Congressman Fires Staffer Over Inadvertent Tweet
Congressman Raul Labrador apparently doesn’t cut his staff many breaks:
A spokesman for Idaho Rep. Raul Labrador has reportedly been fired for mistakenly tweeting from his boss’ account during the Super Bowl about a risque ad for the CBS sitcom “2 Broke Girls.”
“Me likey Broke Girls,” Phil Hardy, who had been operating Labrador’s Twitter account, tweeted Sunday after seeing the spot that featured the show’s stars—Kat Dennings and Beth Behrs—pole-dancing to Def Leppard’s “Pour Some Sugar On Me.”
The tweet was deleted within 14 seconds but was quickly archived by Politwoops, a website that collects deleted tweets from politicians.
“For Rep. Raúl R. Labrador, the most memorable moment seemed to come during an ad for CBS’s 2 Broke Girls involving a stripper pole, clothes being ripped off, and a cherry being seductively consumed,” Politwoops cheerily explained.
Labrador’s office issued a public apology for the tweet on Monday. According to the Idaho Statesman, Labrador then fired Hardy, who had worked for the Republican congressman since 2010.
Apparently Hardy had control of Labrador’s official account as well as his personal account and, well, got the accounts mixed up. Not an uncommon occurrence. Termination seems a bit harsh under the circumstances.
Has embarrassing the boss ever been a thing that enhanced job retention?
Again, what is the benefit of tweeting?
I agree. The Congressman should have followed the sterling example of fellow Republican David Vitter.
I’m still somewhat amazed that something that was up for a mere 14 seconds can live on forever. Not that I should be. The whole tweeting thing seems ripe for eventually embarrassing oneself.
So many people are one drunk tweet away from oblivion…many people are giving thanks that they were not tweeting twenty years ago.
Maybe we should be more worried about a world where literally clicking the wrong button – I constantly delete tweets because I get my accounts mixed up – can lead to someone’s life forever changing, then just saying “well, he should have expected it, using that first amendment right to free speech and all that”? Maybe we should acknowledge that mistakes happen, instead of just flinging poo like monkeys when something so simple happens? Now, this guy’s been named and shamed, and his career prospects are forever harmed. Over what? An innocuous four word tweet?
again demonstrating that new Social Media is the greatest self-imposed and self-inflicted loss of privacy in history.
@Christopher Bowen: My bigger worry here is the thought police. OK, so the guy appears to enjoy titillation, as man has since the dawn of time. He must be a sexist loser to be demonized forever. Nevermind that the whole reason all of us are here is because of sex.
Too bad, so sad, another political operative gets strung up by his own petard. I have a problem with kids who’ve screwed up their lives with indelible posts since they’re kids and they’re expected to make mistakes but this fellow is an adult, a jet setter, knows better, and will easily find a position at the Daily Caller or with another GOP hit squad.
The real question is, why do so many moronic politicians permit someone else to issue statements in their name without supervision? And usually the idiot with control of the account is the least mature and most likely to use poor judgement.
As for the firing, so what. Being fired for poor attention to detail (not realizing which account he was using) and poor judgement (issuing a salacious statement attributed to your boss) is a learning experience. And it is called accountability.
The Representative’s spokesman should have taken the Hillary Clinton option. You know, responsibility without any consequences. It worked well for her.
but then again, ‘What Difference, At This Point, Does It Make’ ?
The boss is an .ssh.l., what other explanation can there be?
I don’t know about the people of Labrador’s district in Idaho, but I want my representatives to have a bit of compassion and empathy — someone who can stop and consider whether the consequences of the laws they are voting for are just.
Giving a person, who isn’t you, the possibility to say things in your name that anyone can read instantly.
I really can’t see why anything would go wrong.
If a politician don’t want to write his or her own tweets, then treat them as instant, far reaching, press statements and have the tweets queued for someone verify each and everyone of them. I mean, how long does it take for someone to read and approve 140 characters, and how many tweets is a politician sending…
If that’s that’s too much, then the politician probably should drop twitter.
it is interesting how the House Republican Delegation consistently has lower approval ratings than the thugs who attacked the consulate in Benghazi.
I have to admit though – Republicans got their way on this one – Susan Rice was pre-emptively dismissed, Hillary got a 5-Star send off, and John Kerry was approved. “Mission Accomplished.”
Consider that Sarah Palin probably had a tweet editor. So, I suppose it could’ve been worse for some.
And imagine John McCain tweeting unsupervised…
“Just wanted tosay.”
“Whoops, hit the wrng key.”
“DidI Just send something?”
“OK this isso much easier with reading glasses HD d!”
“Oops thgfe keys are so small.”
“Megan! Make this phone wrk!”
Megan’s twitter account: “Dad sure goes through a lot of phones.”