Hahahaha, thank you. I can’t be the only person that did a double-take at the “ONE tweet” bit. If it had been one tweet, ABC may very well have gambled on keeping her. Instead, it was the 40+ other tweets that painted a very clear picture of what would happen if they didn’t fire her. 

(i.e. one offensive tweet cost Roseanne Barr her TV show and reputation.)

I don’t tweet. I don’t get it. My instagram and facebook don’t say anything I wouldn’t say in public. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t articles I’ve posted that someone out there might find offensive. There’s probably stuff that resonated with me 5 years ago that I wouldn’t agree with now. It would suck to think…

I think immediately jumping to ‘B’ would create a Streisand Effect where ones past behavior would come under scrutiny when it may not have otherwise. The point of deleting old posts (which everyone should do, btw) is to get ahead of the story, not to create one. 

Doesn’t “b.” practically beg for a deep dig into the way-back machine? This would probably only be worth it for a gossip column if one becomes an entertainer or oppo research if one becomes a politician. For a normal civilian, why call attention to it? There are people (Hello, I'm Jerry) who've never had a social…

Here’s another consideration: a lot of people are just getting hip to the fact that the intention of the written word in of-the-moment attempts at humor, whether in a blog, a tweet, or a simple comment, don’t usually translate well from their verbal, conversational cadence. And they age even worse.

It’s easy:

People have always been brands, but  typically it’s called a reputation.

Well “brand” is basically the front we present to people really but with a catchy PR term. Most people fictionalise or alter their behaviour in public in some way already and that’s all they’re on about really.

Uhh, OF COURSE you should. Frankly, I am surprised publicists don’t all do this already. When I was in freaking high school I was smart enough to realize that posting drunk pictures of myself on Facebook could have negative consequences... And I was a fucking dumbass in high school! If dipshit Zukka could figure that…

What’s with Jez’s clickbait headlines today? This is the third headline that it utterly belied by the content of the story. The Times (for all it’s many, many, MANY faults) didn’t capitulate to the racist trolls, it literally stood by her .

The headline doesn’t seem to match the story? “Capitulates” suggests they fired her, when they actually released a statement of support. Total clickbait.

You don’t think Clinton’s press secretary lied every day? Bush, Jr’s? Obama’s? Please.

Agree - not that it’s unimportant that she is up there being such a piece of shit everyday, but it’s hardly ever new and acting like THIS IS THE DAY SHE TOTALLY LOSES IT! is kind of...dumb. She has been steady in her lying, panic, and anger the whole time.

This is an unprecedented amount of lying. All press secretaries are out there to push the administrations narrative, but this administration outwardly lies every single day multiple times. This is not normal.

“isn’t it ‘interesting’ that Sarah Huckabee Sanders answered a question about racist police violence by going off on a wild, panicked tangent about the economy and border security?”

You succeeded, I hope you’re happy. You got someone to google “kek”.

That was defensive? You live in a very toxic world, my friend. Get a life....

Are you saying that his tweets don’t contradict each other? Because the journalists were right to point out that the tweets do seem to be coming from a person who wasn’t even truly aware what the FISA ACT is.

Well, thanks for reading anyway!