On one hand, the New York Times can put out some of the best journalism in the country. And on the other, it's affirmative action for mediocre white conservatives.
Speaking of the Times. I'm still fuming about "College Presidents Under Fire After Dodging Questions About Antisemitism". Because they DIDN'T "dodge" the question, they would have better off if they did. Instead, foolishly, they attempted to answer exactly the question that was asked, rather than using the standard politician's dodge of answering the question you WANT to be asked.
The question was specifically about "what is prohibited by your code of conduct" not "do you find this morally reprehensible". So it's a legal question about a policy, and yes the policy responses do depend on context.
Sadly, the response to this will be training for all College Presidents in how to be LESS honest when answering questions at a Congressional hearing. Maybe, with practice, they can all learn to deflect and obfuscate as well as politicians, won't we all be better off then?
I tend to judge people by the company they keep. Based on the examples you provide here and have provided, on the topic of whether Elon Musk is a conservative, dude is guilty as charged.
Five years ago I would never have described Musk as a conservative. Now it seems pretty fair to do so. I still don't know what happened to him. I have two theories: One, he was radicalized, and not in a good way, by having a child transition. (Some conservatives, it must be said, support their child's transition, while some liberal parents don't, but the odds don't lean that way.)
Two, he was targeted by an "influence op" by other conservative billionaires. Peter Thiel comes to mind. But there could be others. It is incredibly easy to do this with spectrum people, and Musk is definitely spectrum.
On one hand, the New York Times can put out some of the best journalism in the country. And on the other, it's affirmative action for mediocre white conservatives.
Venmo enthusiast. LOL
Speaking of the Times. I'm still fuming about "College Presidents Under Fire After Dodging Questions About Antisemitism". Because they DIDN'T "dodge" the question, they would have better off if they did. Instead, foolishly, they attempted to answer exactly the question that was asked, rather than using the standard politician's dodge of answering the question you WANT to be asked.
The question was specifically about "what is prohibited by your code of conduct" not "do you find this morally reprehensible". So it's a legal question about a policy, and yes the policy responses do depend on context.
Sadly, the response to this will be training for all College Presidents in how to be LESS honest when answering questions at a Congressional hearing. Maybe, with practice, they can all learn to deflect and obfuscate as well as politicians, won't we all be better off then?
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/06/us/harvard-mit-penn-presidents-antisemitism.html
"College Presidents Under Fire From Fascists Who Hate The First Amendment" just doesn't have the same ring.
I tend to judge people by the company they keep. Based on the examples you provide here and have provided, on the topic of whether Elon Musk is a conservative, dude is guilty as charged.
Five years ago I would never have described Musk as a conservative. Now it seems pretty fair to do so. I still don't know what happened to him. I have two theories: One, he was radicalized, and not in a good way, by having a child transition. (Some conservatives, it must be said, support their child's transition, while some liberal parents don't, but the odds don't lean that way.)
Two, he was targeted by an "influence op" by other conservative billionaires. Peter Thiel comes to mind. But there could be others. It is incredibly easy to do this with spectrum people, and Musk is definitely spectrum.