It is unfortunately not uncommon to see people tweeting about getting rid of a particular race or gender on social media. It does cause a bit more of a stir when that person is the spokesperson for the public schools in Washington, D.C., Hilary Tone. In a heated response to word that former Texas governor Rick Perry would be picked as Energy Secretary, Tone dashed off a statement on Twitter that “If wanting to get rid of something qualifies you to run it, I want to be Secretary of White Men.” Not exactly what one expects from a spokesperson, but the D.C. schools have been remarkably quiet in response to the posting (which was later withdrawn) by its spokesperson.
It was clearly an attempt by Tone to be funny that was a colossal failure. However, we have previously discussed such “jokes” by judges and others. I would not want to see an employee fired over a joke. Indeed, I think that we need to loosen up considerably in disciplining public employees for their statements and conduct in private life. The only interest that I have in this story is the rule that applies to such cases in the future.
Before working for the DCPS, Tone worked for Media Matters, an organization created by the controversial David Brock — a vicious Clinton ally who has been denounced by Bernie Sanders as “scum” and even other Clinton supporters as “bat-shit crazy.”
We have previously discussed the concern over the unequal treatment of such comments. If a spokesperson had joked about the desire to get rid of all black males, would the response be the same?
We have previously discussed the concern that public employees are being punished for statements or images posted on social media. Of course, this is the spokesperson for the schools, but it was a statement made on her personal Twitter account, @HToneTastic.
It was a surprising lack of judgment for a spokesperson of a municipal agency that depends greatly on federal funding. To then reportedly add a racist and sexist element to that political statement is astonishing. She first referenced Perry’s past statement that he wanted to eliminate the Energy Department and then added “If wanting to get rid of something qualifies you to run it, I want to be Secretary of White Men.”
Fox reports that she later took down the tweet and sent out a statement “hey internet – upon reading my mentions, it occurs to me that my tweet about white men earlier today was in poor taste. My apologies.” One does not have to be a spokesperson ordinarily to require hindsight to see that it is remarkably dim to make political comments tinged with racist and sexist elements when you are the face of a major agency.
Yet, the DCPS sent out a fairly restrained statement:
“The social media posts were said on an employee’s personal social media accounts and do not reflect the views of DC Public Schools, which prides itself on being an inclusive organization regardless of race, ethnic background, religion, sex, language, family’s income level, or immigration status.”
I am highly sympathetic with the position of protecting free speech for public employees so long as there is one standard for all employees. Does that mean that the DCPS would take the same position on spokesperson’s joking about eradicating black males? What is the standard for such social media comments. It is not clear from the statement.
What do you think that standard should be?
What is the standard for such social media comments. It is not clear from the statement. What do you think that standard should be?
She’s a press agent. The standard is, ‘don’t tell demonstrable lies, don’t be the story; don’t make your boss look like a jack-wagon’.
Can her ass.
Yep, got to live by those rules in that biz. Time to find the door.
I pay Federal taxes; DC runs on Federal taxes. I am offended by her remarks, joking or not. She reeks of white privilege, liberal privilege, racism, sexism, and insensitivity, and has violated my safe space.
I demand her resignation. While I’m certain that the union rules, or whatever rules protect any federal or DC employee from being fired for any action but death, will prevent any disciplining of her, that doesn’t mean that public outcry can’t pressure her from being reassigned or from resigning.
I am a strong believer in revengism. “What goes around comes around.”
“While I’m certain that the union rules, or whatever rules protect any federal or DC employee from being fired for any action but death”
You might want to look into that. I don’t know. But at her level, she may be a political appointee and have essentially no job protection.
I would guess, but don’t know, that she can be fired, pretty much, at will.
Even rank and file teachers in DC have far fewer protections after Rhee.
(BTW, Did Rhee accomplish any thing positive for the students? Did she raise any scores? And what ever happened with her earlier record and the questions regarding increases in student scores?)
BFM: How do we know that some of the school board didn’t have the same position as she does?
“How do we know that some of the school board didn’t have the same position as she does?”
We don’t know that. Pardon me for being a bit cynical. But I would bet there are a few at her work who believe her remarks are not just funny but tell a deeper truth that they agree with.
It is unfortunate but it seems to be true that there are some who believe that a little racism in the right direction is not such a bad thing.
And there are some of us who believe that racism must be combated in all its quarters where ever it occurs.
True, but does her private tweet affect her job performance? She should be able to speak her peace as a benefit of citizenship in this country.
What about a Filipino-American police officer who writes in his or her incident report that the suspect was a white male?
Isn’t that a racist comment and one presupposes racial distinction is part of the job? Shouldn’t we be combating that, too?
Isn’t that a racist comment and one presupposes racial distinction is part of the job? Shouldn’t we be combating that, too?
No, he’s writing a description of the subject, not saying he wants to eliminate white males. This isn’t that difficult.
No one in public employment should have aught but minimal protection.
1. Nearly all public employees should be hired and promoted according to timely examination (including physical fitness for some) or hired from guild pools which you need an examination to enter.
2. If three supervisors in your chain of command sign an order terminating you, you’re gone.
3. You and your union rep can insist on a hearing in front of an arbitrator where you present evidence that you’ve been fired for one of a half-dozen impermissable reasons. NB, termination at will is the default and the termination is assumed to be valid.
4. You can at the arbitrator’s judgment have more hearings where you have the opportunity to prove your case by a preponderance of the evidence.
5. If you do prove your case, you get an indemnity and the matter is referred to an ombudsman who can at his discretion bring charges against the supervisors resulting in termination and being debarred from public employment for six years.
6. You don’t get your job back. You sit for civil service examinations like every other aspirant.
—
7. The only primary and secondary teachers on the public payroll work for the sheriff’s department and the prison system. They teach incorrigibles no other school will take.
Toads – there are schools that specialize in teaching at-risk or risked students. I worked at them for my entire high school teaching career. I traded students with the sheriff and the juvenile detention centers all the time. I did not see them as incorrigible, just students who needed more help.
DC’s an affluent jurisdiction. Little doubt their school budget is predominantly from local tax assessments. Just about every district in the country gets federal funding, but the contribution of the feds was around 7% of the total, last I checked.
Steve H — “I am offended by her remarks,…”
You don’t get it do you? Free speech means that a person has a right to offend you. You do not have a right not to be offended. Free speech as a principal and a freedom means that a person should not be punished merely because they said something you found offensive. If this were the standard for restricting free speech and/or punishing people for exercising free speech, then the free speech right would be hollow and useless.
For kicks, here’s our spokesperson’s self-proclaimed accomplishments from the website:
“A communications and media expert with six years of experience in politics and advocacy for social justice. Blends excellent writing, editing, and messaging skills with a dynamic ability for public speaking and outreach. Detail-oriented yet big picture thinker known for cultivating lasting personal relationships and quick decision-making in a fast-paced environment.”
Let me know when you stopping chuckling.
That was typed out with a macro. Change a few phrases, and it’s on half the resumes in the country.
first reader: Hillary Tone?
second reader: No! Hillary Tonedeaf.
This blog post was like Seinfield, a show about nothing.
Free speech that isn’t like yelling “Fire!” in a theater. Remember? Or, is there some double standard between Ze or Zir and white males?
Steve: Seinfeld ran for 9 years and was a perennial Nielsen ratings top five leading it twice. The actors became millionaires (Dreyfus didn’t need it) and the show’s famous scenes are embedded in the national ethos. Not too bad for a “show about nothing.” This blog should be so successful.
As to your rather pedestrian at bat on the issue of free speech, you missed the ball completely. The issue isn’t about the words used but that that the spokesman was a public official demeaning (in jest, she claims) a discreet part of the population she serves. That’s what makes it remarkable, not the stupidity of the remark or it’s hopeless attempt at humor.
Mespo: You didn’t watch enough of that show if you didn’t see the segment about Jerry going to one of the major networks about a show he had dreamed up. When asked by the producer, who was played by actual Executive Producer Larry David, what it was about, he or Castanza contemplated it was a “show about nothing.” And that’s exactly what it was, but it was admittedly funny even though there was no substance to it.
It’s the same with her comment about white males controlling the White House, and perhaps the silverbacks on the Hill who control public education and everything else in the federal district. Who knows?
If the bottom line is about public officials tweeting critical rather than free speech per se, I’m sure you’ll be holding President Trump’s feet to the fire. I’ll remind you when you don’t.
The producer was actor, Bob Balaban.
I’ll play along with the tangent. He sure looks like Larry David to me:
SteveG, He does look a bit like Larry David, but it’s not him. The actor does look a lot like Warren Littlefield, who was the NBC executive that developed Seinfeld. He is, as mespo stated, Bob Balaban. He has been in several mockumentaries like Best in Show, A Mighty Wind, etc. Although you never see the face of Steinbrenner in Seinfeld, the voice is that of Larry David. And, Larry David nailed Bernie Sanders on SNL this past year.
There are some real Seinfeld junkies roaming this blog!
Balaban’s best role was opposite Willford Brinkley in Absence of Malice.
My mistake then. Firing squad at high noon?
You get a pass. We Christians like to give a reprieve to a pagan during the Christmas season.
Thanks, Nick. I feel like the White House gobbler at Thanksgiving.
Steve – doesn’t the WH gobbler get a pardon?
Speaking of pardons, what odds would you give that Hillary Clinton will be pardoned in the second week of January?
Steve – I think that if Obama pardons Hillary, he is admitting she is guilty of criminal behavior. So, since she has always claimed to be white as the driven snow, no, I do not think that he will pardon her or if he tries to pardon her, she will accept.
No firing squad just the admonishment that certainty, in matters of opinion, is the land of the fool.
Larry played the lawyer in the cape and the voice of George Steinbrenner.
Public schools = child abuse.
Private schools = profit center
If you fancy you’re going to make yourself wealthy teaching at or running a private school, buy my bridge.
One of the ways private schools make money is by stiffing and short-changing the faculty and staff. The goal of the school privatizing movement is twofold: First, to reduce or eliminate the political power of teacher unions. Second, to divert public education moneys to private schools while reducing staff costs, so as to make them profitable. There is a view held by some, that if an endeavor can’t turn a profit, it isn’t worth doing.
Hilarious.
No, those aren’t the goals, except in the imagination of teacher’s union shills.
Private schools, which are cash-on-the-barrelhead with endowment income, pay modest salaries because that’s what philanthropic agencies can afford. More than 3/4 of the students enrolled in private schools are in church-affiliated institutions and few of the remainder are attending schools run by commercial companies. Commercial companies run charter schools under contract with local school boards.
“If you fancy you’re going to make yourself wealthy teaching at or running a private school, buy my bridge.”
Teaching at a private school – no.
Being CEO of a corporation that owns private schools – yes, maybe.
No, because commercial companies operate charter schools under contract with districts. Private schools are predominantly denominational (about 3/4 of the enrollment) and the remainder incorporated as philanthropies.
Maany years ago, I was a third drawer friend to a couple of teachers at one of the private academies where I lived. This was one of two schools which were the largest such in that area not run by the Catholic diocese and religious orders, and each enrolled about 450 students (among them a lot of doctor’s kids). One of them has a typescript from the administrative office showing that the median salary at the school was at the time $15,000 per annum. The other, a lapsed college teacher, tells me he’s paid $18,000 a year. He tells me they give him a premium for his PhD (which only two other teachers at the school had). The other tells me the man also got a premium because the teaching load in the man’s department was a third higher than in the other department because of staffing problems. Mean public employee compensation was $21,000 per annum in that particular commuter belt at that time. What that private school was paying their standard teachers was a shade above the probationary salaries the school district was paying its neophyte special ed teachers at the time my sister was working for the city school district.
This is unquestionably one of the most idiotic statements I’ve read at this blog.
This was directed at KCFleming
I don’t get the hostility to public education either.
I especially find the hostility puzzling since there is no compelling evidence that charter schools produce better results.
It seems to me the best evidence is that, right now, no body and no approach has a silver bullet for teaching children.
Part of the problem seems to be that schools, any school, face severe competition from other social institutions for the time and attention of children.
People are hostile to public schools because schooling is a fee-for-service enterprise which arises naturally on the market. If you’re concerned about distributional questions, you can finance private schooling with vouchers. What we certainly do no need is a public agency exercising local monopolies.
While we’re at it the status of teachers as public employees has been a conduit for the exercise of influence by predatory teacher’s unions, the predatory public interest bar, and the idiot teacher’s colleges. The schools themselves are wretchedly disorderly most places, recruit and retain many fairly unintelligent people in teaching and administrative jobs, lack focus, misallocate time, &c. They stink.
” What is the standard for such social media comments. It is not clear from the statement.”
The standard is this:
1. If a statement derides whites, especially white males, it’s probably fine.
2. The test? If you insert any other race/gender into your statement, and now it offends you, the original anti-white male statement is fine.
I think there may be a widespread perception that it’s okay to discriminate on the basis of race, as long as you discriminate against a racial majority. It would be nice for Professor Turley to comment on that.
It was posted on the web that there is a sign by the door in that school district which says: Where da White women at?
As usual, DC schools are always in a race to the bottom. She found it. She was trying to be funny but wasn’t. We all have friends like that.
After month after month after month after month…of unrelenting disgusting verbal effluence containing racism, bigotry, misogyny, lies, exaggerations, etc. by DDT our next President and this is all you come up with. Is Turley, DDT’s Secretary of Apologies?
Bush Derangement Syndrome has mutation into Trump Trauma Disorder. I fear, based on reading the MSM, that this mutation has gone airborne.
Good thing DC Schools got rid of Michelle Rhee. Ms. Rhee would never have hired such an intelligent, savvy spokeswoman as this.
There is little doubt that had she made a comment like that about African Americans, there would have been immediate calls for her resignation or termination and she would be gone.
I think you can make the case that there is sometimes different treatment for racist or sexist remarks depending on the race or gender of the person making the remark.
That ought to disturb all of us.
Why do we have so many expectations from people in any form of service to the government, local or federal?
The government is 19+ trillion in debt, so why should people not want to live on credit?
We have people whose job is to enforce the law and obey the laws they help create disregarding a plethora of laws for their own enrichment and political expediency aimed at gaining more self enriching powers.
Why should the average citizen follow the rules while those in obvious seats of power do not?
If the President elect of the United States of America can go on emotional rants about anything he feels inclined to do so, why should we expect anything professional or mature from some mouthpiece of the DC schools?
I think the Professor has his expectations for civil servants and what the government should provide as decorum, let alone delivery of services, set just a tad bit too high.
To just address your first paragraph, federal government debt is not like private or personal or household debt. Or even like state debt. There is no timetable or necessity for it to be ever paid back. The government controls the interest rates paid, and can always make servicing the debt a reasonable national expense. Federal government debt does not have to be a burden to our children or our grandchildren or our great-great-great-….. grandchildren a million years from now. I like to think of it more like shares in a corporation.
The standard should be ‘anything goes’.
KKK on Jerry Springer, Trump on Twitter, Powell in the UN Security council, companies in advertisements and people in public.
BS is rampant. I like my bs up close and personal, where I can get a good whiff of it.
Defamation laws be damned. Grow some skin 🙂
I somehow have the feeling that, if public discourse turns into a non-stop food fight (or worse), it will have a good ending.
Sorry, NOT have a good ending! NOT, repeat NOT!
“I want to be secretary of white men”. I think she’s horny.
People like this Media Matters Moron ought to have the moral integrity to stand on their beliefs. The public deserve to know exactly what out self-appointed elite really believe. Deleting her tweet was a typical act of cowardice.
Nothing surprising here. Statements by Leftists are always going to inflammatory and vile. What would you expect from typical Leftist anti-American, anti-Civilization ultrasubcretinesque subhumans?
Intelligence? Common sense? Simple decency? Those things are anathema to today’s ardent Leftists.
Is it really helpful to post something which consists entirely of name-calling and insults?
I’m sorry, Jay. I thought I was being nice about Hillary Tone-Deaf and entirely fair.
I get her comment was an attempt at humour but why criticise her, a white female, for trying to inject some humour into our lives? Most of the time humour works by alleviating the tension which was her intention.
” Most of the time humour works by alleviating the tension which was her intention.”
Well of course. Nothing relieves stress better than the hilarity of an old time Klan meeting.
Making jokes about race and gender can be truly uplifting – everybody knows that.
Racism never jokes, but there are some out there who think they’re gods and should wipe out others who don’t agree with their view. Yes talking about the Klan. Wouldn’t you want to see justice for everyone based on the crime and nothing else? Justice should be blind don’t you think?
Dave,
If it was funny, please explain why she deleted it?
It was in poor taste with the Klan threatening to kill her. I thought it was dark humour which I get but not everyone else does. Of course with Drumpf as president the civil rights bill, which was hard fought for, will be repealed and the Klan will rise again.
There are jokes, and there are dark jokes, and then there are jokes that express a desire to get rid of men of a certain race.
Not sure if that alleviates tension or creates it.
Creates it, I only said it was an attempt at humour.
What exactly is funny about it? She is a batsheet crazy leftist. And proved she sees everything through the prism of race. A big reason why liberals lost this last election cycle. Bigly.
It’s a good thing there aren’t any batsheet crazy right-wingers, who see everything through the prism of race.
You don’t get it do you? She was attempting to be humorous in a sarcastic manner until the Klan threatened her life.
” … why criticise her, a white female …”
I am fascinated by assumption that we should ignore racist and sexist comments when they are uttered by a white female.
Why is that. Why should we set aside our standards based on the sex or race of the person making the comment.
So your bigotry shines through, well happy should you be when race and sex once again become dominated by the white supremacist knuckleheads under Drumpfs presidency.
We say in jest what we’d like to say in seriousness but fear to.
Is this woman supposed to be our Secretary of Education? What is happening to our society?
No. She’s a dingbat who works in the press office of the DC Board of Education. She’s a flak. And, evidently, and undisciplined and lousy one.