I didn't get the point of her comment, who she is zinging.
My best guess was Ben Sasse, leaving the harder Senate work (in this political environment?), to go back to his safe place in academia, where he is "not expected" to create work product.
Seems weird if she was zinging everyone who does not make something, because the Bulwark would fall under that umbrella, as well as many subscribers.
I didn't get the point of her comment, who she is zinging.
My best guess was Ben Sasse, leaving the harder Senate work (in this political environment?), to go back to his safe place in academia, where he is "not expected" to create work product.
Seems weird if she was zinging everyone who does not make something, because the Bulwark would fall under that umbrella, as well as many subscribers.
Agreed that administrative bloat, and in some cases also policy, in higher ed is fair game for analysis and criticism. But Amanda did not take the time to nuance her argument that way or articulate a strategy that involved anything more than snark. As Charlie appropriately noted, it was a cheap shot, nothing more. As a certain ex-President used to say (and whom I usually am loathe to quote, but she sank to his level here): "Sad."
Yes, I think you are right. I get the goal of zinging Sasse, and how he has earned that treatment. But there was no need to throw the rest of us under the bus with him. Too many conservative commentators too often resort to that in trying to make a statement. I expect better from those who inhabit the realm of The Bulwark because they certainly are capable of it.
I didn't get the point of her comment, who she is zinging.
My best guess was Ben Sasse, leaving the harder Senate work (in this political environment?), to go back to his safe place in academia, where he is "not expected" to create work product.
Seems weird if she was zinging everyone who does not make something, because the Bulwark would fall under that umbrella, as well as many subscribers.
Right. Now, if we're going to zing Sasse by also impugning university administrators, that might be okay.
Agreed that administrative bloat, and in some cases also policy, in higher ed is fair game for analysis and criticism. But Amanda did not take the time to nuance her argument that way or articulate a strategy that involved anything more than snark. As Charlie appropriately noted, it was a cheap shot, nothing more. As a certain ex-President used to say (and whom I usually am loathe to quote, but she sank to his level here): "Sad."
Yes, I think you are right. I get the goal of zinging Sasse, and how he has earned that treatment. But there was no need to throw the rest of us under the bus with him. Too many conservative commentators too often resort to that in trying to make a statement. I expect better from those who inhabit the realm of The Bulwark because they certainly are capable of it.