Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:34 pm UTC

Ixtellor wrote:No, I want you to act like a civil intelligent person with mod status who some young people, for god knows what reason, look up to, instead of a... you know what.

Happening to avoid explicit personal attacks doesn't make a person any more civil or intelligent, if the rest of what they say is still douchey and childish.

Ixtellor wrote:But we, smart people, don't have to follow him down that path and scream "No death panels", when there are no death panels. Like wise, dont' scream "Public Apology" when he already gave one.

When he gives one, we'll stop demanding one.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
tzvibish
Posts: 1031
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:16 pm UTC
Location: In ur officez, supportin ur desktopz
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby tzvibish » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:35 pm UTC

Belial wrote:
Ixtellor wrote:He did make a public apology, he released it to every single news agency in the nation.
Are you only satisfied if he does a half hour live from his office?


Yeah, honestly, I'd prefer a televised apology. Going to a medium with less viewership still seems like a way to weasel out of the spotlight on this one. And one questions, if he's so willing to apologize publicly, why he's dragging his feet now.

So the answer to "who's being childish" is "still him".



Demanding the medium on which an apology is given that was already given both to the president and to news outlets is childish.
Image
-Featuring the Comic Strip XKCD!

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:36 pm UTC

I personally don't care what medium he uses, if he uses it to apologize to the rest of us instead of just to the President. If it's printed rather than live, I'll still think he's a coward, but I'll at least know that he felt it worthwhile to apologize to more than one person.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Aetius » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:38 pm UTC

Am I the only one that doesn't get the whole thing about demanding an apology, in any context? If the person is sincere, they'll apologize of their own accord. If they're not sincere, bury them in the next election and be done with them. Demanding an apology is one of the biggest wastes of time I can think of.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Belial » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:39 pm UTC

Ixtellor wrote:
Belial wrote:So the answer to "who's being childish" is "still him".
He is a straight up douchbag. But he wants to win reelection and is acting in that interest. Being a Republican prick = more votes in SC.

But we, smart people, don't have to follow him down that path and scream "No death panels", when there are no death panels. Like wise, dont' scream "Public Apology" when he already gave one.
We don't have to let him get away with anything, either. We don't have to let his childishness profit him.

And as numerous people have pointed out, he's still only apologized to the president, no matter how loudly he did it.

Belial wrote:Would you like a cookie?
No, I want you to act like a civil intelligent person with mod status who some young people, for god knows what reason, look up to, instead of a... you know what.
So you thought it was a good idea to congratulate yourself on being civil in a thread where no one was uncivil. As a transparent way of pursuing some personal vendetta you have against me. Which, if you happen to be fluent in "backhanded supercilious bullshit", would make you the first uncivil person in this thread.

Just stunningly mature, Ixy. And not self-defeating at all.

How about if, in the future, you don't do that?
tzvibish wrote:Demanding the medium on which an apology is given that was already given both to the president and to news outlets is childish.
As gmal says. But also, it's just telling. When I'm actually sorry, I'll apologize wherever and whenever. But suddenly Wilson refuses. I wonder what that means.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
tzvibish
Posts: 1031
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:16 pm UTC
Location: In ur officez, supportin ur desktopz
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby tzvibish » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:40 pm UTC

Joe Wilson wrote: This evening I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the President’s remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill. While I disagree with the President’s statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the President for this lack of civility.


That was the statement. It was given to news outlets so the entire country could hear it.
Image
-Featuring the Comic Strip XKCD!

User avatar
Owijad
1000 posts and still no title
Posts: 1625
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 10:07 pm UTC
Location: Mas-a-choo-sits
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Owijad » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:40 pm UTC

Aetius wrote:Am I the only one that doesn't get the whole thing about demanding an apology, in any context? If the person is sincere, they'll apologize of their own accord. If they're not sincere, bury them in the next election and be done with them. Demanding an apology is one of the biggest wastes of time I can think of.


Owijad wrote:Incidentally, what's frustrating isn't that he's not apologizing. It's that he's not really sorry.

(and furthermore hasn't been given any real reason to be)


Basically, you're right.
And if you win you get this shiny fiddle made of gold,
But if you lose, the devil gets your sould!

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5933
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Angua » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:41 pm UTC

Aetius wrote:Am I the only one that doesn't get the whole thing about demanding an apology, in any context? If the person is sincere, they'll apologize of their own accord. If they're not sincere, bury them in the next election and be done with them. Demanding an apology is one of the biggest wastes of time I can think of.
It's basically Glenn Beck syndrome, if an apology isn't demanded and given then some people will think that he was right. If he isn't called out on calling the president a liar, was the president really lying and hoping we'll not notice? I'm not saying he's a liar, I'm just asking questions.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
Ixtellor
There are like 4 posters on XKCD that no more about ...
Posts: 3113
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Ixtellor » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:45 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Publicly releasing your individual apology to the President is not the same as publicly apologizing to the millions of other people you similarly embarrassed with your stupid comment.


He gave two apologies. One to Rahm, which we dont' know what was said because it was a private apology that Rahm accepted on behalf of Obama, and one public apology which every news organization in the country ran the very next day.

Owijad wrote:Incidentally, what's frustrating isn't that he's not apologizing. It's that he's not really sorry.


I think its obvious he isn't sorry, but I also bet my house he wont' do it again, so I think he learned his lesson about how to act during an address to congress. Everything else is just politics.

Does anyone here think he is going to have another outburst? We find out in January, so place your bets.

gmalivuk wrote:Happening to avoid explicit personal attacks doesn't make a person any more civil or intelligent, if the rest of what they say is still douchey and childish.


Tis true, tis true. Its why I issue apologies when I offend, and why I admit that sometimes I can be a dick even while not making personal attacks. I could have picked out any of the posters to call out for being misinformed, but I choose someone special for dickish, although justified, reasons. If you notice, within 5 mins of you calling me an asshole on the public forums, I sent you a very polite PM on a totally different subject.

I personally feel witty jabs and harsh disapproval of words and actions is easy doable without resorting to personal attacks. I would also think Moderators should hold themselves to a higher standard. (See Hammer)

gmalivuk wrote:I personally don't care what medium he uses, if he uses it to apologize to the rest of us instead of just to the President. If it's printed rather than live, I'll still think he's a coward, but I'll at least know that he felt it worthwhile to apologize to more than one person.


He did just that, which is what I was pointing out.


Ixtellor
The Revolution will not be Twitterized.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Princess Marzipan » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:54 pm UTC

My major problem with this is that people are fucking CELEBRATING his actions during the address. There was some event a couple of days later where an entire crowd chanted "You lie! You lie!" at the speaker as a show of support.

His apology can't possibly be sincere if he's going to say sorry and then turn right around and reap the benefits from his despicable actions.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
tzvibish
Posts: 1031
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:16 pm UTC
Location: In ur officez, supportin ur desktopz
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby tzvibish » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:59 pm UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:My major problem with this is that people are fucking CELEBRATING his actions during the address. There was some event a couple of days later where an entire crowd chanted "You lie! You lie!" at the speaker as a show of support.

His apology can't possibly be sincere if he's going to say sorry and then turn right around and reap the benefits from his despicable actions.


His apology will never be sincere, regardless of what forum he does it in. He still believes his words to be true, and his campaign chest is profiting immensely from it.

The only reason he has to apologize is purely out of courtesy. Nothing to do with sincerity.
Image
-Featuring the Comic Strip XKCD!

i
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2007 11:31 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby i » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:02 pm UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:His apology can't possibly be sincere if he's going to say sorry and then turn right around and reap the benefits from his despicable actions.


To be fair, there's nothing he can do about how other people perceive him.

It's like claiming his apology isn't sincere because he's still being criticized by others for the outburst.

User avatar
Crius
Posts: 392
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:27 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Crius » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:03 pm UTC

Angua wrote:
Aetius wrote:Am I the only one that doesn't get the whole thing about demanding an apology, in any context? If the person is sincere, they'll apologize of their own accord. If they're not sincere, bury them in the next election and be done with them. Demanding an apology is one of the biggest wastes of time I can think of.
It's basically Glenn Beck syndrome, if an apology isn't demanded and given then some people will think that he was right. If he isn't called out on calling the president a liar, was the president really lying and hoping we'll not notice? I'm not saying he's a liar, I'm just asking questions.


His apology should be for the outburst during a presidential address - not for his opinion on the President's honesty. It could have been phrased nicer, such as "deliberately misrepresented the truth", but I think the opinion he held should not be the point.

We can tell him his opinion is wrong, and the voters of SC can certainly vote him out if they disagree with his opinion, though.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Dauric » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:08 pm UTC

I'm not sure that the Times article does qualify. It would suffice in say the 1800's and early 1900's when all news articles were printed and that's it. Nowadays we've got a 24-hour news cycle of cameras and videos, constant press-covered events and press-conferences that can be summoned at the drop of a hat. I don't think he needs to do a half an hour, or cry crocodile tears for us all. However you know damn well he looks in to those camera lenses, as close as any politician gets to looking America in the eyes, and says all manner of politically expedient sound-bites in less than a minute. It would be trivial to show America his face and apologize as a person and not hiding behind a press release and a staff writer.

It might not be trivial to his career, but that's a bridge he burned when he opened his mouth in the first place.

Of course you also know that he's got to be aware of the falling subscription rates to newspapers, Times included, and that an apology to a camera would reach a wider audience.

also...

The thread was started, and other comments to the effect, that he had apologized to the President and that was good enough..

tzvibish wrote:Congress needs to stop whining. Joe Wilson apologized for his outburst. He picked up the phone, called the president, and apologized. The president accepted his apology, and said he wanted to move on.


Lord Aurora wrote:Probably because he apologized to the person he accused of lying. Personally. Because the person he accused of lying is really the only person who should take offense here.


... and that assertion is one I strongly disagree with given that he did it in front of us all as a nation, acting as a representative of our government in an event seen and reported in every first world nation and more. I think most if not all of our elected officials need to get in line and apologize to the U.S., and some to the rest of the world, -in detail- about their collective dickishness, but I'm not sure our government could afford to be shut down the decades it would take to get through all of it. I don't actually expect that to happen, and frankly Mr. Wilson't outburst was a spoonful in the dump-truck of s41t that our governmet has put on display in recent years, but neither do I delude myself that poor manners are a sufficient substitute and everything is peachy-keen just because he's a politician.

The only reason he has to apologize is purely out of courtesy. Nothing to do with sincerity.


I agree here, that said some degree of courtesy is a cornerstone of civilization and we shouldn't accept it being eroded.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Owijad
1000 posts and still no title
Posts: 1625
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 10:07 pm UTC
Location: Mas-a-choo-sits
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Owijad » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:09 pm UTC

tzvibish wrote:His apology will never be sincere, regardless of what forum he does it in. He still believes his words to be true, and his campaign chest is profiting immensely from it.

The only reason he has to apologize is purely out of courtesy. Nothing to do with sincerity.


So there you have it, this is why we're not moving on. And why we're not going to move on until his behavior has caused him more harm than good.

Or until Glenn Beck shoots a puppy or whatever they have planned next.
And if you win you get this shiny fiddle made of gold,
But if you lose, the devil gets your sould!

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Princess Marzipan » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:11 pm UTC

i wrote:
Princess Marzipan wrote:His apology can't possibly be sincere if he's going to say sorry and then turn right around and reap the benefits from his despicable actions.


To be fair, there's nothing he can do about how other people perceive him.

It's like claiming his apology isn't sincere because he's still being criticized by others for the outburst.


He is reveling in the reaction from this. He has talked the talked of apology, but has yet to walk the walk. I'm not saying his apology is insincere because people are celebrating his actions - I'm saying it's insincere because people are celebrating his actions and he's celebrating alongside them.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
EnderSword
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:11 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby EnderSword » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:11 pm UTC

I don't think he should have apologized publicly or privately, nor should he have issued any statement expressing regret or anything else.

The issue isn't that he called the President a liar, it's that he yelled it at him during a speech.
Had he called him a liar in an interview later or before or in a written statement etc... then it's not a problem. You are allowed to say that the President is lying about stuff.

So the only thing he'd be apologizing for is yelling out 2 words during a speech.
The President is not God...in any non-dictator-run country in the world you can yell out a heckle at your leader without fear of reprisal.

It may not be the normal decorum expected while the President speaks...but I think that decorum is part of the problem. The President doesn't have to answer questions, never has to face anyone or answer to anything. You just had 8 years where a guy basically decided his priviledge meant neither he nor his staff should have to appear before congres or answer anything they didn't want to.

If you're offended at a Guy yelling 'You Lie' right after the President tells a lie...I don't know what to tell ya.

While I don't support the overall political position of the guy who said it, I do support him saying it. In my country parliament gets to yell at our Leader all the time. It's part of being accountable for things.
WWSD?*
*what would Sheldon do?

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Princess Marzipan » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:20 pm UTC

EnderSword wrote:If you're offended at a Guy yelling 'You Lie' right after the President tells a lie...I don't know what to tell ya.

Um. Except the president didn't lie.

EnderSword wrote:In my country parliament gets to yell at our Leader all the time. It's part of being accountable for things.

I'll admit we have an accountability problem - if we didn't, there'd be a lot more going on regarding torture investigations and the like.

But Getting heckled in this manner has NOTHING to do with accountability - and EVERYTHING to do with grandstanding douchebaggery.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Belial » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:22 pm UTC

Indeed. There are plenty of ways to seek accountability, and even call the president a liar to his face in public if you super want to, that don't involve breaching etiquette in a huge and embarassing way in the middle of an official function.

It's the difference between calling your buddy a liar at dinner in front of all of his friends and relatives, and heckling him in front of the same crowd at his damn wedding. One of them means you have an issue, the other means you have an issue and you're an asshole. And probably embarassingly drunk.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Freakish
Posts: 909
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:47 am UTC
Location: Northern Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Freakish » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:24 pm UTC

He believes what he believes, asking to him to make an insincere apology is just fucking idiotic. Apologies aren't band aids.
Freakish Inc. We completely understand the public’s concern about futuristic robots feeding on the human population

User avatar
BlackSails
Posts: 5315
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:48 am UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby BlackSails » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:24 pm UTC

Ive read somewhere that its actually against house parlimentary procedure to call the sitting president a liar while the house is in session. I dont think this is true, but does anyone know for sure?

guenther
Posts: 1840
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 6:15 am UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby guenther » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:26 pm UTC

I agree completely with what EnderSword said. There are times to draw battle lines and close rank, and getting Wilson to re-apologize is not one of them. It's a big waste of energy that does nothing but let people posture. This is precisely the type of thing people complain about when they say how stupid politics are.
A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.

User avatar
Ixtellor
There are like 4 posters on XKCD that no more about ...
Posts: 3113
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Ixtellor » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:28 pm UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:Um. Except the president didn't lie.


AKA, begin 356 page debate on defining "lie".
I don't think he lied, but does anyone honestly believe at least 1 illegal won't benefit or get covered?

BlackSails wrote:Ive read somewhere that its actually against house parlimentary procedure to call the sitting president a liar while the house is in session. I dont think this is true, but does anyone know for sure?


I didn't do the research yet, but believe they proposed legislation forbidding it, but that it doesnt' actually exist that explicitly yet.

Ixtellor
The Revolution will not be Twitterized.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Princess Marzipan » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:29 pm UTC

Ixtellor wrote:
Princess Marzipan wrote:Um. Except the president didn't lie.
I don't think he lied, but does anyone honestly believe at least 1 illegal won't benefit or get covered?

Uh, legally? No, you fucking idiot. If they get coverage it's fraud, which is pretty illegal.

If you're worried about illegal immigrants defrauding the system, it's possibly a valid concern. I have no problem with someone raising that concern. But that's not the concern Joe Wilson raised and continues to prattle on about. He's concerned because he's saying the bill is going (will complete later)
Last edited by Princess Marzipan on Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:31 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
BlackSails
Posts: 5315
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:48 am UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby BlackSails » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:30 pm UTC

Ixtellor wrote:
Princess Marzipan wrote:Um. Except the president didn't lie.


AKA, begin 356 page debate on defining "lie".
I don't think he lied, but does anyone honestly believe at least 1 illegal won't benefit or get covered?


Under the current system, illiegals get free care that the hospital has to pay for. Some hospitals are forced to close under this burden imposed by EMTALA.

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:30 pm UTC

tzvibish wrote:His apology will never be sincere, regardless of what forum he does it in. He still believes his words to be true, and his campaign chest is profiting immensely from it.

The only reason he has to apologize is purely out of courtesy. Nothing to do with sincerity.


Eleanor Roosevelt wrote:When you have decided what you believe, what you feel must be done, have the courage to stand alone and be counted.


Why waste his credibility appologising if he thinks that he did the right thing?
Last edited by TheKrikkitWars on Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:36 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.

User avatar
JBJ
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:20 pm UTC
Location: a point or extent in space

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby JBJ » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:31 pm UTC

BlackSails wrote:Ive read somewhere that its actually against house parlimentary procedure to call the sitting president a liar while the house is in session. I dont think this is true, but does anyone know for sure?

Section 370 of the house rules. I couldn't find the actual text, but this page gives a summary.
So, you sacked the cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker?
The second cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker I've sacked since the sixth sitting sheet slitter got sick.

User avatar
EnderSword
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:11 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby EnderSword » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Um. Except the president didn't lie.


Well he did obviously lie.
"The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally" - Well, yes, of course they would. That's almost a silly statement to make.
Whatever reforms he makes, no matter what they are would apply to, impact and be impacted by illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants get free care now, it's hard to believe an Obama system would not accomodate them. So yes the statement was a lie.

He chose a grand-standing way to object...but there is currently no appropriate way for him to deliver that message directly to the President in public..so what other choice ya got?
There's no question period, there's no debates with the President...you get maybe 1 time a year where you're in the same room with him and you're not allowed to speak to him.
WWSD?*
*what would Sheldon do?

User avatar
JBJ
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:20 pm UTC
Location: a point or extent in space

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby JBJ » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:35 pm UTC

EnderSword wrote:
Um. Except the president didn't lie.


Well he did obviously lie.
"The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally" - Well, yes, of course they would. That's almost a silly statement to make.
Whatever reforms he makes, no matter what they are would apply to, impact and be impacted by illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants get free care now, it's hard to believe an Obama system would not accomodate them. So yes the statement was a lie.

Nope
The reforms he proposed would not apply to illegal immigrants. It's like saying theft is illegal. That is a true statement. It doesn't prevent people from stealing, but it doesn't make the statement a lie.
Last edited by JBJ on Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:37 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
So, you sacked the cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker?
The second cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker I've sacked since the sixth sitting sheet slitter got sick.

User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Red Hal » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:36 pm UTC

Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excssive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untravelled, the naive, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as empty, meaningless, or dishonest, and scorn to use them. No matter how pure their motives, they thereby throw sand into the machinery that does not work too well at best.
-- Robert A. Heinlein
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

User avatar
tzvibish
Posts: 1031
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:16 pm UTC
Location: In ur officez, supportin ur desktopz
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby tzvibish » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:38 pm UTC

Making someone re-apologize in public is not holding them accountable. Holding them accountable would be not voting for them in the next election. If we all agree that the apology would be insincere, then why bother asking for one? It's not going to mean anything. The right way to punish the behavior would be to run ads against him in the next election pointing out the facts that he yelled "you lie" to the president during an dress. That's what will make a difference.
Image
-Featuring the Comic Strip XKCD!

User avatar
BlackSails
Posts: 5315
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:48 am UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby BlackSails » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:38 pm UTC

Not to mention, even if it did cover illiegal immigrants, so fucking what? They are here anyway, they cost hospitals vast amounts of money which directly causes hospitals to close. Do you want hospitals to close? I dont think anyone wants that, except maybe Jenny McCarthy and her crazy friends.

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:43 pm UTC

tzvibish wrote:Making someone re-apologize in public is not holding them accountable. Holding them accountable would be not voting for them in the next election. If we all agree that the apology would be insincere, then why bother asking for one? It's not going to mean anything. The right way to punish the behavior would be to run ads against him in the next election pointing out the facts that he yelled "you lie" to the president during an dress. That's what will make a difference.


No! The right way to punish him would be to censure him with the effect that if such infractions continue to be an issue the body can take action to dicipline him and ultimately remove him from office.

Running ads is a politcal thing divorced from the process of government.
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.

User avatar
EnderSword
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:11 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby EnderSword » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:51 pm UTC



The link itself has a headline saying its not a lie, then a few paragraphs in points out why it is. Illegal immigrants won't get tax credits, but will be able to participate in the insurance if they pay for it.

"FAIR has a point that illegal immigrants would likely be able to buy insurance on the national health insurance exchange. We don't see anything in the bills that would hinder that. A Congressional Research Service report issued Aug. 25, 2009, confirmed our observation. The House bill "does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchange — whether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently," the report said."

So it says its not a lie then points out that it IS a lie and then concludes its still not because the illegal immigrants have to pay for it.
"There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false — the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally." - Obama
That is demonstrably not true - They will be allowed to purchase that insurance. Whether that's good or bad is a matter of your opinion and position on it...I don't see anything wrong with them uying the insurance...but the statement that it doesn't apply to them is a false statement.
WWSD?*
*what would Sheldon do?

User avatar
JBJ
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:20 pm UTC
Location: a point or extent in space

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby JBJ » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:06 pm UTC

EnderSword wrote:


The link itself has a headline saying its not a lie, then a few paragraphs in points out why it is. Illegal immigrants won't get tax credits, but will be able to participate in the insurance if they pay for it.

"FAIR has a point that illegal immigrants would likely be able to buy insurance on the national health insurance exchange. We don't see anything in the bills that would hinder that. A Congressional Research Service report issued Aug. 25, 2009, confirmed our observation. The House bill "does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchange — whether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently," the report said."

So it says its not a lie then points out that it IS a lie and then concludes its still not because the illegal immigrants have to pay for it.
"There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false — the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally." - Obama
That is demonstrably not true - They will be allowed to purchase that insurance. Whether that's good or bad is a matter of your opinion and position on it...I don't see anything wrong with them buying the insurance...but the statement that it doesn't apply to them is a false statement.
But you do agree that there would be no "benefits" to those who are illegal immigrants?
Perhaps this was a matter of context. President Obama's statement "The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally" would probably be better read as "The reforms I'm proposing would not benefit those who are here illegally."
If you're arguing that it doesn't apply, using a strict interpretation of "apply" in that they will be affected, then yes.
Taken in the context of the speech, that reform is intended to benefit the American public (and not benefit illegal immigrants), then the statement is true.
So, you sacked the cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker?
The second cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker I've sacked since the sixth sitting sheet slitter got sick.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Diadem » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:07 pm UTC

I'm a bit confused between what exactly the difference is between 'apologizing in public' and 'apologizing in private, then telling in public that you did so'. Either way you apologized, and the public knows.


But quite apart from that: Isn't congress overstepping the bounds of its authority here? It's congress' job to check the cabinet, not Joe Wilson. Congress has no authority over itself, only the people have that.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
EnderSword
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:11 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby EnderSword » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:18 pm UTC

Taken in the context of the speech, that reform is intended to benefit the American public (and not benefit illegal immigrants), then the statement is true.


Sounds like it would Benefit them, because in theory it is supposed to be a cheaper form of insurance they can buy. But Will not benefit them in the form of tax credits. So they'd receive the benefits if they pay for them, but not receive help in paying for them like other citizens.
So yeah, I think Obama's statement was over-reaching in saying that the reforms wouldn't apply to them because they can freely participate in it.
I probably wouldn't have picked that moment to say it was al ie...but to be fair there just said the exact opposite view was 'False' so he actually framed it.

So if he thinks the opposite is 'False' you're a bit more justified in saying what he said is a 'Lie' too without being accused of being too strict. Kind of a black and white statement in response to a black and white statement.
WWSD?*
*what would Sheldon do?

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:55 pm UTC

Ixtellor wrote:and one public apology which every news organization in the country ran the very next day.

No. That was one widely publicized apology to one single person. There's a difference. If the guy in the restaurant announces to everyone, "Hey everybody, I would like to take this opportunity to say I'm sorry to the waiter for any offense I may have caused," he is not apologizing to the public, he is just publicizing his apology to the waiter.

Diadem wrote:I'm a bit confused between what exactly the difference is between 'apologizing in public' and 'apologizing in private, then telling in public that you did so'. Either way you apologized, and the public knows.

Your two options don't even necessarily include the one we want, which is "apologizing to the public". Apologies, like offenses, are always made *to* someone, independently of how many people happen to witness it. Apologizing to you in front of everyone is different from apologizing to everyone.

And, EnderSword, are you seriously trying to take yet another discussion completely off-topic by ignoring the question of etiquette and apology and instead trying to turn this into yet another debate about the details of healthcare reform? If you are, please stop ever complaining anywhere else when other people are allegedly making off-topic posts. If you aren't, then please stop going on about whether what the President said was, technically and pedantically speaking, a "lie".

Edit: Also, it's not quite a matter of "demanding" an apology, just like we don't "demand" apologies from people who say incredibly stupid offensive shit on the forums. Rather, it's a matter of, "That was a dick thing to do, and by the way you'll be proving yourself an immensely huger douchebag if you additionally refuse to apologize to the public for it."
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Ixtellor
There are like 4 posters on XKCD that no more about ...
Posts: 3113
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Ixtellor » Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:07 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:No. That was one widely publicized apology to one single person. There's a difference


Now your just making adhoc arguments.
The cry was "publically apologize!"

He did publically apologize, he also happen to privatly apologize to Rahm and we have no idea what he said.

Now your calling for him to apologize to America, and your grandma, and the rest of congress?

The dude has 2 major apologies under his belt, including one that was printed and broadcast by EVERY news agency in the country, because he told them too.

Eventually you have to let it go. He apologized twice, got censured by a house resolution... and you demand more?

He didn't shoot a person or pass "bring back segregation" legislation, he said 2 words and has suffered all he is going to suffer. The only thing left to be done is vote him out of office.


This is an argument about having a consistant political ideology versus hardcore partisanship. If you demand he be flogged naked on TV, guess which camp your in.

Ixtellor
The Revolution will not be Twitterized.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: Joe Wilson apologized; Move on.

Postby Garm » Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:12 pm UTC

EnderSword, to say that the President is lying because immigrants will probably benefit from a proposal that would lower health care costs across the board is a stretch. One might say that it's a lie in the most technical sense of the word but to conflate that with the assertion that conservatives are making, that illegal immigrants will be covered by the so called "public option" is itself a lie. Seems to me that you're proposing that illegal immigrants be prohibited from buying their own health care through private organizations (certainly something that conservatives have suggested). This strikes me as rather inhumane and maybe illegal. Also very counter to the free market.

You say that people stand up and yell at each other all the time in the legislature of your country. Would that be Britain or Canada? They have strict rules for what can and cannot be said. Accusations of lying is one of those things that falls into the cannot be said list. Calling the speaker, be s/he president or congressman, making the accusation that they are telling lies presupposes a good faith debate. There is no possibility to move the discussion forward once one side has decided the other is lying. Not that it matters. We can't really have a meaningful debate about the merits of health care because one faction of our government is so dead set against the possibility of reform that it renders such debate fruitless.

The continuing brouhaha over Joe Wilson has less to do with his outburst and subsequent empty apology. It's no longer really about what he said, merely that he said it. It's a shocking breach of decorum and an affront to the etiquette of top legislative body in the United States. There are rules for a reason. If we didn't enforce them, what good are they?
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Sableagle and 11 guests