State Employee Faces Discipline for Looking at Porn Insulting Obama at Work

Posted on Comments

Stereotypes are harmful and one would be promoting a sexist stereotype to say that women have a habit of forwarding “cute” e-mails, no matter how many times your mother-in-law does it. However, not all junk-mail is created equal:

DENVER, Colo. – A Colorado Department of Transportation employee could face discipline for forwarding an email with a photo depicting President Barack Obama shining the shoes of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
The 73-year-old woman, whose name was not released, forwarded the email to at least four co-workers, among other people, on Dec. 22 using her state email account. At least one recipient complained.
The person who originally sent the e-mail, who isn’t a state employee, wrote “It appears he (Obama) has found his niche.”

See, that’s just wrong. Maybe that photo is funny to 73-year-old women, but the rest of us? Blehh. If we’re going to get fired from our jobs for looking at pictures that depict people in insultingly demeaning roles, we’re going to get our money’s worth. Colorado state employees, consider yourself warned that you may be fired for looking at the offensive, degrading stereotype depicted below if you click “Read more.”

From Our Legal Department

If you are threatened with firing for looking at a scantily-clad French maid while at work, you could defend yourself in several ways:

  • This was intended as political commentary, and is therefore clearly protected by the First Amendment.
  • You are taking a night class in women’s studies at the local university, and this was research for your term paper on mid-20th-century misogyny.
  • The person who sent this to you was herself French, and obviously did not mean to suggest that all French women are domestic servants.
  • You are a deputy district attorney, and this photo is evidence relevant to an investigation.

When in doubt, “intentionality” is the way to go. It’s satire.

88 comments

  4. Great new format.. some of the post don’t have the author.. I see some attribute Smitty, some don’t have anything. Not sure why..
    In light of Andrew Sullivan’s recent, um, subcontracting..thought you’d want to resolve that one.

  5. Great new format.. some of the post don’t have the author.. I see some attribute Smitty, some don’t have anything. Not sure why..
    In light of Andrew Sullivan’s recent, um, subcontracting..thought you’d want to resolve that one.

  6. Great new format.. some of the post don’t have the author.. I see some attribute Smitty, some don’t have anything. Not sure why..
    In light of Andrew Sullivan’s recent, um, subcontracting..thought you’d want to resolve that one.

  20. This is a hell of a good account about the whole LGF meltdown and you are mentioned in it:

    And just who are “they,” anyway? Charles’ definition of “white supremacist” is proving tremendously elastic. His latest target of the epithet is the blogger and longtime journalist Robert Stacy McCain, who apparently has known several openly supremacist assholes and belonged to or said nice things about groups that have, on occasion, said something vaguely intemperate.

    I never really read “the other McCain” before of late, but he’s been getting a lot of attention (good and bad) of late, so I started poking through his stuff. And I came to this conclusion:

    The guy is a good blogger. Quite frankly, he’s a hell of a better blogger than Charles.

  21. This is a hell of a good account about the whole LGF meltdown and you are mentioned in it:

    And just who are “they,” anyway? Charles’ definition of “white supremacist” is proving tremendously elastic. His latest target of the epithet is the blogger and longtime journalist Robert Stacy McCain, who apparently has known several openly supremacist assholes and belonged to or said nice things about groups that have, on occasion, said something vaguely intemperate.

    I never really read “the other McCain” before of late, but he’s been getting a lot of attention (good and bad) of late, so I started poking through his stuff. And I came to this conclusion:

    The guy is a good blogger. Quite frankly, he’s a hell of a better blogger than Charles.

  22. This is a hell of a good account about the whole LGF meltdown and you are mentioned in it:

    And just who are “they,” anyway? Charles’ definition of “white supremacist” is proving tremendously elastic. His latest target of the epithet is the blogger and longtime journalist Robert Stacy McCain, who apparently has known several openly supremacist assholes and belonged to or said nice things about groups that have, on occasion, said something vaguely intemperate.

    I never really read “the other McCain” before of late, but he’s been getting a lot of attention (good and bad) of late, so I started poking through his stuff. And I came to this conclusion:

    The guy is a good blogger. Quite frankly, he’s a hell of a better blogger than Charles.

  23. I denounce you. The only way that image could be worse would be if you superimposed my head on the image.

    Of course I am referring to the French Maid image. You must agree that would be an abomination!

  24. I denounce you. The only way that image could be worse would be if you superimposed my head on the image.

    Of course I am referring to the French Maid image. You must agree that would be an abomination!

  25. I denounce you. The only way that image could be worse would be if you superimposed my head on the image.

    Of course I am referring to the French Maid image. You must agree that would be an abomination!

  32. There’s actually been a lot of fuss out here for the last six months about state employees sending political stuff, and politicians sending things to state employees.

  33. There’s actually been a lot of fuss out here for the last six months about state employees sending political stuff, and politicians sending things to state employees.

  34. This picture has been around since 2008, and it shows up exclusively on right wing mailing lists and websites. It’s ridiculous to try to deny that this is an example of right wing racism — the message of a black man shining Sarah Palin’s shoes could not possibly be more obvious.

    And it doesn’t matter if the woman in this case is registered Democrat or not. This is not something a supporter of Barack Obama would send to anyone.

    And of course, people show up to post comments insulting me for pointing it out. This has become standard practice on the right — defend the most disgusting examples of bigotry and racism, and viciously attack those who point it out.

  35. This picture has been around since 2008, and it shows up exclusively on right wing mailing lists and websites. It’s ridiculous to try to deny that this is an example of right wing racism — the message of a black man shining Sarah Palin’s shoes could not possibly be more obvious.

    And it doesn’t matter if the woman in this case is registered Democrat or not. This is not something a supporter of Barack Obama would send to anyone.

    And of course, people show up to post comments insulting me for pointing it out. This has become standard practice on the right — defend the most disgusting examples of bigotry and racism, and viciously attack those who point it out.

  49. Here is Glenn Reynolds just perfectly bitch slapping Andrew Sullivan:

    January 1, 2010
    NO, ANDREW, it’s that you’re a preening, hectoring, self-centered, unpersuasive bad writer. That was my point, which you presumably got since you declined to include a link to my post. The more you argue that way — and the more you make it all about your self-satisfied sense of moral superiority — the less persuasive you are. Which, by now, has made you pretty damned unpersuasive indeed.

    Some backstory here and here.

    Posted at by Glenn Reynolds at 8:07 pm

    The beauty of Reynolds’ slap down is his description of Andrew Sullivan’s narcissism is it so closely applies to Charles Johnson and Patterico too. This troika of troubador troublemakers all do the same thing–take things out of context, dish out the hyperbole and snark, and ultimately love their own respective reflections more than getting things right. They are really deserve to be stranded together on a desert island (with no internet connection).

  50. Here is Glenn Reynolds just perfectly bitch slapping Andrew Sullivan:

    January 1, 2010
    NO, ANDREW, it’s that you’re a preening, hectoring, self-centered, unpersuasive bad writer. That was my point, which you presumably got since you declined to include a link to my post. The more you argue that way — and the more you make it all about your self-satisfied sense of moral superiority — the less persuasive you are. Which, by now, has made you pretty damned unpersuasive indeed.

    Some backstory here and here.

    Posted at by Glenn Reynolds at 8:07 pm

    The beauty of Reynolds’ slap down is his description of Andrew Sullivan’s narcissism is it so closely applies to Charles Johnson and Patterico too. This troika of troubador troublemakers all do the same thing–take things out of context, dish out the hyperbole and snark, and ultimately love their own respective reflections more than getting things right. They are really deserve to be stranded together on a desert island (with no internet connection).

Comments are closed.