episode involving privacy for political family children to how the media treats the Palin kids or treated the Bush twins as teens.

elissa (89dd8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:29 am

To clarify, are you saying that you believe that Palin used her children for political purposes?

All politicians do, don’t they Leviticus? Especially those children who are young enough to still be living at home and are photogenic. Remember when the Monica Lewinsky story broke and the Clinton family went on some Camp David holiday, so there was a carefully-staged photo of daughter Chelsea walking in between her parents and holding one of each of their hands as they made their way to Marine One? There’s no way that wasn’t supposed to be symbolic. Yet there are still those who claim with a straight face that the Clintons were really great about keeping Chelsea out of the political fray.

I agree with DRJ with respect to politicians trying to have it both ways. I remember that early in President Obama’s first term is was verboten to ask why the Obamas were sending Malia and Sasha to an expensive and tony private school at the very same time that they were ending opportunity scholarships for less fortunate DC schoolchildren. Yet when President Obama casually mentioned that a daughter had received a poor grade or Mrs. Obama mentioned that one of them had put on weight from eating too much junk food — and when those anecdotes served some larger political point that the administration was pushing — then suddenly the privacy of the girls was no longer to be respected.

I think that Ms. Lauten made a huge mistake in commenting upon the Obama daughters’ dress and comportment and I don’t particularly feel sorry for her for being fired, but I would never automatically rule out-of-bounds any references to them as long as the Obamas continue to use them for political cover.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:30 am

The President uses his children as political props. The Obama children were, once again, being hauled out as props for the President’s Thanksgiving day address. Political props are always fair game. The ethical breach here is the use of the Obama children for political purposes, a breach that clearly seemed to have annoyed the Obama girls and should annoy Patterico readers, as well.

Whether or not the dress/behavior of the Obama girls was appropriate is an entirely subjective question. That there is a difference of opinion about appropriate teen attire between an Angelino and a rural Tennessean is hardly a surprise. Ms. Lauten holds the President’s daughters to an admirably high standard, which speaks to the cultural health of rural Tennessee. If only more children were held to such a standard.

ThOR (5d4ee2) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:32 am

I have to admit, ThOR, that I also like how the girls in rural Tennessee dress. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_Duke#mediaviewer/File:Daisy_Dukes.jpg

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:38 am

Great comments, elissa and JVW.

Leviticus (f9a067) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:45 am

i wouldn’t single Elizabeth out for any particular criticism really

i think her comments are one opinion and a completely respectable one

you just have to realize that if you want to participate in the sordid politics of our pitiful little country you have to follow a very very rigid speech code

I think she gets that now

happyfeet (a037ad) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:56 am

elissa, I disagree.

Lauten was not a public figure and should not be hounded by the press for her personal thoughts. That her parents were harassed is beyond the pale. That they are doing so, while ignoring much graver admissions by actual public figures (like Gruber) is not “hypocrisy”, it is outright political action by alleged non-combatants.

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:57 am

BTW, I think that Lauten and her Congressman boss should have just said FU.

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:59 am

I agree with that, the part about how they shoulda just said FU

happyfeet (a037ad) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:02 am

Leviticus,

Sometimes Palin did use her family as props, just as Obama and virtually all politicians do. It’s the celebrity part of modern politics, and it’s part of the bargain politicians and celebrities make in their quest for power and fame.

On the other hand, I don’t think it’s part of the bargain for people like Lauten, who are on the political periphery, unless they’re conservative. Then all bets are off because conservatives are too cowed to stand up for her. So if you want to throw stones, as you so often want to do these days, throw them at people like me who are so accustomed to liberal hypocrisy that We don’t even flinch when liberals mercilessly skewer young women like Lauten.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:12 am

I will say right here, Sasha and Malia’s momma dresses them funny.

I mean really. The three of the, Michelle, Sasha, and Malia, they don’t know how to dress.

Michelle, especially. She clearly is given top of the line designer clothes that just do not suit her appearance and she doesn’t know how to say no and pick the ones that suit her. And at the turkey pardoning, we can see her doing the same to her kids. A tragedy.

When she does wear something that suits her and actually smiles, she can be quite stunning.

luagha (e5bf64) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:19 am

nk,

The Obama girls don’t need me or anyone to tell them how to dress or act but I think it can be kind, true and useful to point out that kids in every generation need to consider more than how their peers dress when they attend grown-up events. That’s especially true in venues like this.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:19 am

Lauten was not a public figure and should not be hounded by the press for her personal thoughts. That her parents were harassed is beyond the pale.

Disagree with the first part, agree with the second part. Lauten was a Congressional staffer who is thus paid by the taxpayer. Chalk this up to my being tired of government employees acting obnoxious and suffering no consequences. Maybe if the Obama girls were not minors I would feel differently, but I think Lauten’s comments were crass and if I were her boss I would no longer want her to be associated with me. But the pile-on from Big Media is also gratuitous and out of proportion, and almost certainly wouldn’t be happening were Lauten not white and a conservative.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:20 am

A Congressional staffer is not a public figure? How about public official then?

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:22 am

“So if you want to throw stones, as you so often want to do these days, throw them at people like me who are so accustomed to liberal hypocrisy that We don’t even flinch when liberals mercilessly skewer young women like Lauten.”

– DRJ

I don’t think I have been throwing stones these days (except at Mark on occasion). That said, I would be happy to discuss the comments where you think I’m throwing stones – maybe I’m wrong. Either way, I definitely don’t want to throw stones at you. I continue to have the utmost respect and fondness for you, and to see you as a mentor, and it makes me sad that you seem so irritated with me these days and that I seem so oblivious to the source of that irritation.

Leviticus (f9a067) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:24 am

I have the daughter’s PINK (the Victoria Secrets PINK) Christmas wish list in my pocket, DRJ. It will hurt my wallet more than my sense of my propriety. 😉

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:27 am

I didn’t know about the behavior in question, or Lauten’s response, until I saw the Eleventy!!! ad in the Daily Mail, and later the Today show dialed to 13!!!

narciso (ee1f88) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:43 am

It is regretable that the Republican’s allow themselves to be intimidated in this fashion. This really has nothing to do with the Obama girls and Lauten’s remarks. If it wasn’t Lauten’s stupid tweet, it would be something else. There are, after all, thousands of Republican staffers in D. C., and they say tens of thousands of stupid things every day. For those who support Obola and have the power to make waves, it is just a matter of selecting the event that is easiest to amplify. The fact that they have done this is an indication that they have a sense that they really need to change the topic.

The Republicans would be wise to have five or ten issues that are of importance to the country that they can agree on, and in response to every question about the cause of the day, in this case Lauten’s remarks, they should simply respond that governing is a serious business, and they are much more concerned about one of the prioritized issues. If the press won’t accept that answer, then deflect the question by asking why the press is complacent about Democrats lying to them, for example claiming not to know Gruber.

The key is to let the press know that you don’t take them seriously, and at the same time don’t give them more ammunition. Stay on topic. The coverage is one-sided, so point that out every time they attempt to divert the conversation onto their chosen issue.

bobathome (348c8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 11:22 am

Joke, or Farce?

askeptic (efcf22) — 12/3/2014 @ 11:55 am

6. …He uses his family for political and PR purposes when he thinks it will help him. The facts suggest this turkey pardoning is an example of Obama using his girls to help his popularity…

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:20 am

True. He’ll often mention his daughters for that purpose. And/or to shield himself from criticism. It’s very telling what it says about him. And about his brainwashed minions.

For instance on one of his many TV appearances as Preezy he talked about how he’s so bad at math he can’t help Sasha and Malia with their homework. I recall criticizing the Preezy at a later point, observing that it’s obvious he’s lousy at math when you look at his economic policies and what he’d thought they’d do as opposed to what they did. I think I also said that if we’re going to have a teenaged girl as President it should be Malia since she was the one with the math skills in the family.

My Gawd! From the reaction I got you’d have thought I was David Letterman and just did a Willow Palin/Derek Jeter statutory rape joke. Well, no you wouldn’t. Letterman didn’t get nearly the reaction I got from Obama’s obamatons. Apparently you can’t criticize Da Won’s math skills if he drags his daughters into the situation when he talks about how poor they are. They’re a shield. If you attack his skills at that point, then by the same bizarre logic that leads to voting for Barack Obama in the first place you’re attacking his daughters (if anything I was complimenting Malia’s math skills, and in any case I wasn’t the one who brought them up).

I also recall during his budget impasse with the House Republicans Tiger Beat received some mildly critical commentary for not meeting with any of the congresscritters. Something about his unwillingness to do the after hours schmoozing that all Presidents must do in order to get Congress to go along with their agendas I think his much ballyhooed dinner with Senate RINOs during the Rand Paul filibuster was a delayed response to that very mild criticism. But what was his immediate response? What it always is; hide behind someone’s skirts. In that case it was Malia and Sasha. He said he didn’t work after hours because he wanted to spend time with his daughters because they were growing up so fast that if he didn’t do it then he’d miss out entirely. So that meant apparently he couldn’t spare an evening ever to meet with Congressional leaders.

Naturally to his brainwashed minions this meant he was father of the year or something. To sane people it meant if he really wanted to spend more time with his family he should resign like everyone else. He had just announced he wouldn’t be available for work until after his second term was over. A lot of congresscritters have young children at home. I specifically brought up Paul Ryan. But they don’t hide behind their kids. They don’t use their kids as an excuse as to why they’re not willing to find the time to do their jobs.

It isn’t that Barack Obama uses his family as props. All politicians do to some extent. There are certain times when the family has to share the spotlight. For instance when they get a nomination or win an election it’s practically de rigueur that they all share the stage for the big victory wave. It’s just bizarre when Obama chooses to use his family as props. I don’t recall Presidents using their kids to downtalk their own math skills. But then has any other President been so hungry for pop-star status that they’ve done late night TV like Fallon or Kimmel or morning shows like The View? I don’t think any President from either party ever has done such shows while in office once (as opposed to when running for office). Also they don’t usually talk down their math skills. It’s difficult to try to insist your economic plan needs to be enacted when you’ve just gone on TV and advertised that grade school math is beyond you. Or it should be, unless cognitive dissonance is the defining feature of your supporters. Then they’ll go along with The Party Approved Current Truth, whatever it happens to be at the moment. It was also deeply weird that he’d drag Sasha and Malia into a political situation and use them as human shields. It was so obvious. He had practically jetted back from a Chicago fundraiser to complain that he couldn’t meet with congressional Republicans because he needed to be a homebody. For The Children! Apparently thinking that would shut everybody up. Just in time to jet off to Manhattan so he could meet with wealthy donors at a $30k a plate dinner hosted by the CEO of Goldman Sachs.

But then Barack Obama treats everyone as if they’re just props.

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=buzz%20aldrin%20barack%20obama%20air%20force%20one&qs=n&form=QBIR&pq=buzz%20aldrin%20barack%20obama%20air%20force%20one&sc=0-0&sp=-1&sk=#view=detail&id=47762BBC948D339AC6753C31333F33BDAF95D565&selectedIndex=2

Check out how Buzz Aldrin is glaring at Obama. The Apollo 11 astronaut thought he had been invited to fly down from the WH to Cape Canaveral to discuss space flight-related issues. No. He didn’t see the preezy for the entire flight. He had been invited for just one purpose. To be used for that photo op.

Styrofoam Greek columns all.

33. nk,

The Obama girls don’t need me or anyone to tell them how to dress or act but I think it can be kind, true and useful to point out that kids in every generation need to consider more than how their peers dress when they attend grown-up events. That’s especially true in venues like this.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:19 am

But at what age? One of Luaten’s current LHMFM critics who is ripping into her for daring to criticize how the teenaged Obama girls dressed once did the exact same thing to Chief Justice Roberts kids, when they along with his wife accompanied him to his swearing in ceremony. And the children who that media critic thought then were dressed funny? The oldest was five.

The hypocrisy of the LHMFM is jaw dropping sometime.

Steve57 (c4b0b3) — 12/3/2014 @ 11:56 am

this could’ve been avoided if those girls had just worn something more nicer

and stood up straight

and brought a little poise to the table

happyfeet (a037ad) — 12/3/2014 @ 11:58 am

I watched the video and saw nothing particularly inappropriate about the behavior or dress of Obama’s daughters, who look like typical teenagers.

Lauten’s point was that they are not “typical teenagers;” they are on national television as members of the First Family during an official function and should act accordingly.

bridget (5ed8f8) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:04 pm

those roberts kids thought they were going to a country house easter egg hunt in victorian england

but one must be kind

happyfeet (a037ad) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:04 pm

It used to be a standard that when wanting to display respect for an occasion, we “dressed for church”. Today, the standard of attire seen at church gatherings is appalling, sometimes no better than what is seen on-board an airliner.
Needless to say, the girls could have dressed more “for church” and less for a “sock hop”.

askeptic (efcf22) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:10 pm

But are we sure “pardoning” a frigging turkey is rightly considered an “official function”?

elissa (89dd8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:12 pm

I think what everybody is dancing around is that all this happened because it was Lauten’s time of the month and no other reason, but nobody wants to say it for fear of being stoned to death with empty Midol bottles, so they’re making all kinds of intellectual and ethical arguments. (Ducks)

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:14 pm

If it wasn’t an “Official Function” then what was it doing on the WH calendar, and being conducted in the Public Rooms of that White House?

nk, ducking is not enough, you need an ‘entrenching tool’.

askeptic (efcf22) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:17 pm

Here is Mollie Hemingway’s take/takedown.

http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/03/dear-media-this-elizabeth-lauten-nonsense-is-why-everybody-hates-you/

elissa (89dd8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:21 pm

But are we sure “pardoning” a frigging turkey is rightly considered an “official function”?

When I am ~~emperor~~ President I think I am going to dispense with the silly little traditions of pardoning turkeys and greeting championship sports teams and signing proclamations designating April as “Boating Accident Awareness Month” and all that falderal that Presidents do. There is enough real work on the Chief Executive’s plate without these little flights of whimsy.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:23 pm

Is it possible for me to make a joke about the phrase “sock hop” at this juncture without being chastised for the impertinence of youth?

Leviticus (f9a067) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:23 pm

Go right ahead, Leviticus.

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:25 pm

I actually don’t know if it counts as a joke to say “what’s a ‘sock-hop’?” when you’re actually pretty sure it’s a dance of some sort.

Leviticus (f9a067) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:28 pm

You’ll still do the basketball brackets though, won’t you, JVW?

elissa (89dd8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:28 pm

Am I correct that Lauten made the post on her own Facebook page? unless she was doing it under color of her official congressional position, who cares about who she works for and why should she be given any more scrutiny than any other social media commentator in non job related activity?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:29 pm

I’ve never even seen a sock hop. Or a barn dance. But I have seen a housefly.

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:31 pm

Yes, lawyers do attract various insects./s

askeptic (efcf22) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:33 pm

Fascist speech police.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:34 pm

For those who ponder over such things, I used “sock hop” as a metaphor for a “teen function”, just as “dressing for church” was also a metaphor.

askeptic (efcf22) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:36 pm

If I didn’t have to go feed my pet scorpions, I’d give that remark of yours the flaming it deserves, askeptic.

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:37 pm

I also have a pet Bug. He’s a dog, but whatever.

Leviticus (f9a067) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:44 pm

the obama girls have dogs named sunny and bo

but they’re off limits

so shut you stupid rethuglican face

happyfeet (a037ad) — 12/3/2014 @ 12:48 pm

Compare and contrast the coverage of a no-name staffer of a no-name congresscritter, to the coverage of a prominent Dem staffer that was indicted on sexual assault charges in 2012 and pled guilty yesterday. Compare and contrast the coverage of this to the coverage of a huge Obama bundler and one of the founders of HRC who is charged with pedophilia.

The MFM lost their ever-loving minds over mild criticism on a personal Facebook page. It is nice when they so clearly show which side they are on.

At this point, I wonder if the column inches and breathless moral preening outrage exceeds that of their Gruber coverage.

JD (86a5eb) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:15 pm

60- Thank You for your mercy – the Christmas Spirit lives.

askeptic (efcf22) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:16 pm

63- Winner, Winner, pay the line.

askeptic (efcf22) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:17 pm

Compare and contrast the Lauten coverage to the minimal column inches of Biden’s kids drug issues, and discharge from the military. The MFM disgusts me.

JD (86a5eb) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:19 pm

Compare what Lauten said to what Harry Reid said about private citizens on the floor of the Senate under protection of the speech and debate clause. Koch Suckers.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:26 pm

Hey, I was wondering: if we call Michael Brown a “thug” we are told by the arbiters of political correctness that it is considered racist, notwithstanding his penchant for strong-armed robbery. So if we call Tim Scott or Mia Love or any other black conservative a “Rethuglican” is that also a racial slur against black people?

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:35 pm

Compare and contrast the Lauten coverage to the minimal column inches of Biden’s kids drug issues, and discharge from the military. The MFM disgusts me.

Compare what Lauten said to what Harry Reid said about private citizens on the floor of the Senate under protection of the speech and debate clause. Koch Suckers.

Both totally legitimate points. In the case of the MFM they are simply hopeless, and after the pounding their preferred party took last month it is no wonder that they are desperate to find white conservative racism under every rock and stone. Witness their obsession with Ferguson, MO. In Hairy Reed’s case, the antidote to his jackasssery is to be found at the ballot box. If we can’t take him down, then at least we can tar more vulnerable Democrats with Reid’s obnoxiousness.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:38 pm

Again: is it not the case that we closer to the ideal of a “free market” in media than we are to the ideal of a “free market” in, say, the production of food or cars or power tools?

Leviticus (f9a067) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:52 pm

I disagree the MSM is hopeless, JVW. If conservatives bothered to shame them for this behavior, or to simply stand up to them, some would change because the MSM is basically a junior high school clique with a megaphone that hates to be mocked.

Unfortunately, more often than not, conservatives — including some here — have joined in the chorus that says Lauten (or Akin or O’Donnell) have crossed the line. We used to justify this by saying we have principles so that’s why we turn on the Lautens of the world, but does anyone here really think Lauten, Akin or O’Donnell are bad people? Would we want to be abandoned this way because of a moment of classlessness or stupidity? Instead of standing up to liberals and the media, the conservative non-response only serves to empower the clique to continue its behavior.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:59 pm

DRJ, I agree that we are sometimes too harsh on our own. It is one thing to hold our own accountable; it is quite another to demand that they be perfect.

Frankly, I thought that Lauten’s comments were a classy way of saying what many of us were thinking: the girls’ dress and behaviour were inappropriate to the situation. Richard Mourdock said that all babies are special and that God has a plan for everyone. Big frickin deal.

bridget (5ed8f8) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:10 pm

he showed some mercy
one gobbler to another
sticks to what he knows

Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:13 pm

the important thing is to get the healing process started

and you know what that means

yup

therapy dogs all around

starting with the obama girls and elizabeth

and then of course for everyone else that’s been hurt by this

just hug it out on them pups

happyfeet (a037ad) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:16 pm

the media, like all compliant liberals, reacts to and obeys it’s Robot Overlord.

Free to be what he expects them to be.

Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:17 pm

a “no sweat” pardon
he’d rather stuff a plump dog
his palate pleaser

Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:22 pm

Mr. Feets = I think you need to get yourself one of them emotional support pigs. Not to make comfort food and eat, but the kind that gets excited and poops all over airplanes.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:38 pm

i know that one pig was a very great, really invaluable source of support and strength for charlotte when she was dying Mr. daley

i was very moved

happyfeet (a037ad) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:42 pm

Unfortunately, more often than not, conservatives — including some here — have joined in the chorus that says Lauten (or Akin or O’Donnell) have crossed the line. We used to justify this by saying we have principles so that’s why we turn on the Lautens of the world, but does anyone here really think Lauten, Akin or O’Donnell are bad people? Would we want to be abandoned this way because of a moment of classlessness or stupidity? Instead of standing up to liberals and the media, the conservative non-response only serves to empower the clique to continue its behavior.

OK, that’s entirely valid. But in this case a 20-something woman (30-something woman?) is out there criticizing teenage girls for their dress and the way in which they comport themselves, and in this era of our intense focus on bullying I don’t think we want to be defending that. It would be one thing if Ms. Lauten had said, “Gee, President and Mrs. Obama, why do you force Sasha and Malia to attend these photo op events when clearly their dress and demeanor strongly indicate that they are bored silly by them and would rather be doing practically anything else.” If she had come under withering criticism for a post like that I would be the first to defend her, and should anyone raise spurious charges of racism I will be happy to tell them to go get bent, but I think Ms. Lauten erred when she addressed the Obama girls directly in her post. That comes off as an older woman picking on two teenage girls.

But I do understand the larger point that conservatives often hold their own accountable for behavior that leftists just sweep under the rug whenever it happens to one of their own. That is a legitimate point, but if we are going to demand accountability from them we had better be quick to show it from our own side. You’re right that Ms. Lauten probably isn’t a bad person and deserves a second chance, but I don’t think second chances come until you have atoned for your original wrong. One thing that rankles me about the left is how they believe that their supporters should always get an immediate do-over when they screw up. No: first the punishment, then the rehabilitation.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:44 pm

“But in this case a 20-something woman (30-something woman?) is out there criticizing teenage girls for their dress and the way in which they comport themselves, and in this era of our intense focus on bullying I don’t think we want to be defending that.”

JVW – It was on a Facebook page, not a newscast or in a national column for cripesakes, and even if it were, she’s entitled to her opinion.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:52 pm

JVW, it is preposterous to think that we can “demand accountability” from the LHMFM. They do what they do for a reason. And when prominent Republicans bow down to their *bullying* it only encourages them. The best thing to do is ignore them when they go on these rants. The public will figure out that this is just partisan horseplay a lot quicker if the cast of characters supporting today’s cause is always the same group of lefties. We need 52% of the U. S., not 90%. So why play their games when it will always be impossible to win.

bobathome (348c8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 2:58 pm

Leviticus (f9a067) — 12/3/2014 @ 1:52 pm

The costs of entry into any of those segments is very high.
So, No, I don’t believe that the media is any more of a ‘free market’ than the other segments you cite.

askeptic (efcf22) — 12/3/2014 @ 3:19 pm

While our attention has been focused on this silliness, an American healthcare worker is being flown back from West Africa with a possible case of Ebola. No indication whether this is one of our Public Health officers or someone with one of the private relief agencies. The victim is likely not a U. S. soldier as they would presumably be called construction workers and not healthcare workers. Nor is the place of infection indicated. They must be fairly certain the patient has Ebola as they are using the Emory University Hospital to treat him or her, which suggests the patient is being transported in one of the specialized business jets.

The data from Liberia have yet to settle down. They have determined (somehow) that about 300 of the cases they had classified as Ebola were something else, and this led to a major correction in late October. Currently the number of new confirmed cases are running in the mid-teens, while the number of deaths per day are running in the mid-teens up to the mid-twenties. This suggest progress is being made in halting the epidemic, but the data isn’t as steady as one might like.

The revised number of deaths in Liberia in their Oct. 31 report was 2697, and the Nov. 28th number is 3145.

bobathome (348c8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 3:23 pm

The liberal media should be telling blacks to arm themselves so they can shoot back.

gunner (575106) — 12/3/2014 @ 3:26 pm

Leviticus, in a “free market” companies that lose money disappear. It’s hard to see how the leftie cable news outlets can make any money when their viewership for all their shows is a small fraction of the viewership for any one of the big name Fox shows. What you call media are ego-trips by billionaires who really don’t care whether their pet projects make money or not. They just want to inflict their insanity on the rest of us. Ditto most of the newspapers.

bobathome (348c8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 3:29 pm

The amount of coverage on this nothingburger story about a nobody does raise issues about about stories they are consciously avoiding.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 3:32 pm

Disagree with the first part, agree with the second part. Lauten was a Congressional staffer who is thus paid by the taxpayer

So, the private thoughts of the city hall janitor is grist for the public mill? Too far down? How about the receptionist at the congressman’s office? Is she fair game?

This politics of personal destruction is bad enough when it affects the players, but the supporting staff? Where do you stop?

Kevin M (56aae1) — 12/3/2014 @ 3:59 pm

A Congressional staffer is not a public figure? How about public official then?

Public officials are “public.” (The clue is hidden in the previous sentence.) Their staff is not. What next? That the guy who drives the congressman likes gay porn, or Madonna? Has EVERYONE taken leave of their senses?

Kevin M (56aae1) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:06 pm

What’s depressing is that Lauten’s boss is not some Robportmanesque lawyer/nomenklaturist. He’s a farmer who belongs to a family group of Gospel singers, so, not a social climber by any means. He should be as much at home as anyone telling the DNC press office and their servants to stuff it.

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:09 pm

I am willing to bet that many Congressional staffers spent the evening bowdlerizing their FB pages. I am also willing to be that some of them weren’t in time.

I am increasingly glad I don’t post under my full name any more, and my FB page is a bit anonymous and mostly defensive (don’t want someone else with my name being mistaken for me).

Kevin M (56aae1) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:11 pm

JVW:

But in this case a 20-something woman (30-something woman?) is out there criticizing teenage girls for their dress and the way in which they comport themselves, and in this era of our intense focus on bullying I don’t think we want to be defending that.

Ten years ago, society would have complimented someone like Lauten for mentoring younger women about appropriate behavior and dress. Now we call them bullies.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:21 pm

I’m with DRJ. Nowadays, if you commit the slightest infraction, as decided by the mean girls, you must lose everything you have and be hounded out of your livelihood. Ridiculous. However, pendulums can be a b*tch. In instigating this behavior those on the left would do well to heed an old adage.
Be careful what you wish for.

Gazzer (cb9ee2) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:28 pm

Whether it was just on her facebook page, or plastered on a billboard, or officially entered into the minutes of congress really does not matter now–she thought she was being cute, she said it, someone at some 24/7 Democrat oppo organization saw it, shopped it to people in the media and the mfm did what they do. What they always do. She’s supposedly a professional communications person and she worked for a congressman (one assumes on his staff that is paid by taxpayer dollars). She has caused him unwanted attention and embarrassment, and it should be rather easy for people to understand how he may no longer trust her judgement or trust her to represent him to constituents and to the media. She will be the story now, not him or his policies. It was a stupid, petty, unnecessary thing for her to say or get involved with and she needed to apologize. If some want to have a pity party about the awful media and how we ought to defend her just because she’s a conservative–have at it. IMO we don’t fix the media’s bias problem or public perception by defending our own idiocy (e.g., she’s probably a good person, she was trying to be helpful-she didn’t intend to look mean to the president’s daughters, and anyway they deserved it, etc., etc).

Using this obvious current example of over-reach, though, to amplify the larger issue of media bias as Mollie Hemingway did, (and others are doing, too) in comparing the media’s approach to Gruber and other much more important Dem “oopsies”, is absolutely the way to go.

Lauten’s life is not over. She will land somewhere hopefully a little wiser and more seasoned.

I think JVW said it exactly right above:

if we are going to demand accountability from them we had better be quick to show it from our own side. You’re right that Ms. Lauten probably isn’t a bad person and deserves a second chance, but I don’t think second chances come until you have atoned for your original wrong.

elissa (ca2702) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:37 pm

So, the private thoughts of the city hall janitor is grist for the public mill? Too far down? How about the receptionist at the congressman’s office? Is she fair game?

They aren’t really private thoughts when they are shared with the world via Facebook, are they Kevin M? Even if she had her status settings configured so that only her friends could view her posts, all it takes is one lefty friend of hers to screen-shot it and share it out. Sorry, but I reject the whole privacy argument out of hand.

If you had an insurance agent who posted something like, “I am so tired of racist, white cracker cops gunning down unarmed black boys,” or “the only reason that conservatives complain about President Obama is because those racists can’t stand to see a successful black man,” would you want to continue doing business with him? After all, there are plenty of people selling insurance out there who don’t see fit to share their mindless political beliefs with the world. This is one of the reasons that I don’t post or comment under my real name here, by the way. I know if I am a sales manager and I see one of my employees is making obnoxious posts and I tend to notice that his existing clients are abandoning him, I’m damn well going to suggest that he dial back the online pontificating and let him know that if his performance slips below standard that he is going to lose his job.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:42 pm

==Ten years ago, society would have complimented someone like Lauten for mentoring younger women about appropriate behavior and dress.==

Sorry. Then and now, that’s the job of the parents/grandparents, a close family friend, a trusted teacher, or in this case, perhaps the office of protocol. What Lauten said on facebook was not “mentoring”.

elissa (ca2702) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:43 pm

. . . she said it, someone at some 24/7 Democrat oppo organization saw it, shopped it to people in the media and the mfm did what they do.

That’s a great point too, elissa. She works in the world of politics, so it would be crazy of her not to realize that the things she posts publicly won’t be scrutinized and blown out of proportion by her adversaries. Again, I want her to get a second chance somewhere down the road, but I refuse to feel bad for her that she blew this opportunity by being so thoughtless.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:46 pm

. . . but I refuse to feel bad for her that she blew this opportunity by being so thoughtless.

No, that’s poorly worded. What I mean is that I refuse to believe that she was mis-treated by being dismissed from her job when she screwed up. It’s a hard lesson to learn, and I wish she hadn’t had to learn it, but I think it was the right call.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:48 pm

Elitism is a tough sell for me, whether it’s liberal or conservative.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 4:59 pm

But I live in a small town and went to a state school, so obviously I’m not refined enough to decide things like this.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:00 pm

you have to wonder though if this won’t tempt the obamas into tarting up the girls on future occasions in hopes of ensnaring more critics

that’s sort of how food stamp rolls you know

happyfeet (831175) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:06 pm

Didn’t we accuse some woman of being an unfair scold for whining about a rocket scientist’s aloha shirt, not too long ago? Said some pretty mean things about her too?

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:08 pm

yes we did

happyfeet (831175) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:10 pm

we did indeed

happyfeet (831175) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:11 pm

JVW – In double rich, nougaty, chewy, irony, would you apply the same public official standards to our blog host, including mob veto and job loss that you believe is appropriate for Lauten?

If not, why not?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:16 pm

I agree with many of the comments that Lauten made a mistake (although I have not seen the offending post on Facebook,) but the Republicans make a bigger mistake by bending to this type of intimidation. Her boss could have said something like “I’ll look into it, but it will have to take its place in the line a bit farther back than illegal executive orders, Benghazi, the IRS intimidating conservatives, and stonewalling by the Department of Justice, just to name a few.” No point making this a lynching. And no point in blindly supporting your employee. Let the thing pass, and accept Lauten’s resignation when the heat is off.

Giving in to this sort of pressure is like leaving dog food out on the porch. There are bears and coyotes all over the place, and doing stupid stuff like that will only encourage them to come and visit. And they will keep coming back once they’ve figured out that you are an easy target.

bobathome (348c8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:17 pm

Who cares whether her social media thoughts are ‘private’ or not. An employer who pink slips her for this because of contrived displays by political enemies is contemptible.

And Margaret Carlson is still walking the streets. The gosizdat media take care of their own.

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:20 pm

And no point in blindly supporting your employee. Let the thing pass, and accept Lauten’s resignation when the heat is off.

Why?

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:21 pm

I think we, as a society, need a frank and open discussion about extending tolerance, and maybe even indulgence, to the silly little things our women do and say when their hormones are out of balance or, or in balance; or they’re on a diet, or feel bad about falling off their diet; or when their hairdresser didn’t get the color right, or got it perfectly and their husband didn’t even notice; or… (Runs)

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:21 pm

“She has caused him unwanted attention and embarrassment, and it should be rather easy for people to understand how he may no longer trust her judgement or trust her to represent him to constituents and to the media. She will be the story now, not him or his policies. It was a stupid, petty, unnecessary thing for her to say or get involved with and she needed to apologize. If some want to have a pity party about the awful media and how we ought to defend her just because she’s a conservative–have at it.”

elissa – In my view it was up to the back bench Congressman to decide whether he would have the balls to say her views were her own and he does not control what his staff says on their personal social media accounts because in America people have the right to air their opinions. Instead he threw her under the bus, just like Mozilla threw Brendan Eich under the bus for a political contribution made years before. I feel no need to defend her, but I do feel the need to point out that if they think caving in to leftist speech police, I completely disagree.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:31 pm

caving in to leftist speech police is the right thing to do,

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:33 pm

It’s like paying the Danegeld.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:33 pm

If some want to have a pity party about the awful media and how we ought to defend her just because she’s a conservative–have at it

No, elissa, I would have the same attitude if she worked for Maxine Waters (not that reporters would pounce). I defend her because she has certain inalienable rights as a human being. Freedom of speech, particularly innocuous speech, is a right in this country, even if it pisses off the President.

I am surprised not everyone defends her. Sad, that, and if I sound a bit judgmental, there’s a reason for that.

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:39 pm

They aren’t really private thoughts when they are shared with the world via Facebook, are they Kevin M?

They are the thoughts of a private person. To jump on someone for their facebook post just to score some counting coup on the other guys is reprehensible. It is uncivil at the very least and pushes the boundaries of acceptable behavior. Again, this is not a grey area to me at all.

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:43 pm

If you had an insurance agent who posted something like, “I am so tired of racist, white cracker cops gunning down unarmed black boys,” or “the only reason that conservatives complain about President Obama is because those racists can’t stand to see a successful black man,” would you want to continue doing business with him?

Maybe yes, maybe no, but it would certainly be none of your business. Would you fire an employee who posted such, just for that?

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:45 pm

Didn’t we accuse some woman of being an unfair scold for whining about a rocket scientist’s aloha shirt, not too long ago? Said some pretty mean things about her too?

Yes, but there is a tad bit of differnce between a personal FB page and The effing Atlantic!

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:46 pm

== obviously I’m not refined enough to decide things like this.==

C’mon. Nobody has suggested that, DRJ. This discussion has been going on for hours involving many individual comments and commenters, all of us viewing the Lauten situation through our own various and personal lenses. Commenters have been coming and going, and stating/sharing/hashing out their honest opinions–sometimes differing, and sometimes with full or partial agreement with others. That’s all. That’s what we do here in this community and you’re a part of that process.

elissa (ca2702) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:48 pm

I should point out I sent money to Joe Wilson when he said “You Lie” even though official Washington had the vapours.

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:50 pm

I think that I’m not going to argue too much with my friends here over what some hillbilly girl said because Walmart had run out of Ho-Hos. You guys have at it. I agree with everything Patterico wrote in his post and I’ll leave it at that.

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 5:50 pm

109, 110, 111. daleyrocks, That’s certainly a legitimate (multi- comment) point. 🙂 But we really don’t know the full context, do we? So consider this–what if she’s really not very good at her job, and/or there were other past problems, or some other examples of bad judgement related to her use of social media or something else, and this was kind of the tip of the iceberg for the “back bencher” congressman with respect to her employment as his spokesperson? Do I sound like Sammy?

Well, you called it “caving in to leftist speech police”. But I’ve seen more than a few on the right who are not actively supporting her either. Her previous boss for example, Tea Party Republican Rep. Joe Walsh, told the Daily Herald he wasn’t surprised she’d make comments that would get her in trouble.

“I’m stunned that this is a story,” Walsh said. What she said was pretty stupid. But so what?”

Walsh said Lauten wasn’t on his staff long and she was gone before his unsuccessful 2012 re-election campaign. He was first elected in 2010.

“She didn’t last with me,” he said. “She had some issues and some problems.”

elissa (87e2c7) — 12/3/2014 @ 6:18 pm

Art, I’m assuming that she will offer her resignation. I’d say it is up to her, but if this ends up embarrassing her boss, then, speaking for myself, the appropriate response is to resign. Let her make the decision.

bobathome (348c8a) — 12/3/2014 @ 6:26 pm

Again: is it not the case that we closer to the ideal of a “free market” in media than we are to the ideal of a “free market” in, say, the production of food or cars or power tools?

I don’t know, there’s not much of a free market in anything these days. That said, the Internet brings a free-market spirit to the distribution of information, and we have seen stunning progress in that area in an amazingly short time.

If the feds get their claws into the Internet via this Net Neutrality nonsense, though, that will represent a giant braking action on all this progress.

Patterico (9c670f) — 12/3/2014 @ 6:32 pm

And more from the right:

Anita McBride, who was first lady Laura Bush’s chief of staff, said Monday that every presidential family wants its children to be “generally off-limits” to the news media, but social media make maintaining such boundaries a challenge. But social media also pose a challenge for congressional staffers.

“Everybody has access to the Internet, everybody can state an opinion and can do it anonymously and without retribution,” McBride said. “But it’s a very different situation for a communications director for a member of Congress.”

McBride, who also worked under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and now is executive-in-residence at American University’s Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, didn’t blame the Obama daughters for their lack of interest in the turkey pardon.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-obama-girls-criticism-talk-20141201-story.html

elissa (87e2c7) — 12/3/2014 @ 6:37 pm

but if this ends up embarrassing her boss, then, speaking for myself, the appropriate response is to resign.

Take some advice from Eleanor Roosevelt: “no one can make you feel inferior without your consent”. If he’s embarrassed, he ought not to be. A little spine here. It’s not that difficult.

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 6:45 pm

But I’ve seen more than a few on the right who are not actively supporting her either

What? There are Republicans who are craven? Say it ain’t so.

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 6:47 pm

what if she’s really not very good at her job,

If she’s not good at her job, review her performance problems with her and give her time to fix them. If they’re still not fixed, fire her at the apposite time. Don’t fire her because she said to her friend that the Obama girls were shlepping about in repulsive miniskirts; that’s the act of the pathologically other-directed.

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 6:51 pm

Didn’t we accuse some woman of being an unfair scold for whining about a rocket scientist’s aloha shirt, not too long ago? Said some pretty mean things about her too?

Because her remarks were substantively asinine. None of us were in a position to fire her. If her employer were to fire her, it would be because editorial standards do not permit poisonous exercises in frivolity. Very few commentary sites have such standards.

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 6:54 pm

So I’m staying at the Dew Drop Inn at Hooterville, and there’s a drip in the bathroom sink that’s driving me nuts. Drip … drip … drip …. So I call the front desk and tell the young lady who answers, “I got a leak in the sink”. And in a sweet Southern voice she says, “Y’all go right on ahead”.

nk (dbc370) — 12/3/2014 @ 7:00 pm

The amount of coverage on this nothingburger story about a nobody does raise issues about about stories they are consciously avoiding.

The major media have favored the Democratic Party since 1960 and arguably earlier. Edith Efron’s The News Twisters was issued in 1969. However, as recently as 1998 the print media at least had their own fish to fry and were not a subsidiary of the Democratic Party. As we speak, the major media and the Democratic Party nomenklatura are two aspects of the same social nexus.

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 7:01 pm

However, pendulums can be a b*tch. In instigating this behavior those on the left would do well to heed an old adage. Be careful what you wish for.

There is no pendulum. The major media will not stir the pot and you have to be Van Jones level stupid for Democratic politicos and their Boswells to feel the least embarrassment. The Republican equivalents to Van Jones (e.g. Paul Craig Roberts) would never be appointed even to an advisory committee which meets 3x a year.

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 7:05 pm

“As we speak, the major media and the Democratic Party nomenklatura are two aspects of the same social nexus.”

Art Deco – Thank you for another unnecessary statement of the obvious.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 7:45 pm

There is no pendulum. The major media will not stir the pot and you have to be Van Jones level stupid for Democratic politicos and their Boswells to feel the least embarrassment. The Republican equivalents to Van Jones (e.g. Paul Craig Roberts) would never be appointed even to an advisory committee which meets 3x a year.

Doesn’t matter. LSMFM is dying and they know it. Look what was achieved with Chic-Fil_A, Hobby Lobby and even the recall elections in Colorado, to name just a few.

Gazzer (cb9ee2) — 12/3/2014 @ 7:57 pm

“109, 110, 111. daleyrocks, That’s certainly a legitimate (multi- comment) point. 🙂 But we really don’t know the full context, do we?”

elissa – We didn’t need her background until the media felt it necessary to go into attack mode over a few sentences on a personal Facebook page, did we? Did they need to stake out her parents’ house? Talk to former employers? Dig up college newspaper columns? No.

The left decided to destroy her because of her personal opinions. That is what is wrong with the situation. Screw your context. I don’t care whether people think what she said was right or wrong or out of line or nk thinks she was having her period. That collective decision to destroy somebody which we have seen over and over from the left because of perceived thought or speech crimes is wrong.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 7:58 pm

The left decided to destroy her because of her personal opinions.

No, the left decided to be obnoxious, which is their metier. There was no need for her supervisor to pay any attention. He’s your problem, and the culture within the krack-kampaign-konsultant-kapitol-hill wing of Republican Party which cannot respond with vigor or even show condign indifference to dishonest partisan attacks on their own (Mr. Akin’s experience is sadly relevant here).

Art Deco (ee8de5) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:24 pm

JVW – In double rich, nougaty, chewy, irony, would you apply the same public official standards to our blog host, including mob veto and job loss that you believe is appropriate for Lauten?

Are Assistant DAs considered “at will” employees, or do they enjoy some job protections? I’m pretty sure that Congressional aides can be canned for the most trivial of reasons. A lot of this depends on what sort of protections you enjoy in your position; for instance, college professors (even at public schools) have wide latitude to act like jerks in their personal life without it affecting their employment.

I’m not sure what you mean by “mob veto.” Has Ms. Lauten been kicked off of Facebook for what she wrote? Has she been enjoined from ever opining on the Obama girls again? As far as I know, she is free to start her own business or work at home in those great jobs that pay $10,000 per month just for using Google, but she doesn’t have the right to be employed by someone who thinks her behavior reflects poorly on her employer. Are you, daleyrocks, going to argue otherwise?

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:48 pm

“Are Assistant DAs considered “at will” employees, or do they enjoy some job protections?”

JVW – You’re smarter than that. That’s not the issue. The issue is the principle involved. By mob veto I mean if enough people holler about something somebody said or wrote, even if it is overtly not racist, sexist or otherwise scandalous, the perceived offending party gets the boot.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 8:58 pm

JVW – I think fertile ground for a story would be the twitter timelines and Facebook pages of aides of senior Democrat members of Congress. The only issue would be getting people to pay attention to the nutbaggery you are sure to find.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:01 pm

By mob veto I mean if enough people holler about something somebody said or wrote, even if it is overtly not racist, sexist or otherwise scandalous, the perceived offending party gets the boot.

Hey, you know what: if her Congressman/employer wants to step up and say, “Dammit, their side says much worse things with impunity, so I’m not going to do anything to her at all,” then more power to him. But the point is that it is his choice. If he is weak-willed and craven and is just giving in to the howls from the left, then that is a bad reflection on him. If, on the other hand, he thinks that his employee showed really poor judgement and that impacts his confidence in her ability to perform her job, then I don’t blame him one bit. Note elissa’s comment from 6:18 pm where Ms. Lauten’s former employer suggests that she isn’t the best employee the world has ever known. Maybe this was the last straw. Without knowing her personally or being able to vouch for her awesome abilities in the office, I’m not going to waste good outrage taking up her cause.

And the fact that it appears that Ms. Lauten had her own teenage discipline problems suggests to me that she is incredibly stupid for criticizing other teens for their behavior, unless she puts it in the context of “don’t be like I was.” Just from her complete lack of self-awareness alone I wouldn’t think she was worth going to the mattresses over.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:13 pm

Hey, you know what: if her Congressman/employer wants to step up and say, “Dammit, their side says much worse things with impunity, so I’m not going to do anything to her at all,” then more power to him. But the point is that it is his choice. If he is weak-willed and craven and is just giving in to the howls from the left, then that is a bad reflection on him.

JVW – I believe I noted that or an alternate response would have been for him to respond I am not aware of what she wrote and have no comment. She wrote it on her own time on her personal social media, not this office’s. Your earlier position that she is a public official paid by the taxpayer and is not entitled to private opinions, however, makes it impossible for the congressman to take such a principled position, an amazing situation given the background of this blog.

Note elissa’s comment from 6:18 pm where Ms. Lauten’s former employer suggests that she isn’t the best employee the world has ever known.

I did not elissa’s comment and replied. I find the additional crap dug up on Lauten irrelevant to the firestorm generated by a few sentences of minor criticism.

Without knowing her personally or being able to vouch for her awesome abilities in the office, I’m not going to waste good outrage taking up her cause.

Pretty much missing the point entirely again.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:35 pm

“No, the left decided to be obnoxious, which is their metier. There was no need for her supervisor to pay any attention.”

Art Deco – No, they had to pump up the volume on her to get to the point where her boss had to make a decision whether or not to get involved. I already said he did not. I don’t know why you feel a need to repeat back to me things I have already said.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:40 pm

Your earlier position that she is a public official paid by the taxpayer and is not entitled to private opinions, however, makes it impossible for the congressman to take such a principled position, an amazing situation given the background of this blog.

One last time, daleyrocks: when you post it on your Facebook status it is no longer a private opinion. Yes, it’s a personal opinion, but the fact that you chose to share it rather indiscriminately suggests that it is anything but private. If Jeremiah Wright had argued, “Hey, when I said ‘Goddam America’ I was just expressing a private opinion expressed to my congregation and it is thus of no business to anyone outside the church’s walls and my relationship with Barack Obama shouldn’t be of any concern,” would you have agreed? I’m surprised you can’t see the difference. But I guess this blog would be a boring place if we all agreed every time on every issue.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 9:56 pm

“One last time, daleyrocks: when you post it on your Facebook status it is no longer a private opinion. Yes, it’s a personal opinion, but the fact that you chose to share it rather indiscriminately suggests that it is anything but private.”

JVW – Fine, call it personal it still means private to me. It is an opinion expressed in a private capacity not as a public official. One last time, do you see any parallel to where this comment is appearing? I am surprised you can’t see the parallel.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:05 pm

Yeah, we just aren’t going to see eye to eye on this. Fair enough.

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:10 pm

“Yeah, we just aren’t going to see eye to eye on this. Fair enough.”

JVW – I don’t think so. Read the disclaimer here on the home page.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:16 pm

“Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico…”

Says it all, don’t it?

JVW (60ca93) — 12/3/2014 @ 10:31 pm

JVW – You got it. Try a little lower.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/4/2014 @ 9:23 am

But this is OK:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/reliable-source/wp/2014/12/04/jenna-bush-hager-hanky-panky-and-the-white-house-roof/

As a guest on Wednesday night’s episode of Bravo’s “Watch What Happens Live!”, the former first daughter was asked by a caller if she’d ever “fooled around” at her dad’s workplace, a.k.a the White House.

The 33-year-old wife and mom, who was once known as the naughty twin (since everyone’s using old-timey language today), answered thusly, “Listen, a lady never talks.” Awesome. Moving on. No need to think about a 19-year-old Jenna Bush using the Lincoln Bedroom for unofficial activities. But then again this is Bravo. So, of course, there’s more.

I wonder if they are camped out on the reporter’s parent’s doorstep.

Kevin M (d91a9f) — 12/4/2014 @ 11:33 pm

12/3/2014

Big Media Goes Absolutely Insane Over Lauten

146 Responses to “Big Media Goes Absolutely Insane Over Lauten”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out