Apology Botched
You know, I’m seeing everywhere news reports that insist Obama fell over himself to apologize, twice, for describing as “wasted” the lives of U.S. soldiers killed in combat to free an oppressed people and make the world a safer place.
But I have yet to see a news report that includes an actual apology. He expresses “regret” that he had “misspoken” and experienced a “slip of the tongue.” He “would absolutely apologize” if “any of them”* are offended. How come everyone is so eager to apologize for this guy?
Here’s a Chicago Sun-Times columnist. No apology.
Here’s the AP story. No apology.
Here’s ABC: No apology.
All of those reports say there was an apology. Some say he apologized right away. One says he claims he apologized right away. But none quote it. Like John Kerry, he’s botched it, and regrets that he misspoke. Here’s the only report I could find that points out he hasn’t actually apologized:
Boston Herald: No apology noted.
*Most versions I saw substitute “(military families)” for what Obama actually said, which was “any of them.” It is not clear that he didn’t mean “soldiers” or “wasted-life dead people,” however.
Dan Riehl wonders at the readiness of a presidential candidate who thinks he can pick and choose what kind of attention he gets. Guess which one.
Michelle bitchslaps Obama. h/t jammiewearingfool.
Welcome Punditeers, don’t be strangers, stop in and look around: We’ve got heroes, we’ve got zeroes. There’s a bar fight going on, and a look at the bad old days that just can’t stay away. Oh yeah, and Bugs Bunny Redux. Meanwhile, Stratfor posits, “Osama, why so mum?” and reads the tea leaves on what this means for this severely diminished terrorist organization.
Topics: pols
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 2:20 am on Wednesday, February 14, 2007
15 Responses to “Apology Botched”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
February 14th, 2007 at 2:49 am
Bill’s Nibbles — 2007.02.14
Some Bill’s Bites posts, some things I excerpted and linked but I’m sending you to the original post. I may rearrange the order of the items within this post as I add new things that I think belong above the
February 14th, 2007 at 2:55 am
Not ready for prime time (Updated and bumped)
Not ready for prime time Scott Johnson On his first day of campaigning as an official candidate for president, Barack Obama committed what would in days of old have been recognized as a major international blunder. Times have changed, of course. If you…
February 14th, 2007 at 6:42 am
He doesn’t need to recant. The people who care aren’t going to vote for him anyway, and the remark gets him in tighter with the moonbats who are his prime constituency.
Other than current media noise, that remark is actually a boost for him in trying to woo the far left.
February 14th, 2007 at 7:02 am
It’s the standard politician apology: “I’m sorry if what I said offended you, you provincial and close-minded rube”. They are unable, and not required, evidently, to say “I was wrong”.
February 14th, 2007 at 7:45 am
Mr. Bingly, it’s the standard non-apology apology As you noted, IF, what I’ve said… not I’m sorry for what I said or I’m sorry I offended you.
By making the non-apology apology, the offender takes the high road, without being on the high road if you take my meaning.
February 14th, 2007 at 8:21 am
The person or persons that hold such deep seated convictions, that ‘they’ are right, will never apologize for those deep seated convictions.
The Left hold those deep seated convictions, nothing, absolutely nothing will open their closed minds. Anyone that does not “toe the line”, is deemed to be suffering from leprosy of the mind and sent off to the leper colony.
Ask Joe Lieberman.
February 14th, 2007 at 8:45 am
The more pertinent question to ask Sen. Lieberman is why after being branded a leper and defeated by his party in their primary he chooses to still sit on that side of the aisle.
Maybe they gave him the paper-mache head.
February 14th, 2007 at 8:56 am
It looks like Obama has jumped the snark.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:26 am
He doesn’t dare apologize, even if he were inclined to. The netroots would crucify him. But he’s blown off the military vote (which includes their families), and we’ll see if it makes a difference.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:06 am
I suspect this, like so much Democratic rhetoric, accepts certain event s as given. If we pull out and leave Iraq in the midst of a bloodbath, an argument may very well be made that those lives have been “wasted.” The question would be - is life so much better in anarchy and tribal warfare than it was under Saddam, is America any safer with Iraq at such a point than it was with Iraq under Saddam? That question would be debatable and Obama might be right.
Of course, another future would pose another question with another answer: an Iraq, with a continued presence of American troops after the surge, that has slowly built the technological and cultural capital to become an independent, coherent, representative, and free nation. That Iraq - both for the Iraqis and America - is far better than Saddam’s Iraq; then, the lives of those American men and women would have been worth very, very much and their deaths, no less mourned, would be far from wasted.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:15 am
The Obamanation
The hardest working woman in media lays waste to Prophet Obama.
February 14th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Sociologist Erving Goffman’s explanation of an apology http://home.att.net/~rhhardind/goffman.apology.txt
Vicki Hearne, writing on general loopiness of male explainers’ thinking on dogs, writes on something Professor R.G.Frey published, in light of which you might want to reconsider the dog example : (quote)
[P]hilosophers like Frey are capable of quite extraordinary performances, such as the following :
“Now in the case of my dog, can anything like a ranking of rational desires be achieved? … When I put food before him, my dog eats it ; when I throw the stick, he fetches it. Both he does unfailingly, unless he is distracted by some stronger impulse, such as, on occasion, sex ; and in response to the question whether my dog desires or prefers eating to chasing sticks, I can only say he does both when the situations are to hand and no other impulse interferes. Several times, I have tried putting food before him and throwing a sitck at the same time, each time he has sought neither the food nor the stick but stood looking at me.”
unquote, _Adam’s Task_ p.pp
February 14th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
MoDo has turned on him too. He’s sunk.
February 14th, 2007 at 11:59 pm
Frankly, I’d rather see someone, anyone, speak honestly, and then maintain an honest stance. If the man thinks our men and women have been wasted, have the guts to say so and stick by it. Anything is better than the weaselly words wrung out of a man who is supposed to know whereof he speaks. It’s damned unattractive (except from Kerry, from whom no attractiveness if possible under any circumstance–that bus left years ago).
February 15th, 2007 at 1:24 am
I see Obama as a Kerry in the making, lots of hot air, not much substance, but with lot more MSM and Democratic support than Kerry saw. Except that Obama never went to Vietnam. And he doesn’t resemble Lurch.
Oh, and Obama is black, just not the right kind of black. Maybe Bill Clinton can help there.