Badly Lynched Yet Well Hung.

From the Benefit of the Doubt to Doubting the Benefits

Was it last week that Carl Paladino's twitter account farted out that tweet about lynching Loretta Lynch then deleted it and came along with the rookie tweeter excuse for an explanation? Yeah I think it was last week. See it's hard to keep up with this guy. Between his damned Asians outburst aimed at the kids studying at UB and his plans to teach hygiene to inner city minorities in his boarding schools you get turned around and dis-oriented if you'll overlook the pun or better yet pretend it was unintentional.

Well Carl has now turned his attentions to his own party and is on record as telling Utah Republican convention delegate Stefani Williams in an email: 

"You should be hung [sic] for treason Stefani. There will not be a Republican Party if you attempt to replace Trump. I'll be in your face in Cleveland," Paladino allegedly wrote, according to an email that Williams shared with The Hill. 

So this time it's a Carlfecta: suggestions of violence, follow up threat and a SIC to indicate that Carl has failed to follow the rules of English grammar.

When the lynch  Lynch tweet was deleted and carlsplained as the mistake of an underling there was no shortage of eye rolling and skepticism. Most who doubted the veracity of the rookie tweeter excuse pointed to Paladino's extensive history of inflammatory remarks on various topics. Carl likes to dismiss all of that as the politically correct nattering of screaming liberal meemies who can't handle his brand of the non p.c. "truth." 

Shouldn't a guy who's just wiped the remnants of the latest dogpile from his Florsheims --or at least tried to-- maybe try to avoid more talk of hanging or lynching women he doesn't like until the odor of his most recent misstep has had some time to dissipate? Yeah, you and I might think that but Carl doesn't see it that way. This is nothing more than the latest shining example of why CEO's fail so miserably when they endeavor to work within a system -- say one running the schools or one attached to a political party. Guys like Carl have said and done exactly as they pleased and been rewarded financially for doing so pretty much all of their lives. If someone pisses him off he can fire them. If someone writes something he doesn't like he can eviscerate them on the sidewalk outside Dinosaur BBQ. If a reporter asks a question Carl doesn't want to answer on the way into a Board of Ed meeting, Carl unloads on him with a stream of obscenities. In CEO land this kind of behavior is seen as bold and fearless, as some kind of alpha dog privilege and a sure sign of strong leadership. But in the larger world where the rest of us have to mind our manners as we fill in the gap between birth and eternity that kind of talk has consequences. It gets you fined and fired; it puts letters in your personnel file and it comes back to bite you in the ass when the County Executive tries to slide you into a sweet gig.

How then has none of this expansive  disciplinary file affected the status of Carl Paladino as a member of the Buffalo Board of Education? What exactly does a board member have to say or do before anyone raises the question of his suitability to sit on a school board that makes decisions on what's best for children, especially a large population of minority children including a significant population of "Damned Asians?" At what point do we free Carl from the drudgery of budgeting and contract negotiations, of trying to put the screws to his business rival Ciminelli and of the humiliation of having to squeak out an election victory against an 18 year old kid in the belly of "Carl Country?" It's obvious Carl Paladino has bigger fish to fry. And with the incoming Board majority reducing his role and influence to that of a bit player who can strut and fret but won't accomplish anything more as a  minority block member than he did in the majority, I think it's only fair that we accept his resignation and allow him to go make America Great Again. It's only fair.