I keep hearing from people on Twitter, e-mail, and the comments section, telling me that I’m missing the point in my ranty post below. They say Mair had it coming. She shouldn’t have said what she said. It was really about her other views. Etc.
Maybe that’s all true, but so what?
Whatever their merits, those are all arguments for not hiring her. She said what she said about Iowa — and everything else — long before she was hired. That’s a really important distinction, no? The Iowa GOP (and conservative activists) cried foul. Their stated objection was that she was hostile to the Iowa caucuses. And that’s all it took. I agree entirely that if she’d said such things after Walker hired her, he’d have grounds to can her. But that’s not what happened. Pretending otherwise doesn’t make it so.