Yesterday, Marko Elez, a 25-year-old software engineer who was working in a temporary DOGE position, resigned after it was revealed that he made repeated racist postings on Twitter/X. Here is more on the specifics from NPR:
The Wall Street Journalreported on a number of 2024 posts from an account connected to Elez on Musk’s X platform and noted that White House officials confirmed his resignation after the paper pointed out Elez’s activity on the social media site.
“You could not pay me to marry outside of my ethnicity,” the account wrote in September. “Normalize Indian hate,” a separate post from that month read.
In July of last year, the account posted: “Just for the record, I was racist before it was cool.”
In other posts, from December, the account pushed for repealing the Civil Rights Act and shared: “I just want a eugenic immigration policy, is that too much to ask.”
All of the posts have now been deleted, but NPR has independently confirmed them using the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine, which scrapes and archives vast parts of the open web.
Within less than 24 hours, Elez’s boss–Elon Musk–was already polling Twitter/X about whether or not Doge should rehire Elez. From The Hill:
Tech billionaire Elon Musk took to his social media platform X to ask users if he should rehire one of his deputies who resigned Thursday after racist social media posts of his resurfaced.
“Bring back @DOGE staffer who made inappropriate statements via a now deleted pseudonym?” Musk wrote Friday morning on X , attached to a poll asking users to answer “Yes” or “No.”
As of 10:30 a.m. EST Friday, the post had nearly 2.9 million views and more than 232,000 votes. More than 80 percent of users who answered selected “yes.”
And Musk isn’t the only member of the administration who seems to think we’re treating this person too hard. Our Vice President believes the real villain here isn’t the person making racist posts–it’s the press:
Here’s my view:
I obviously disagree with some of Elez’s posts, but I don’t think stupid social media activity should ruin a kid’s life.
We shouldn’t reward journalists who try to destroy people. Ever.
First, we’re not talking about a “kid”–this is an adult who at the age of either 24 or 25 thought it was a good idea to post racist comments online. We shouldn’t infantilize Elez. Or if we’re going to worry about “ruining” a 25-year-old’s life for a dumb decision, then we should also extend that courtesy to folks moving through the criminal justice system today who are much younger (including minors being charged as adults).
Second, Musk’s “inappropriate” and Vance’s “stupid social media activity” are doing a lot of heavy lifting to hide the ugly nature of:
“You could not pay me to marry outside of my ethnicity,” the account wrote in September. “Normalize Indian hate,” a separate post from that month read.
In July of last year, the account posted: “Just for the record, I was racist before it was cool.”
In other posts, from December, the account pushed for repealing the Civil Rights Act and shared: “I just want a eugenic immigration policy, is that too much to ask.”
Credit where it’s due, unlike Elez who posted his racist crap from the assumed protection of an anonymous account, Beattie is being racist with his full chest.
TL;DR: You don’t need to be a racist to serve in the Trump administration, but it also doesn’t look like they will ever hold being racist against you (unless, of course, you are an “anti-white” racist… by that, I mean someone who is OK with celebrating Black History month–in that case, the new Attorney General of the US wants to investigate your private company).
Aside: If Vance and Musk think Elez should not have been removed, they should take it up with whomever within DOGE or Trump Administration leadership decided that the software engineer had to go. “Resignations” in these situations are an option to help someone being shown the door save face. Clearly, someone at the upper levels of Executive Branch leadership didn’t get the message that casual racism is now OK.
There hasn’t been any shame around DOGE, so I wouldn’t expect it to appear just because one of them was like “white makes right!” – they would just say that’s locker room talk where they’re from and the magaverse would flood the zone with prominent pols claiming it’s racist DEI to call actual racism racist.
– Me, yesterday.
The weekend is going to be all about Republicans turning this into “we’re not the racist ones, it’s the woke anti-white DEI media talking about it that’s racist” and the guy will be hired back. CNN, WaPo, and NYT will parrot RW talking points and endlessly “debate” the extreme racism of his remarks/whether he should be in government/What This Tells Us About Trump, and they’ll embrace RW language about what he said as something absurd like “racially tinged questions”.
But what I want to know is who fired him or told him to resign? That implies someone taking responsibility within the quasi-government Muskenjugend. Who is that person enforcing some modicum of a standard?
Daryl
So Vance, whose wife is of Indian decent, thinks it’s okay to normalize Indian hate.
Ted Cruz, famously, didn’t mind President Doughboy calling his wife ugly.
What’s with MAGA men being unwilling to defend their women?
Is this what they mean by a “tradwife?” Is this why they support the serial sex offender in the White House?
Pathetic excuses for men, if you ask me.
becca
@Daryl: Pathetic excuses for men. I cannot stress enough how “unmanly” the right comes across to most people, especially women. Kissing up and kicking down is the way of flaccid cowards. Beyond gross and repulsive.
.
Gustopher
Yesterday, Marko Elez, a 25-year-old software engineer who was working in a temporary DOGE position, resigned after it was revealed that he made repeated racist postings on Twitter/X.
He was just using the tool as intended.
First, we’re not talking about a “kid”–this is an adult who at the age of either 24 or 25 thought it was a good idea to post racist comments online. We shouldn’t infantilize Elez.
The particular things he posted read like stupid edgelord shit. Which may be worse than racism, but we’re counting angels dancing on the head of a pin at that point.
Anyway, we should go after these “kids” — actions have consequences, and they are hurting a lot of people and undermining the rule of law and ruining the country. That’s worse than Twitter edgelord shit or racism. Screw ‘em.
It’s not too hard to imagine Ellez posting this stuff in some kind of performance of “you can’t tell me what to do!!!!” Which is pretty much the same as what @Gustopher calls “stupid edgelord stuff”.
In addition, “some of Elez’s posts” is a particularly weaselly way of avoiding explicitly stating what was and wasn’t offensive.
Vance again:
So I say bring him back.
If he’s a bad dude or a terrible member of the team, fire him for that.
First, The Vice President of the United States shouldn’t be using the word “dude” in public statements. Secondly, where this puts the bar for “bad” in Vance’s mind is impossible to tell.
I hated Vance when Trump selected him as running mate, it’s only gotten worse, and there’s no bottom in sight.
I want to know is who fired him or told him to resign?
And Who hired him?
“The best and the brightest”
Fortune
A 25-year-old man (not a child) who has morally reprehensible beliefs, or at best makes morally reprehensible comments. If he’s a government spokesman or policy-maker he should be removed. Maybe advisor. (I don’t know what his job was.) Otherwise, what’s the argument? Are there prohibited beliefs for any government employee? ETA: I haven’t read the story, I don’t know if he was bringing those beliefs to work, which also should be grounds for removal. Private email or anonymous, I don’t see why he should be removed.
And yet, unsurprisingly you have strong views and rise to defense of someone who makes racist comments for the LULZ.
BTW, since he isn’t in a union position, he doesn’t get the right to the very defense you are offering him. Also, Darren Beattie is in a policy position and still has a job. But looking forward to you complaining about DEI again.
As far as employment law is concerned, and I mostly am familiar with California employment law, which is friendlier to workers than many states, @Fortune has the right of it in this situation.
If Ellez was spouting this stuff at work, he’d be cooked. If he spouted this stuff not at work, but in a very visible and current way, such as would make his workplace seem “hostile” to other employees, he would be cooked.
But to fire him for this, and not risk a “bad faith” lawsuit, would require that the employer demonstrate that he had created a “hostile environment” for other workers. I doubt very much that would ever happen.
There may be other legal systems more friendly to firing him, of course.
mattbernius
@Fortune:
Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs
@Jay L Gischer: I don’t know the conditions of Elez’s employment but if he’s a federal worker in a temporary slot they may be able to fire him without cause.
Serious question: who is his employer? DOGE is a government segment, but it’s operating outside the rules of any agency and outside the remit of that agency. So is this guy a government employee? If so, we can see his employment records, including information about his hiring process – what was the position, how were they chosen, where is the funding from, what is their classification, how much are they paid? That all becomes public information, unless the person is hired for a very specific position in security => they have been fully vetted to obtain an appropriate clearance.
If they’re a contractor, the details of that contract are available…somewhere? And if they’re not a contractor or an employee, what the fuck are they doing touching government equipment?!?
(Fortune is technically correct here, but obviously arguing from bad faith. His silence in the face of “fired for talking to black people” gives the game away.)
Joe
@Jay L Gischer: I think you have a point from an employment law perspective, but that isn’t anybody’s conversation around it, unless some significant part of Musk’s 80% are also employment lawyers implicitly making your same point. The conversation around it that Musk appears to be promoting and Vance has no problem with is that these aren’t such bad opinions that anybody should be upset with.
So… check notes… as long as the Republican lead Senate confirms a white nationalist via a majority vote, that’s ok with you that the Trump Administration decided to place him in senior leadership… After previously firing him for… being a white nationalist….
Fortune
@Matt Bernius: Check your notes again, you just made that up. I asked if he was employed.
For full transparency, I fully admit that in a bit of frustration I posted something that I immediately regretted and edited my post to remove that. If you are referring to that, I rescind that comment and apologize.
If you are referring to the comment as it now stands:
So… check notes… as long as the Republican lead Senate confirms a white nationalist via a majority vote, that’s ok with you that the Trump Administration decided to place him in senior leadership… After previously firing him for… being a white nationalist….
I stand by it. You don’t share your thoughts beyond “the adult who wrote racist things on twitter shouldn’t have been fired.”
All I can say is if that, in all of this, is the hill you want to die one–what can I say, that says a LOT more about you, and how we should take your thoughts on these issues than anything else. I mean, you’re the one who decided to go all “LEE-ROYYYY JENKINS” on the “Won’t someone please think about the poor young man done in for posting a lot of racists stuff online when he thought no one would ever find out!!! He shouldn’t have lost his job.”
Of course, if you want to actually share more of your positions–again beyond “DEI is bad” and “Don’t fire 25 year olds for saying racist things”–then go for it.
Matt Bernius
Also, since twitter isn’t displaying the tweet from Beattie, here’s what he wrote:
Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work.
Unfortunately, our entire national ideology is predicated on coddling the feelings of women and minorities, and demoralizing competent white men.
Again, he has to be confirmed by the Senate. And still Trump and Vance decided this person is ok for an deputy secretary of state position.
And I guess Fortune’s ok with this too… OH MY GOD, I JUST REALIZED–I think Fortune is Susan Collin’s burner account. Same level of pearl grabbing mixed with ultimate compliancy.
But to fire him for this, and not risk a “bad faith” lawsuit, would require that the employer demonstrate that he had created a “hostile environment” for other workers. I doubt very much that would ever happen.
Given that DOGE is creating an incredibly tense environment, I can see an argument that this man’s publicly professed statements could tip that from tense to hostile. Remember, Twitter comments are public, and these are incredibly recent. He has tried to hide them, but they were right there.
And since DOGE is involved in reducing headcount — technically only recommending the headcount to be reduced, but still — his statements could be used by anyone who believes they were fired for race. In a business, he would represent an unacceptable legal risk to be anywhere near those processes.
I think it would come down to whether the employer thinks there risk-harm for firing this little racist and getting sued is more or less than the risk-harm in many lawsuits from other people being terminated.
I expect every boss I’ve ever had would fire his racist ass. Or silo him away on a “special project” where he never encounters another person.
Fortune
@Matt Bernius: No one’s dying on any hill. Drop the drama. My point as always is your hair isn’t on fire so stop acting like it. You don’t need another commenter being technically wrong but claiming to be in good faith, you need someone to tell you to calm down and think whether you really want government workers to be fired based on personal politics. You’re the one who thought to write an article about it, Leroy, I just commented.
Matt Bernius
@Fortune:
Huh, so great to know that you think explicit racism is acceptable “personal politics” for anyone working in government. Which I guess is why you still refuse to comment on Darren Beattie either.
I also, based on a bunch of interactions, wonder the degree to which you’d actually be willing to extend those same courtesies to people whose positions you weren’t prepared to look past. Is there any personal politics that you wouldn’t find acceptable?
BTW, you are right, my hair is on fire right now–and it’s because I actually know what people like Musk and others are dismantling and seeing the real and painful effects it’s currently having on good people who have been trying to make government work better for everyone. And I also know the long term negative impact that this is going to have on vulnerable people across this country–including many people who voted for Trump.
In the meantime I have to deal with spineless people like you who are afraid to actually take positions trying to hand wave away the damage and pretend that we should just accept willful racism as just another viewpoint. It’s great that you think you’re safe from the fallout from all of this and can pretend to be above it all.
Me, I will apologize when I get something wrong. But I’m NEVER going to apologize for caring and working against what is currently happening.
Jay L Gischer
@Joe: Oh, I don’t endorse those opinions, not for a hot second. I am happy to condemn them, not just as morally inappropriate, but damaging to productivity and organizational effectiveness.
I am quite sure that ability and skills come in big variety of packages, not just the strong-jawed white guy package.
Matt Bernius
@Fortune:
BTW, one final point–you have been incredible silent in just about every other thread dealing with the Federal layoffs and persecutions. Then you pop up here, in this one, to say that this was wrong. BTW, let’s not lose sight of the fact that someone in the Administration fired this man.
So, I’m genuinely curious: were you silent on all those other posts because you agreed with the general premise that those positions shouldn’t be eliminated and the purging steps that were being taken were wrong?
I’m writing that because I know you once commented that you tend to only respond when you think people get something wrong.
Jay L Gischer
@Gustopher: Hmm, for some reason I thought the comments were maybe a year old or so? And posted on a non-corporate forum, under a different username.
The only reason it came to light at all is because some third party outed him.
I would have a very big problem hiring someone with this hung on him. It’s easier to not hire someone than it is to fire them.
I very much doubt whether the “hostile work environment” business applies to federal employees. I don’t know though, one way or another. I also believe that Trump’s attitude is “go ahead and sue us and see how far that gets you”. This will never cost Trump himself a dime. The taxpayers will pay for any judgement. Nor will he be vulnerable to criminal prosecution. You know why.
The most important accountability is political accountability. And the South Koreans are way ahead of us on that score.
al Ameda
I’m old enough to remember when, back in 1970, Richard Nixon nominated to the Supreme Court a Leon Carswell, a decidedly pedestrian if not mediocre judge from Florida. During the senate hearings Senator Roman Hruska (R-Nebraska) defended the nomination by saying:
So what if he is mediocre? There are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren’t they? We can’t have all Brandeises, Cardozos, and Frankfurters and stuff like that there.
Epilogue: Carswell was not confirmed. That was then, this is now.
Look at where we are now; the Republican Senate is Roman Hruska writ large. This is how they see the federal government and the federal judiciary. Approximately 99% of Republicans would confirm a party-pack of Twinkies and a case of 16oz Mountain Dew soda, just because they can. There is no quality of control with this crew, anything goes.
The same with their quasi-legal staffing of the DOGE team. Nothing matters, only loyalty and fealty to President Musk (I know, I know, that was gratuitous.)
Matt Bernius
@Jay L Gischer:
Thanks for raising that point about CA labor law. I will consider that view in terms of employment law. I also wonder the degree to which your onboarding agreements would interact with that.
And, like @Joe said, this and most government roles that are this high profile create messy situations.
Chip Daniels
All Trumpists are by definition comfortable with racism and misogyny.
So it doesn’t matter what is in their hearts or private souls, they are eager and willing collaborators with injustice.
About the only silver lining is that they still yelp with indignation when we point this out.
DK
@Jay L Gischer: Mmm, I dunno if it’s that cut-and-dried, as a past and future business lead in California. Yes, Cali has more worker protections than most states, but we are still an “at-will” employment state. Employees can separate for any reason, and employers can fire for almost any reason. The “almost” covering the usual protected classes: race, gender, sexual orientation, political affiliation, religion, age etc.
Similar to most employees in most states.
In addition, most employment contracts these days termination of employment based on off-work public conduct detrimental to the employer’s rep.
Predictably, bootlicking MAGA slaves, who don’t support Trump despite simping for everything Trump does no matter what, will pretend sending racist tweets is protected class “personal politics.” But you’d be hard pressed to find any court or governmental employment agency to agree (at least pre Jan 20, 2025).
Case study: I was on the board of a CA healthcare institution whose exec. director was fired for off-site drug-related activity, but that had not affected his job performance. He claimed wrongful termination. The State rejected his claim, and he also lost his civil suit.
My understanding is that union employees — especially in government unions — have more protections. They can be very difficult to fire, especially for outside conduct. But even those protections are not absolute.
In any case, the dumb kid in question is not a government union employee. It’s not at all clear he was officially hired or who pays him. That’s another problem with Musk his unqualified children of DOGE (Dangerous Oligarch Grabbing Everything). They should not be editing sensitive US Treasury code and illegally downloading Americans’ bank and health data to their unsecured private laptops.
Their time would be better spent brainstorming how to end Putin’s Ukraine attack, how to prevent Trump’s WW3 invasions of Gaza and Mexico, and how to contain bird flu and lower the rising cost of eggs, housing, and healthcare. Rapist Trump pledged to fix these problems “on day one” and instead destroyed aviation safety and released 1,500+ criminals.
Joe
Of course, another issue buried in this conversation, especially as it turns toward Beattie is the pearl-clutching fear of what a DEI hire might bring to the table, the absolute insistence on meritocracy, while actually hiring these kinds of great white mopes.
were you silent on all those other posts because you agreed with the general premise that those positions shouldn’t be eliminated and the purging steps that were being taken were wrong?
I don’t know, if I look over the article or the thread and it’s stupid then I usually don’t bother responding. I saw the GSA one and thought of pointing out GSA mostly owns buildings, not leases them, but by that point people were already talking about impeaching Trump for interfering with the courts, so there was nothing left to salvage there. I would have had to look up ownership of courthouses and even if I were right, someone would have said I was right but commenting in bad faith.
This article sounded reasonable and it didn’t take much time to realize the flaw in its argument. I could reply and get a concession to my point quickly.
Connor
“First, we’re not talking about a “kid”–this is an adult who at the age of either 24 or 25 thought it was a good idea to post racist comments online.”
I will breathlessly await your essay on how a twenty-something Bill Clinton should publicly apologize, perhaps forego all his presidential related rewards for his published opposition to “Brown.”
Robert Byrd? (among many other Dem southerners) Lyndon Johnson? Al Gore? Barack “Trayvon Could Have Been Me” Obama. Race bait much?? Or most recently, Joe “Then You Ain’t Black” Biden. I guess blacks are puppets who better vote Dem if they think right.
There are plenty of racists to go around. All stripes. All ages. All ethnicities. A pox on all of them.
It seems to me you just saw a cheap opportunity to try to attempt to discredit DOGE and threw some shixt up against the wall. I’m observing an awful lot of selective outrage here.
Here’s a dirty little secret. If every person who expressed a controversial opinion (and lord knows, someone would label it racist), laughed at it, or repeated it, and was forced to resign, then the unemployment rate would approach 90%. Have some perspective. I used to be a pretty good basketball player. Then I saw White Men Can’t Jump. Took three years of therapy to recover from the mental anguish. But seriously, visit a sports locker room sometime. A black fraternity. A pickup basketball game at a local gym. And dare I say, the United States Congress.
BTW – I’m connected. Perhaps you’d like to meet, as some say, Justice Clarence “Uncle Tom” Thomas some time.
Did you have a substantive point about my comment you would like to address?
I stand by it. There is no reason for selective outrage. Its akin to whataboutism. Invoking it is intellectually light. Racism is a really low rent argument. It exists all around us, over long periods of time. That’s unfortunate.
And what is so abundantly clear: the diversion of funds in many government organizations is being exposed. And the beneficiaries are squealing like stuck pigs. And those who defend are simply arguing for the continuation of what would make Bernie Madoff blush: fraud.
Long live DOGE. Its about time.
Scott F.
@Matt Bernius: You wrote a cogent and caring post about how the Trump administration (as represented by the weasel-like defenses of VP Vance and DOGE-lord Musk) will never hold being racist against you unless it’s woke-racism and this thread degraded into a back and forth about the personal politics (or “morally reprehensible beliefs” in someone’s words) of a 25 year old minion who will be forgotten about tomorrow.
Stupid trolls!
JohnSF
@ptfe:
Apparently the legal basis of DOGE is that it’s a re-designation of the Office of Digital Services.
Which, among other things, was tasked with improving federal cyber-security standards.
lol
Now he’s asking for a substantive response to a barely coherent comment.
The sentence structure, especially at the beginning suggests this person is a bully.
I can see him poking someone in the chest with each name of a Democratic politician.
I would also question the sanity of anyone who would be excited to hang out with Clarence Thomas unless they have upcoming business before the court.
I mean, Kavanaugh I could see. He would probably be a fun hang; just keep an eye on from any intoxicated ladies present and knock before you open any closed door.
But Clarence Thomas? I would be a little creeped out to be anywhere near someone whose idea of sexy talk involves a public hair on a soda can.
Matt
I obviously disagree with some of Elez’s posts, but I don’t think stupid social media activity should ruin a kid’s life.
If he’s just a young stupid kid that lacks self moderating ability then he doesn’t belong anywhere near the computer systems that this country runs on. These people really are dumb…
@Fortune: Of course you don’t know. You’re too busy knee jerk defending your tribe to bother finding out..
JohnSF
@Connor:
What exactly is your point?
Certainly, various persons, at various times, may have said things that were in hindsight mistaken.
The point is what is happening NOW: a bunch of Musk-acolytes, without vetting, without relevant experience, are busily engaged in monkeying about with Congressionally mandated programs and expenditure, and in particular, the basic federal employee records and federal payments systems databases.
And at least some of them (and Elez is NOT the only one: see Kliger re Fuentes) have social media records that indicate extreme-right alignments.
The whole project is absurdly ill-conceived.
If President Trump wanted to do this in a serious and orderly fashion, he could have appointed Musk as head of OMB and carried out an in-depth audit of spending, then reporting to Congress with recommendations for stopping various items.
Instead, you have an effective usurpation of the right of Congress to determine and oversee expenditure.
This is a short route to the executive becoming the sovereign.
Note: not just a monarchy, but a full-on, absolute, sovereignty.
Are you quite sure that is what you desire?
Because then, your problem is, what happens if the other party gets to appoint an imperator?
Do you then try to walk it all back?
Or just try to prevent that happening?
See Roman Republic, fall of.
Fortune
@Steven L. Taylor: It’s funny, most sites have a thoughtful main writer and a bunch of smack-talking extremists in the comments section who bring down the conversation…
I’m sorry. The people who lose their minds every time Libs of TikTok or whoever posts some video of a gay teacher don’t get to clutch their pearls and say, “oh, my heavens” when some racist turburger is denied access to some of the most sensitive information in the country. If this guy were a Democrat and had posted anything mildly critical of cops or supportive of Palestine, they’d be demanding his head on a pike.
@Connor: One thing I forgot. If you are falling for the notion that DOGE is actually exposing anything, you reveal yourself to be an easily manipulated simpleton.
If he’s just a young stupid kid that lacks self moderating ability then he doesn’t belong anywhere near the computer systems that this country runs on.
Indeed. This should be obvious. But, alas, partisanship is one helluva drug.
Edward Coristine, a 19-year-old member of Elon Musk’s squad that’s criss-crossing US government agencies, was fired from an internship after he was accused of sharing information with a competitor.
“Edward has been terminated for leaking internal information to the competitors,” said a June 2022 message from an executive of the firm, Path Network, which was seen by Bloomberg News. “This is unacceptable and there is zero tolerance for this.”
A spokesperson for the Arizona-based hosting and data-security firm said Thursday: “I can confirm that Edward Coristine’s brief contract was terminated after the conclusion of an internal investigation into the leaking of proprietary company information that coincided with his tenure.”
Long overdue merit hires, according to MAGA sheep:
unvetted teenage cyberthief, unqualified racist manchild, dog killers, frog-voiced heroin addicts, wife-beating drunks, Fox News hosts, drugged-up Nazi oligarchs, pro-Assad kooks, rapists who incite terror attacks on Congress, WWE hosts.
Unqualified: experienced civil servants loyal is to the constitution, not to Epstein-bestie raypist Trump — especially if black, brown, female, or gay/queer.
No wonder eggs sections are empty and planes are crashing with clown car DOGE goons in charge.
Steven spends a lot of time thoughtfully engaging posters.
Connor’s post would have fit in nicely on /b/, but not on a site populated by adults.
DK
@Fortune: Some sites have somewhat clever trolls. Not Trump slave crybabies whose main contribution is whining about the site, because there’s nothing else going on in your failson lives but hanging on the words of folks with the wit and decency you envy but lack.
You won’t find the regulars here tantruming in the comments section of Breitbart and Gateway Pundit. Humans don’t root around in dark recesses to hangout with roaches. By contrast, a stray bug does on occasion leave the nest, venturing into the light for nourishment.
So, yeah, what James, Steven, Matt etc. have built here is fun and unique. That’s why you MAGA sheep will be back tomorrow — still hate reading, still triggered, still changing no one’s mind.
Sucks to win an election and still hate your life huh? Turns out scapegoating trans woke DEI hire cat-eating CRT Haitian migrant pronoun drag shows for your problems — and simping for feckless, incompetent oligarchs — can’t turn a loser into a king. Sad!
Gavin
If a llama with one L is a holy man and a llama with 2 L’s is an animal, what’s a 3L llama?
A big fire in Boston!
That’s funnier than the idea that Connor’s connected to anything other than Doordash.
These right-wing trolls are painfully insecure, constantly seeking the approval of the liberals who live rent-free in their head, yet never standing on business because they know they’ve got no argument once the whataboutisms and red herrings are ignored.
“If a llama with one L is a holy man and a llama with 2 L’s is an animal, what’s a 3L llama?
A big fire in Boston!
That’s funnier than the idea that Connor’s connected to anything other than Doordash.”
It was also funnier when Ogden Nash told the same joke in rhyme.
Fortune
@DK:
@Gavin:
Honestly, how realistic is this theory that conservatives admire you and want to be your friends? All the heterodox comments either mock you or try to teach you. Maybe you don’t think you’re funny and/or ignorant but you have to admit you’re not admirable.
Gavin
Fortune, at some point even you have to admit you’re simply not capable of owning the libz. How many times are you going to keep trying and failing? You’ve been ratioed on every thread you’ve posted on.. and you still think you’re teaching anyone other than the libz living rent-free in your head?
Nobody’s impressed by your ridiculous attempts to use big words. You’re the one with a monolithic belief structure — not people who post here. Pro tip: When you use a word like “heterodox” which could have a much clearer word substituted without losing any meaning…… you’re the one who looks like a sweaty tryhard.
Fortune
@Gavin: Heterodox is a common word. It highlights how this site has an orthodoxy, as well as avoids the assumption that all dissenting voices on the site are in agreement. And I didn’t mean to pick on you above, for all I know you’re a great guy. I don’t know if we’ve ever talked.
ETA: Also, if I keep getting ratioed and coming back, that’s proof I’m not looking for friends, right? I wouldn’t want to be on a site where I get likes but nobody learns anything.
@Fortune: Honest to God in Heaven, I would love it if you would just make real arguments for your position. But all you do is poke. That’s not heterodoxy. It is just simplistic contrarianism.
You never respond to complex arguments and often say it isn’t your job to do so. On the one hand, that’s true, you are not obligated to anything. On the other, you seem to want to be taken seriously. That requires making actual arguments/rebuttals.
And you reveal your preferences for what you do, and do not, comment on.
Thousands of government workers have been told they are losing/will lose their jobs. Real people with real consequences. Not a peep from you.
A guy is revealed to have made blatant, no-wiggle-room racist comments and you criticize his firing.
Noting that I cannot know your mind, can you see what this looks like?
BTW: Elon can keep him employed at one of his companies (I hear tell he owns several and has a lot of money). And it is not even clear that they guy was drawing a federal salary, so what, exactly has he really lost here?
Unlike the federal employees whose lives are being thrown into turmoil, this guy almost certainly has a very soft landing in his future.
Gavin
No, heterodox is not a common word.. on any site that is lucky enough to count smart people as regular visitors.
It very well might be common on right-wing sites…. because that’s a word that stupid people think makes you sound smrt.
Getting ratioed and continuing to return means you can’t read the room. Continuing to return to a site where you don’t get likes and nobody learns anything from your posts is just a waste of everyone’s time. [and those posts above are about as negatively animated as I’ve ever seen Dr.Taylor. So, good job, or something, because you’re well on your way to an IP ban.]
The other fun part, of course, is that if you were actually interested in a conversation you wouldn’t think everyone on the site was Part Of An Orthodoxy. If everyone already conformed to a set of beliefs, those beliefs wouldn’t be able to be changed. Oopsie!
Funny how anyone who confronts reality on reality’s terms somehow keeps rejecting conservatism. It’s almost like it’s right-wingers that have an orthodoxy!
@Gavin: “Heterodox” is often used by people who think they are being edgy or smart in their dissent from more commonly accepted views.
In the context of internet discussions of this type it tends, to me, to be indicative of someone who is almost certainly pushing a specific orthodoxy of their own (in this case, standard contemporary right-wing views) but wanting to pretend like they are not part of a group nor influences thereby. It is kind of like how a lot of conservatives used to call themselves libertarians or “classic liberals” because it sounded more intellectual (not that some people who claim to be in those camps aren’t).
I first heard the term “heterodox” in grad school and it was used to describe economic policies that deviated from the established orthodoxy of basic market economics.
So, good job, or something, because you’re well on your way to an IP ban
FWIW, Fortune is not doing what it takes to get banned, which usually means constant off-topic comments (he tends to stick to the topic) and repeated personal attacks on the site’s authors. He comes close on occasion, but hasn’t crossed that line).
All the heterodox comments either mock you or try to teach you.
Ha. So you’ve never been a comedian or an educator then.
Nobody has anything to learn from your crying and complaining, boo. Nor your fake “I don’t support Trump” routine.
There’s battles over competing views on this site all the time. It’s just there’s also too much decency and morality to suck up to Trumpism like you do.
Simping for Nazis doesn’t make you heterodox. It just makes you a simp.
That’s not heterodoxy. It is just simplistic contrarianism.
That’s been my biggest issue with most of the self branded heterodox writers. It is almost always smug (edge lord) contrarianism–which becomes more and more apparent when you realize they can never agree with any orthodox position.
For the record, I also only encountered heterodox for the first time in grad school. And when you look at most of the people who have helped make heterodox a far more common phrase, they almost all have advance degrees (typically in the liberal arts or social sciences).
FWIW, Fortune is not doing what it takes to get banned, which usually means constant off-topic comments (he tends to stick to the topic) and repeated personal attacks on the site’s authors.
Seconding this. Fortune had done absolutely nothing that suggests they should be banned.
Comments
75 responses to “Vance + Musk: Self-Proclaimed Racist DOGE Employees Should Be Rehired”
There hasn’t been any shame around DOGE, so I wouldn’t expect it to appear just because one of them was like “white makes right!” – they would just say that’s locker room talk where they’re from and the magaverse would flood the zone with prominent pols claiming it’s racist DEI to call actual racism racist.
– Me, yesterday.
The weekend is going to be all about Republicans turning this into “we’re not the racist ones, it’s the woke anti-white DEI media talking about it that’s racist” and the guy will be hired back. CNN, WaPo, and NYT will parrot RW talking points and endlessly “debate” the extreme racism of his remarks/whether he should be in government/What This Tells Us About Trump, and they’ll embrace RW language about what he said as something absurd like “racially tinged questions”.
But what I want to know is who fired him or told him to resign? That implies someone taking responsibility within the quasi-government Muskenjugend. Who is that person enforcing some modicum of a standard?
So Vance, whose wife is of Indian decent, thinks it’s okay to normalize Indian hate.
Ted Cruz, famously, didn’t mind President Doughboy calling his wife ugly.
What’s with MAGA men being unwilling to defend their women?
Is this what they mean by a “tradwife?” Is this why they support the serial sex offender in the White House?
Pathetic excuses for men, if you ask me.
@Daryl: Pathetic excuses for men. I cannot stress enough how “unmanly” the right comes across to most people, especially women. Kissing up and kicking down is the way of flaccid cowards. Beyond gross and repulsive.
.
He was just using the tool as intended.
The particular things he posted read like stupid edgelord shit. Which may be worse than racism, but we’re counting angels dancing on the head of a pin at that point.
Anyway, we should go after these “kids” — actions have consequences, and they are hurting a lot of people and undermining the rule of law and ruining the country. That’s worse than Twitter edgelord shit or racism. Screw ‘em.
That’s not obvious at all
@Stormy Dragon: Indeed.
It’s not too hard to imagine Ellez posting this stuff in some kind of performance of “you can’t tell me what to do!!!!” Which is pretty much the same as what @Gustopher calls “stupid edgelord stuff”.
@ptfe:
FTFY
Huh. Maybe this is just a scaled up version of a classic edgelord move:
1. Say something terrible
2. Keep escalating until someone objects
3. Claim you were just joking
You know, it wasn’t serious…why is anyone even paying any attention to this guy and what he says.
@Stormy Dragon:
@Steven L. Taylor:
Exactly!
In addition, “some of Elez’s posts” is a particularly weaselly way of avoiding explicitly stating what was and wasn’t offensive.
Vance again:
First, The Vice President of the United States shouldn’t be using the word “dude” in public statements. Secondly, where this puts the bar for “bad” in Vance’s mind is impossible to tell.
I hated Vance when Trump selected him as running mate, it’s only gotten worse, and there’s no bottom in sight.
@ptfe:
And Who hired him?
“The best and the brightest”
A 25-year-old man (not a child) who has morally reprehensible beliefs, or at best makes morally reprehensible comments. If he’s a government spokesman or policy-maker he should be removed. Maybe advisor. (I don’t know what his job was.) Otherwise, what’s the argument? Are there prohibited beliefs for any government employee? ETA: I haven’t read the story, I don’t know if he was bringing those beliefs to work, which also should be grounds for removal. Private email or anonymous, I don’t see why he should be removed.
@Fortune:
Of course you don’t.
@Daryl: Give me a set of principles and/or law that let you fire him and can’t be used to fire people for being Jewish.
@Fortune:
And yet, unsurprisingly you have strong views and rise to defense of someone who makes racist comments for the LULZ.
BTW, since he isn’t in a union position, he doesn’t get the right to the very defense you are offering him. Also, Darren Beattie is in a policy position and still has a job. But looking forward to you complaining about DEI again.
@Matt Bernius: Does Beattie have a job?
As far as employment law is concerned, and I mostly am familiar with California employment law, which is friendlier to workers than many states, @Fortune has the right of it in this situation.
If Ellez was spouting this stuff at work, he’d be cooked. If he spouted this stuff not at work, but in a very visible and current way, such as would make his workplace seem “hostile” to other employees, he would be cooked.
But to fire him for this, and not risk a “bad faith” lawsuit, would require that the employer demonstrate that he had created a “hostile environment” for other workers. I doubt very much that would ever happen.
There may be other legal systems more friendly to firing him, of course.
@Fortune:
Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs
https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/03/politics/kfile-darren-beattie-state-department-controversial-tweets-white-nationalist-conference/index.html
@Jay L Gischer: I don’t know the conditions of Elez’s employment but if he’s a federal worker in a temporary slot they may be able to fire him without cause.
@mattbernius: Doesn’t he have to be confirmed?
Serious question: who is his employer? DOGE is a government segment, but it’s operating outside the rules of any agency and outside the remit of that agency. So is this guy a government employee? If so, we can see his employment records, including information about his hiring process – what was the position, how were they chosen, where is the funding from, what is their classification, how much are they paid? That all becomes public information, unless the person is hired for a very specific position in security => they have been fully vetted to obtain an appropriate clearance.
If they’re a contractor, the details of that contract are available…somewhere? And if they’re not a contractor or an employee, what the fuck are they doing touching government equipment?!?
(Fortune is technically correct here, but obviously arguing from bad faith. His silence in the face of “fired for talking to black people” gives the game away.)
@Jay L Gischer: I think you have a point from an employment law perspective, but that isn’t anybody’s conversation around it, unless some significant part of Musk’s 80% are also employment lawyers implicitly making your same point. The conversation around it that Musk appears to be promoting and Vance has no problem with is that these aren’t such bad opinions that anybody should be upset with.
@ptfe: Fired for talking to black people?
@Fortune:
So… check notes… as long as the Republican lead Senate confirms a white nationalist via a majority vote, that’s ok with you that the Trump Administration decided to place him in senior leadership… After previously firing him for… being a white nationalist….
@Matt Bernius: Check your notes again, you just made that up. I asked if he was employed.
@Fortune:
For full transparency, I fully admit that in a bit of frustration I posted something that I immediately regretted and edited my post to remove that. If you are referring to that, I rescind that comment and apologize.
If you are referring to the comment as it now stands:
I stand by it. You don’t share your thoughts beyond “the adult who wrote racist things on twitter shouldn’t have been fired.”
All I can say is if that, in all of this, is the hill you want to die one–what can I say, that says a LOT more about you, and how we should take your thoughts on these issues than anything else. I mean, you’re the one who decided to go all “LEE-ROYYYY JENKINS” on the “Won’t someone please think about the poor young man done in for posting a lot of racists stuff online when he thought no one would ever find out!!! He shouldn’t have lost his job.”
Of course, if you want to actually share more of your positions–again beyond “DEI is bad” and “Don’t fire 25 year olds for saying racist things”–then go for it.
Also, since twitter isn’t displaying the tweet from Beattie, here’s what he wrote:
Again, he has to be confirmed by the Senate. And still Trump and Vance decided this person is ok for an deputy secretary of state position.
And I guess Fortune’s ok with this too… OH MY GOD, I JUST REALIZED–I think Fortune is Susan Collin’s burner account. Same level of pearl grabbing mixed with ultimate compliancy.
@Jay L Gischer:
Given that DOGE is creating an incredibly tense environment, I can see an argument that this man’s publicly professed statements could tip that from tense to hostile. Remember, Twitter comments are public, and these are incredibly recent. He has tried to hide them, but they were right there.
And since DOGE is involved in reducing headcount — technically only recommending the headcount to be reduced, but still — his statements could be used by anyone who believes they were fired for race. In a business, he would represent an unacceptable legal risk to be anywhere near those processes.
I think it would come down to whether the employer thinks there risk-harm for firing this little racist and getting sued is more or less than the risk-harm in many lawsuits from other people being terminated.
I expect every boss I’ve ever had would fire his racist ass. Or silo him away on a “special project” where he never encounters another person.
@Matt Bernius: No one’s dying on any hill. Drop the drama. My point as always is your hair isn’t on fire so stop acting like it. You don’t need another commenter being technically wrong but claiming to be in good faith, you need someone to tell you to calm down and think whether you really want government workers to be fired based on personal politics. You’re the one who thought to write an article about it, Leroy, I just commented.
@Fortune:
Huh, so great to know that you think explicit racism is acceptable “personal politics” for anyone working in government. Which I guess is why you still refuse to comment on Darren Beattie either.
I also, based on a bunch of interactions, wonder the degree to which you’d actually be willing to extend those same courtesies to people whose positions you weren’t prepared to look past. Is there any personal politics that you wouldn’t find acceptable?
BTW, you are right, my hair is on fire right now–and it’s because I actually know what people like Musk and others are dismantling and seeing the real and painful effects it’s currently having on good people who have been trying to make government work better for everyone. And I also know the long term negative impact that this is going to have on vulnerable people across this country–including many people who voted for Trump.
In the meantime I have to deal with spineless people like you who are afraid to actually take positions trying to hand wave away the damage and pretend that we should just accept willful racism as just another viewpoint. It’s great that you think you’re safe from the fallout from all of this and can pretend to be above it all.
Me, I will apologize when I get something wrong. But I’m NEVER going to apologize for caring and working against what is currently happening.
@Joe: Oh, I don’t endorse those opinions, not for a hot second. I am happy to condemn them, not just as morally inappropriate, but damaging to productivity and organizational effectiveness.
I am quite sure that ability and skills come in big variety of packages, not just the strong-jawed white guy package.
@Fortune:
BTW, one final point–you have been incredible silent in just about every other thread dealing with the Federal layoffs and persecutions. Then you pop up here, in this one, to say that this was wrong. BTW, let’s not lose sight of the fact that someone in the Administration fired this man.
So, I’m genuinely curious: were you silent on all those other posts because you agreed with the general premise that those positions shouldn’t be eliminated and the purging steps that were being taken were wrong?
I’m writing that because I know you once commented that you tend to only respond when you think people get something wrong.
@Gustopher: Hmm, for some reason I thought the comments were maybe a year old or so? And posted on a non-corporate forum, under a different username.
The only reason it came to light at all is because some third party outed him.
I would have a very big problem hiring someone with this hung on him. It’s easier to not hire someone than it is to fire them.
I very much doubt whether the “hostile work environment” business applies to federal employees. I don’t know though, one way or another. I also believe that Trump’s attitude is “go ahead and sue us and see how far that gets you”. This will never cost Trump himself a dime. The taxpayers will pay for any judgement. Nor will he be vulnerable to criminal prosecution. You know why.
The most important accountability is political accountability. And the South Koreans are way ahead of us on that score.
I’m old enough to remember when, back in 1970, Richard Nixon nominated to the Supreme Court a Leon Carswell, a decidedly pedestrian if not mediocre judge from Florida. During the senate hearings Senator Roman Hruska (R-Nebraska) defended the nomination by saying:
Epilogue: Carswell was not confirmed. That was then, this is now.
Look at where we are now; the Republican Senate is Roman Hruska writ large. This is how they see the federal government and the federal judiciary. Approximately 99% of Republicans would confirm a party-pack of Twinkies and a case of 16oz Mountain Dew soda, just because they can. There is no quality of control with this crew, anything goes.
The same with their quasi-legal staffing of the DOGE team. Nothing matters, only loyalty and fealty to President Musk (I know, I know, that was gratuitous.)
@Jay L Gischer:
Thanks for raising that point about CA labor law. I will consider that view in terms of employment law. I also wonder the degree to which your onboarding agreements would interact with that.
And, like @Joe said, this and most government roles that are this high profile create messy situations.
All Trumpists are by definition comfortable with racism and misogyny.
So it doesn’t matter what is in their hearts or private souls, they are eager and willing collaborators with injustice.
About the only silver lining is that they still yelp with indignation when we point this out.
@Jay L Gischer: Mmm, I dunno if it’s that cut-and-dried, as a past and future business lead in California. Yes, Cali has more worker protections than most states, but we are still an “at-will” employment state. Employees can separate for any reason, and employers can fire for almost any reason. The “almost” covering the usual protected classes: race, gender, sexual orientation, political affiliation, religion, age etc.
Similar to most employees in most states.
In addition, most employment contracts these days termination of employment based on off-work public conduct detrimental to the employer’s rep.
Predictably, bootlicking MAGA slaves, who don’t support Trump despite simping for everything Trump does no matter what, will pretend sending racist tweets is protected class “personal politics.” But you’d be hard pressed to find any court or governmental employment agency to agree (at least pre Jan 20, 2025).
Case study: I was on the board of a CA healthcare institution whose exec. director was fired for off-site drug-related activity, but that had not affected his job performance. He claimed wrongful termination. The State rejected his claim, and he also lost his civil suit.
My understanding is that union employees — especially in government unions — have more protections. They can be very difficult to fire, especially for outside conduct. But even those protections are not absolute.
In any case, the dumb kid in question is not a government union employee. It’s not at all clear he was officially hired or who pays him. That’s another problem with Musk his unqualified children of DOGE (Dangerous Oligarch Grabbing Everything). They should not be editing sensitive US Treasury code and illegally downloading Americans’ bank and health data to their unsecured private laptops.
Their time would be better spent brainstorming how to end Putin’s Ukraine attack, how to prevent Trump’s WW3 invasions of Gaza and Mexico, and how to contain bird flu and lower the rising cost of eggs, housing, and healthcare. Rapist Trump pledged to fix these problems “on day one” and instead destroyed aviation safety and released 1,500+ criminals.
Of course, another issue buried in this conversation, especially as it turns toward Beattie is the pearl-clutching fear of what a DEI hire might bring to the table, the absolute insistence on meritocracy, while actually hiring these kinds of great white mopes.
@Matt Bernius:
I don’t know, if I look over the article or the thread and it’s stupid then I usually don’t bother responding. I saw the GSA one and thought of pointing out GSA mostly owns buildings, not leases them, but by that point people were already talking about impeaching Trump for interfering with the courts, so there was nothing left to salvage there. I would have had to look up ownership of courthouses and even if I were right, someone would have said I was right but commenting in bad faith.
This article sounded reasonable and it didn’t take much time to realize the flaw in its argument. I could reply and get a concession to my point quickly.
“First, we’re not talking about a “kid”–this is an adult who at the age of either 24 or 25 thought it was a good idea to post racist comments online.”
I will breathlessly await your essay on how a twenty-something Bill Clinton should publicly apologize, perhaps forego all his presidential related rewards for his published opposition to “Brown.”
Robert Byrd? (among many other Dem southerners) Lyndon Johnson? Al Gore? Barack “Trayvon Could Have Been Me” Obama. Race bait much?? Or most recently, Joe “Then You Ain’t Black” Biden. I guess blacks are puppets who better vote Dem if they think right.
There are plenty of racists to go around. All stripes. All ages. All ethnicities. A pox on all of them.
It seems to me you just saw a cheap opportunity to try to attempt to discredit DOGE and threw some shixt up against the wall. I’m observing an awful lot of selective outrage here.
Here’s a dirty little secret. If every person who expressed a controversial opinion (and lord knows, someone would label it racist), laughed at it, or repeated it, and was forced to resign, then the unemployment rate would approach 90%. Have some perspective. I used to be a pretty good basketball player. Then I saw White Men Can’t Jump. Took three years of therapy to recover from the mental anguish. But seriously, visit a sports locker room sometime. A black fraternity. A pickup basketball game at a local gym. And dare I say, the United States Congress.
BTW – I’m connected. Perhaps you’d like to meet, as some say, Justice Clarence “Uncle Tom” Thomas some time.
@Matt Bernius:
I find this confusing. Is his premise that morale is something more concrete than a feeling?
Yes, you do. If you belong to the Klan, the Nazi Party or MAGA, whatever you think you are, by working in a racist organization, you are a racist.
@Kurtz: His premise is whatever will suit whichever argument he’s currently making. See: Definition of “conservatism.”
@Connor:
It is always fun when people unwilling to post under their own names try to flex about how important they are. It is very impressive!
In regards to the OP, this is just another piece of the Elon puzzle.
-Nazi salute
-Nazi jokes/alt-right memes
-Holocaust minimization.
-defending rather blatant racism.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Did you have a substantive point about my comment you would like to address?
I stand by it. There is no reason for selective outrage. Its akin to whataboutism. Invoking it is intellectually light. Racism is a really low rent argument. It exists all around us, over long periods of time. That’s unfortunate.
And what is so abundantly clear: the diversion of funds in many government organizations is being exposed. And the beneficiaries are squealing like stuck pigs. And those who defend are simply arguing for the continuation of what would make Bernie Madoff blush: fraud.
Long live DOGE. Its about time.
@Matt Bernius: You wrote a cogent and caring post about how the Trump administration (as represented by the weasel-like defenses of VP Vance and DOGE-lord Musk) will never hold being racist against you unless it’s woke-racism and this thread degraded into a back and forth about the personal politics (or “morally reprehensible beliefs” in someone’s words) of a 25 year old minion who will be forgotten about tomorrow.
Stupid trolls!
@ptfe:
Apparently the legal basis of DOGE is that it’s a re-designation of the Office of Digital Services.
Which, among other things, was tasked with improving federal cyber-security standards.
lol
@Connor:
Dude, you do not have to snort the whole 8 ball at once.
How was Obama stoking racial hatred with that statement?
You mean, like, Chris Rufo?
Wait, you get your coke from Clarence Thomas?
@Steven L. Taylor:
Now he’s asking for a substantive response to a barely coherent comment.
The sentence structure, especially at the beginning suggests this person is a bully.
I can see him poking someone in the chest with each name of a Democratic politician.
I would also question the sanity of anyone who would be excited to hang out with Clarence Thomas unless they have upcoming business before the court.
I mean, Kavanaugh I could see. He would probably be a fun hang; just keep an eye on from any intoxicated ladies present and knock before you open any closed door.
But Clarence Thomas? I would be a little creeped out to be anywhere near someone whose idea of sexy talk involves a public hair on a soda can.
If he’s just a young stupid kid that lacks self moderating ability then he doesn’t belong anywhere near the computer systems that this country runs on. These people really are dumb…
@Fortune: Of course you don’t know. You’re too busy knee jerk defending your tribe to bother finding out..
@Connor:
What exactly is your point?
Certainly, various persons, at various times, may have said things that were in hindsight mistaken.
The point is what is happening NOW: a bunch of Musk-acolytes, without vetting, without relevant experience, are busily engaged in monkeying about with Congressionally mandated programs and expenditure, and in particular, the basic federal employee records and federal payments systems databases.
And at least some of them (and Elez is NOT the only one: see Kliger re Fuentes) have social media records that indicate extreme-right alignments.
The whole project is absurdly ill-conceived.
If President Trump wanted to do this in a serious and orderly fashion, he could have appointed Musk as head of OMB and carried out an in-depth audit of spending, then reporting to Congress with recommendations for stopping various items.
Instead, you have an effective usurpation of the right of Congress to determine and oversee expenditure.
This is a short route to the executive becoming the sovereign.
Note: not just a monarchy, but a full-on, absolute, sovereignty.
Are you quite sure that is what you desire?
Because then, your problem is, what happens if the other party gets to appoint an imperator?
Do you then try to walk it all back?
Or just try to prevent that happening?
See Roman Republic, fall of.
@Steven L. Taylor: It’s funny, most sites have a thoughtful main writer and a bunch of smack-talking extremists in the comments section who bring down the conversation…
I’m sorry. The people who lose their minds every time Libs of TikTok or whoever posts some video of a gay teacher don’t get to clutch their pearls and say, “oh, my heavens” when some racist turburger is denied access to some of the most sensitive information in the country. If this guy were a Democrat and had posted anything mildly critical of cops or supportive of Palestine, they’d be demanding his head on a pike.
@Connor: I stand by the notion that if you want us to be impressed as to who you are, then don’t be anonymous.
As to the rest, I primarily see poor comparisons mixed in with a defense of racism.
So, again, most impressive!
@Connor: One thing I forgot. If you are falling for the notion that DOGE is actually exposing anything, you reveal yourself to be an easily manipulated simpleton.
Most impressive!
@Matt:
Indeed. This should be obvious. But, alas, partisanship is one helluva drug.
@Fortune: I guess I am not giving you enough attention.
Is your non-sequitur supposed to alarm me?
Musk’s DOGE Teen Was Fired By Cybersecurity Firm for Leaking Company Secrets (Bloomberg)
Long overdue merit hires, according to MAGA sheep:
unvetted teenage cyberthief, unqualified racist manchild, dog killers, frog-voiced heroin addicts, wife-beating drunks, Fox News hosts, drugged-up Nazi oligarchs, pro-Assad kooks, rapists who incite terror attacks on Congress, WWE hosts.
Unqualified: experienced civil servants loyal is to the constitution, not to Epstein-bestie raypist Trump — especially if black, brown, female, or gay/queer.
No wonder eggs sections are empty and planes are crashing with clown car DOGE goons in charge.
@Fortune:
Steven spends a lot of time thoughtfully engaging posters.
Connor’s post would have fit in nicely on /b/, but not on a site populated by adults.
@Fortune: Some sites have somewhat clever trolls. Not Trump slave crybabies whose main contribution is whining about the site, because there’s nothing else going on in your failson lives but hanging on the words of folks with the wit and decency you envy but lack.
You won’t find the regulars here tantruming in the comments section of Breitbart and Gateway Pundit. Humans don’t root around in dark recesses to hangout with roaches. By contrast, a stray bug does on occasion leave the nest, venturing into the light for nourishment.
So, yeah, what James, Steven, Matt etc. have built here is fun and unique. That’s why you MAGA sheep will be back tomorrow — still hate reading, still triggered, still changing no one’s mind.
Sucks to win an election and still hate your life huh? Turns out scapegoating trans woke DEI hire cat-eating CRT Haitian migrant pronoun drag shows for your problems — and simping for feckless, incompetent oligarchs — can’t turn a loser into a king. Sad!
If a llama with one L is a holy man and a llama with 2 L’s is an animal, what’s a 3L llama?
A big fire in Boston!
That’s funnier than the idea that Connor’s connected to anything other than Doordash.
These right-wing trolls are painfully insecure, constantly seeking the approval of the liberals who live rent-free in their head, yet never standing on business because they know they’ve got no argument once the whataboutisms and red herrings are ignored.
@Gavin:
“If a llama with one L is a holy man and a llama with 2 L’s is an animal, what’s a 3L llama?
A big fire in Boston!
That’s funnier than the idea that Connor’s connected to anything other than Doordash.”
It was also funnier when Ogden Nash told the same joke in rhyme.
@DK:
@Gavin:
Honestly, how realistic is this theory that conservatives admire you and want to be your friends? All the heterodox comments either mock you or try to teach you. Maybe you don’t think you’re funny and/or ignorant but you have to admit you’re not admirable.
Fortune, at some point even you have to admit you’re simply not capable of owning the libz. How many times are you going to keep trying and failing? You’ve been ratioed on every thread you’ve posted on.. and you still think you’re teaching anyone other than the libz living rent-free in your head?
Nobody’s impressed by your ridiculous attempts to use big words. You’re the one with a monolithic belief structure — not people who post here. Pro tip: When you use a word like “heterodox” which could have a much clearer word substituted without losing any meaning…… you’re the one who looks like a sweaty tryhard.
@Gavin: Heterodox is a common word. It highlights how this site has an orthodoxy, as well as avoids the assumption that all dissenting voices on the site are in agreement. And I didn’t mean to pick on you above, for all I know you’re a great guy. I don’t know if we’ve ever talked.
ETA: Also, if I keep getting ratioed and coming back, that’s proof I’m not looking for friends, right? I wouldn’t want to be on a site where I get likes but nobody learns anything.
@Fortune: Honest to God in Heaven, I would love it if you would just make real arguments for your position. But all you do is poke. That’s not heterodoxy. It is just simplistic contrarianism.
You never respond to complex arguments and often say it isn’t your job to do so. On the one hand, that’s true, you are not obligated to anything. On the other, you seem to want to be taken seriously. That requires making actual arguments/rebuttals.
And you reveal your preferences for what you do, and do not, comment on.
Thousands of government workers have been told they are losing/will lose their jobs. Real people with real consequences. Not a peep from you.
A guy is revealed to have made blatant, no-wiggle-room racist comments and you criticize his firing.
Noting that I cannot know your mind, can you see what this looks like?
BTW: Elon can keep him employed at one of his companies (I hear tell he owns several and has a lot of money). And it is not even clear that they guy was drawing a federal salary, so what, exactly has he really lost here?
Unlike the federal employees whose lives are being thrown into turmoil, this guy almost certainly has a very soft landing in his future.
No, heterodox is not a common word.. on any site that is lucky enough to count smart people as regular visitors.
It very well might be common on right-wing sites…. because that’s a word that stupid people think makes you sound smrt.
Getting ratioed and continuing to return means you can’t read the room. Continuing to return to a site where you don’t get likes and nobody learns anything from your posts is just a waste of everyone’s time. [and those posts above are about as negatively animated as I’ve ever seen Dr.Taylor. So, good job, or something, because you’re well on your way to an IP ban.]
The other fun part, of course, is that if you were actually interested in a conversation you wouldn’t think everyone on the site was Part Of An Orthodoxy. If everyone already conformed to a set of beliefs, those beliefs wouldn’t be able to be changed. Oopsie!
Funny how anyone who confronts reality on reality’s terms somehow keeps rejecting conservatism. It’s almost like it’s right-wingers that have an orthodoxy!
Here’s a question: what orthodoxy are you challenging in this thread?
@Gavin: “Heterodox” is often used by people who think they are being edgy or smart in their dissent from more commonly accepted views.
In the context of internet discussions of this type it tends, to me, to be indicative of someone who is almost certainly pushing a specific orthodoxy of their own (in this case, standard contemporary right-wing views) but wanting to pretend like they are not part of a group nor influences thereby. It is kind of like how a lot of conservatives used to call themselves libertarians or “classic liberals” because it sounded more intellectual (not that some people who claim to be in those camps aren’t).
I first heard the term “heterodox” in grad school and it was used to describe economic policies that deviated from the established orthodoxy of basic market economics.
@Gavin:
FWIW, Fortune is not doing what it takes to get banned, which usually means constant off-topic comments (he tends to stick to the topic) and repeated personal attacks on the site’s authors. He comes close on occasion, but hasn’t crossed that line).
@Fortune:
Ha. So you’ve never been a comedian or an educator then.
Nobody has anything to learn from your crying and complaining, boo. Nor your fake “I don’t support Trump” routine.
There’s battles over competing views on this site all the time. It’s just there’s also too much decency and morality to suck up to Trumpism like you do.
Simping for Nazis doesn’t make you heterodox. It just makes you a simp.
@Steven L. Taylor:
That’s been my biggest issue with most of the self branded heterodox writers. It is almost always smug (edge lord) contrarianism–which becomes more and more apparent when you realize they can never agree with any orthodox position.
For the record, I also only encountered heterodox for the first time in grad school. And when you look at most of the people who have helped make heterodox a far more common phrase, they almost all have advance degrees (typically in the liberal arts or social sciences).
@Steven L. Taylor:
Seconding this. Fortune had done absolutely nothing that suggests they should be banned.