Jump to content

US Politics: It’s Not A Crime If Your Feelings Got Hurt


Mr. Chatywin et al.

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

No I’m not. I’m arguing that it’s not black and white. Biden can feel like he gave a heartfelt apology and Hill can feel like it wasn’t good enough or that it was insincere, and we as voters can decide how we feel about it at the polls. I’ve always maintained that what Biden did was gross and wrong, but I can also recognize that he’s tried to make amends for what he did, albeit in a clumsy way. And if you disagree and think his apology is BS, that’s fine too.

I think what you're misunderstanding here is the objections are to his bitch-ass apologies that consistently try to evade responsibility - that's a nakedly craven political tactic usually in the domain of the GOP or the Clintons.  With Hill, it's always "I'm sorry for the way you were treated," not "I'm sorry for the way I treated you."  With the creepy groping, it's "I'm sorry that made some feel uncomfortable," not "I'm sorry my inappropriate behavior tends to make women uncomfortable." 

I mean, when I see some old wasted dude creep out a bartender (which, shockingly happens quite frequently in Pittsburgh), I tell her "man I'm sorry he was such a creep," not "I'm sorry you felt creeped out."  I don't see anyone (on this thread) that's really all that "outraged," but it's both fair and accurate to say his "apologies" are bullshit non-apologies, and that's (another) perfectly valid reason to not want to vote for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:
4 hours ago, Zorral said:

Not to have done what he did in the first place, because what he did was wrong

Well since this isn’t actually possible, let’s try to stick with what is. If someone did something similar to you, what level of atonement would it take for you to forgive them? Honest question.

He could have long ago made a very big sincere public apology, maybe even while VP, in which he outlined why he was wrong in his wrong doing to her.  He could admit his agency -- but he still couches what he did as 'what happened to you,' not what I did to you.  This is the number one rule of apologies.  You know this, just like you know he never admitted his agency then or now.  That's just for starters.

He could fund a program or contribute funding to other programs that are set up to right these sorts of wrongs committed against women by powerful rich men.

I'm sure we can think of many more.

But the numero uno is that he still refuses to accept his own agency, i.e. responsibility for what happened to Anita Hill.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DMC said:

I think what you're misunderstanding here is the objections are to his bitch-ass apologies that consistently try to evade responsibility - that's a nakedly craven political tactic usually in the domain of the GOP or the Clintons.  With Hill, it's always "I'm sorry for the way you were treated," not "I'm sorry for the way I treated you."  With the creepy groping, it's "I'm sorry that made some feel uncomfortable," not "I'm sorry my inappropriate behavior tends to make women uncomfortable." 

I mean, when I see some old wasted dude creep out a bartender (which, shockingly happens quite frequently in Pittsburgh), I tell her "man I'm sorry he was such a creep," not "I'm sorry you felt creeped out."  I don't see anyone (on this thread) that's really all that "outraged," but it's both fair and accurate to say his "apologies" are bullshit non-apologies, and that's (another) perfectly valid reason to not want to vote for him.

It’s not that I’m misunderstanding. I just have a lower bar. People in general suck at apologizing and owning their mistakes, so I give people credit for when they do so and if it appears sincere, even if the apologies themselves are less than ideal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It’s not that I’m misunderstanding. I just have a lower bar. People in general suck at apologizing and owning their mistakes, so I give people credit for when they do so and if it appears sincere, even if the apologies themselves are less than ideal.

No, you clearly seem to still not understand that his "apologies" aren't really apologies.  They're ways for him to obfuscate blame/responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

No, you clearly seem to still not understand that his "apologies" aren't really apologies.  They're ways for him to obfuscate blame/responsibility.

Maybe in vacuum, but this isn’t a vacuum and Biden has accrued enough credibility for me to believe that he is sorry for what he did, even if he doesn’t articulate in an ideal way.

Frankly speaking, how often do you hear a politician apologize without hedging their comments? Or people in general? Just look at the fallout of the #MeToo movement for example. Basically everyone that was accused either denied or down played the accusations, with some pleading ignorance. I can only think of one person who fully acknowledged what they did and admitted and explained why it was wrong, and that was Louis C.K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Maybe in vacuum, but this isn’t a vacuum and Biden has accrued enough credibility for me to believe that he is sorry for what he did, even if he doesn’t articulate in an ideal way.

Frankly speaking, how often do you hear a politician apologize without hedging their comments? Or people in general? Just look at the fallout of the #MeToo movement for example. Basically everyone that was accused either denied or down played the accusations, with some pleading ignorance. I can only think of one person who fully acknowledged what they did and admitted and explained why it was wrong, and that was Louis C.K.

He didn't bother with even this travesty of what an apology consists of -- until he wanted to run for POTUS in this era of #MeToo.  He's one of them.

Beyond that, even if he had 'good intent' he bungled the hearings.  He didn't fight for her, he even held back the testimonies by other women who had been abused by Thomas.

In other words, HE BUNGLED IT BIG TIME (and it's not his only Big Bungle by a long shot) and he's not taking responsibility for his bungling.

Moreover he was wrong politically and strategically doing so.  His judgment is bad, politically and interpersonally.  We don't need another one of those in office.  Or, more to the point, running, and sucking energy from the Dem candidates who aren't him, like Elizabeth Warren.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Zorral said:

He could have long ago made a very big sincere public apology, maybe even while VP, in which he outlined why he was wrong in his wrong doing to her.  He could admit his agency -- but he still couches what he did as 'what happened to you,' not what I did to you.  This is the number one rule of apologies.  You know this, just like you know he never admitted his agency then or now.  That's just for starters.

He could fund a program or contribute funding to other programs that are set up to right these sorts of wrongs committed against women by powerful rich men.

I'm sure we can think of many more.

But the numero uno is that he still refuses to accept his own agency, i.e. responsibility for what happened to Anita Hill.

 

 

And that would be an ideal response, but it’s one that is not easy to give. If you were in his shoes, with his life experiences, do you think it would be an easy act to do as you wrote? It’s easy on paper, but not so much in reality, especially when it has to be done for all the world to see.

Also, regarding your second “paragraph,” you do know what Biden’s signature piece of legislation is, right?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Maybe in vacuum, but this isn’t a vacuum and Biden has accrued enough credibility for me to believe that he is sorry for what he did, even if he doesn’t articulate in an ideal way.

Frankly speaking, how often do you hear a politician apologize without hedging their comments? Or people in general? Just look at the fallout of the #MeToo movement for example. Basically everyone that was accused either denied or down played the accusations, with some pleading ignorance. I can only think of one person who fully acknowledged what they did and admitted and explained why it was wrong, and that was Louis C.K.

It really isn't that hard to acknowledge responsibility and, ya know, be a fucking adult.  That other politicians do it - which was part of my point - is an entirely worthless argument to say someone can't object to it.  Is it disqualifying?  No, I don't think anyone's saying that.  But it makes me hope even more I won't have to vote for him eventually (which is very unlikely), and if I was his opponent you bet I'd be pointing it out to make sure that doesn't happen.  Like, literally, all he'd have to do is what I outlined to begin with:

1 hour ago, DMC said:

With Hill, it's always "I'm sorry for the way you were treated," not "I'm sorry for the way I treated you."  With the creepy groping, it's "I'm sorry that made some feel uncomfortable," not "I'm sorry my inappropriate behavior tends to make women uncomfortable." 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh my fuck, please don't give me the "it's so hard for an old plutocrat to admit he did something wrong." What the fuck kind of candy-assed shit-sniffing baby-food-gumming egg-coddling snowflakery is that? My four year old has been better trained to apologize for what he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, DMC said:

It really isn't that hard to acknowledge responsibility and, ya know, be a fucking adult.  That other politicians do it - which was part of my point - is an entirely worthless argument to say someone can't object to it.  Is it disqualifying?  No, I don't think anyone's saying that.  But it makes me hope even more I won't have to vote for him eventually (which is very unlikely), and if I was his opponent you bet I'd be pointing it out to make sure that doesn't happen.  Like, literally, all he'd have to do is what I outlined to begin with:

 

Again, on paper it is. In person it's harder and it gets magnified by the fact that it would be in front of the entire world. And I'm not even talking about Biden at this point. It's an aspect of humanity and it's worth acknowledging. 

And no, I highly doubt you'll be having to vote for him in the general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Again, on paper it is. In person it's harder and it gets magnified by the fact that it would be in front of the entire world. And I'm not even talking about Biden at this point. It's an aspect of humanity and it's worth acknowledging. 

If your outlook on humanity is it's "rare" for people to admit it when they're wrong, then you have no right to complain about the degradation of modern politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DMC said:

If your outlook on humanity is it's "rare" for people to admit it when they're wrong, then you have no right to complain about the degradation of modern politics.

I wouldn't say rare, and if I did before it was misused, but it's not as easy or common as people are making it out to be, especially when you factor in the given conditions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

it's not as easy or common as people are making it out to be, especially when you factor in the given conditions. 

It really is.  Just fundamentally disagree there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

On CNN this morning someone was commenting about how other candidates have tip-toed around Trump, and how Biden went right after him in his video. And how Trump has jumped to the bait, and how he has made Charlottesville a topic of conversation as he tries to defend himself. Biden has pulled a Trump on Trump. Who else has done that? Others have just drawn insults.

Ah yes, Biden's belligerence is his greatest trait.

Great being a neutral adjective, of course.

Joe's expansionist impulses leave their impressions upon both the women in his sphere of influence and the combative rhetoric employed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

I wouldn't say rare, and if I did before it was misused, but it's not as easy or common as people are making it out to be, especially when you factor in the given conditions. 

You're right, it is rare - because in general people aren't held to their word all that often, at least not against them, and they usually don't suffer consequences for prior behaviors.

And a lot of times people do suffer consequences, but they do it and go away. They don't try and run on them again and again. 

Yeah, it's hard. You know what's really hard? Being the fucking POTUS. If Biden can't handle apologizing well, he's not going to handle a whole lot of other things particularly well. How he handles his mistakes is important. He hasn't done a good job of it so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing I like about Biden was his choice to not run last time. I don’t mean that sarcastically, either...95% career politicians in his situation run and use the tragedy as ‘motivation’, especially when his son apparently begged him to before passing. But he said ‘no, this is bigger than being President’ and that really registered with me.

He’s kinda likeable for a career politician, but I don’t particularly like him. He’s prone to unforced errors and centrist as fuck and absolutely establishment. He’s got more charisma than most Dem candidates, but that’s mostly a weak field. I get the argument that if you want to play by Trump rules he’s the most natural fit, I just think that’s a really bad basis for making the decision. But until Buttigieg caught my attention I thought the options were people whose policies I tend to like but I wonder about their electability (Warren and maybe Sanders) or a more electable candidate (Harris) where I have to reconcile myself to being ~ on record/content but better than Trump. Or a cut-out like Booker. So I was pretty meh on the whole thing, hoping someone would emerge (and why I therefore treat my liking Buttigieg with a bit of suspicion, but I really think I do like him).

I guess I always knew Biden was an option, but somehow I thought that my thinking he’d missed his moment would translate to him thinking it and kinda expected him to put a toe in, find it tepid, and withdraw. But we’re here. Not excited. Go Mayor Pete. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How's this for an apology of the crime bill?  Biden still thinks weed is a gateway drug and doesn't support legalization.  An apology would involve getting some of the people whose lives he ruined out of prison or changing the world so it's less likely to happen to others in the future.  Instead he's still got his head in the sand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Triskele said:

Another old Biden legacy is pushing the addiction is a disease thing which I realize sounds fine to a lot of people today but I predict will also age poorly* and turn out to have done more harm than good.

Why do you think that it will age poorly? It's pretty well established that addiction is a biochemical disorder in the brain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...