Bing Bong, The Bitch is NOT Dead

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Shodan

The word “credible” in the above has no meaning.

If you want to nitpick, sure, in the same way that it’s meaningless to describe the King of the United States as bald.

New topic for debate; Why are you folks so dim?

My best guess is everyone looks dim to you because you’re blinded by partisanship.

Daniel

[Shodan]

@RTFirefly

Then why were you doing so in rebuttal to a comment I made preceding my introduction of the word into the thread? That seems like a mighty funny way to do it.

I used to think you didn’t read. Now I am beginning to think you can’t.

We only seem that way to people who think “A followed B, therefore A caused B” is sound logic.

No, to those who recognize tu quoque as a logical fallacy as well.

@LeftHandofDorkness

My best guess is everyone looks dim to you because you’re blinded by partisanship.

And your best guess is worthless, so here we are.

Deliberate stupidity is the only kind that can’t be addressed.

Regards,
Shodan

[UncleBeer]

Mebbe McKinney is taking her behavioral cues from Ada Smith, NY State Senator from Queens:

STATE Senate officials are considering an unprecedented “censure” vote against violence-prone Queens Democratic Sen. Ada Smith, who was charged last week with throwing hot coffee in the face of an aide.

AND

State law does require the expulsion of a legislator convicted of a felony, but the latest charge against Smith - like one involving a confrontation with the State Police two years ago - is a misdemeanor.

AND

In past incidents, Smith - often called the “Madwoman” or “Wild Woman” of Albany - was accused of menacing an aide with a meat cleaver and attacking a guest at a wedding party with a garbage-can cover. She was also once Maced after confronting a traffic officer in Brooklyn.

http://www.nypost.com/commentary/61521.htm
There was a half-page story in the March 30th Economist running down the details of Smith’s transgressions which was much better than the one linked here, but it’s “premium content,” and non-subscribers won’t be able to get to it. So, you’ll hafta live with the NY Post story. There’s nothing in it that isn’t also in the Economist story.

[BobLibDem]

I don’t suppose any of you find her apology adequate?

[wring]

I didn’t.

[Fear_Itself]

@Shodan

Deliberate stupidity is the only kind that can’t be addressed.

Then the Post Office must have a devil of a time delivering your mail.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@wring

I didn’t.

Nor did I. Her apology, IIRC, said that no physical contact should have occurred–which sounded to me like a further dig at the officer for physically stopping her. Somebody didn’t receive enough time-outs as a child, sounds like.

Daniel

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Nor did I. Her apology, IIRC, said that no physical contact should have occurred–which sounded to me like a further dig at the officer for physically stopping her. Somebody didn’t receive enough time-outs as a child, sounds like.

Daniel

I didn’t like that implication, but I thought her apology was fairly full and complete, as far as public apologies go. She stopped short of accepting responsibility entirely for the incident, which I think she should, but otherwise I was suprised by how comprehensive her apology was.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Hentor the Barbarian

I didn’t like that implication, but I thought her apology was fairly full and complete, as far as public apologies go. She stopped short of accepting responsibility entirely for the incident, which I think she should, but otherwise I was suprised by how comprehensive her apology was.

Here’s what I’m seeing from the NYTimes:

“There should not have been any physical contact in this incident,” Ms. McKinney said, reading a prepared statement. She went on: “I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all, and I regret its escalation. And I apologize.”

That is a terrible apology. A good one would say,
“Whether the officer should have touched me is not the issue here. The issue is how I responded to the officer. I badly overreacted, and I apologize to him and to the Capitol Police.”

Using words like “misunderstanding” and “escalation” removes her own personal responsibility for the incident. Same thing with the first sentence.

If there’s a more complete apology somewhere, I’d like to see it; but as it is, she needs to be sent to her room where she can think about what she did; when she can come down and talk reasonably about what she did wrong and how she’ll avoid such behavior in the future, then she can have dinner.

Daniel

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

That is a terrible apology. A good one would say,
“Whether the officer should have touched me is not the issue here. The issue is how I responded to the officer. I badly overreacted, and I apologize to him and to the Capitol Police.”

Sure. I agree.

Using words like “misunderstanding” and “escalation” removes her own personal responsibility for the incident. Same thing with the first sentence.

Again, I don’t disagree.

I heard it on NPR, so there were momentary pauses between clauses. After the first portion, I was thinking how pathetic her apology was. Then she added regretting its escalation, which is a hair better. After another brief pause, she added “And I apologize.” And I thought - "Well, saying ‘I apologize’ so clearly is fairly novel for a public apology.

I do retract describing it as full and complete, because in the context of what one should say, you’re right, it’s not close. And I should start comparing what actually happens to such standards, rather than to the standard of what usually happens.

[D_Odds]

@Hentor the Barbarian

I didn’t like that implication, but I thought her apology was fairly full and complete, as far as public apologies go. She stopped short of accepting responsibility entirely for the incident, which I think she should, but otherwise I was suprised by how comprehensive her apology was.

The case, as last I heard this morning, was still going to the grand jury. Accepting responsibility ahead of getting the case pulled would be a very, very dumb idea. McKinney’s handlers and speech writers are smarter than that.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Hentor the Barbarian

And I should start comparing what actually happens to such standards, rather than to the standard of what usually happens.

This may bring us around to the bumper sticker I want to make: If you’re still outraged, you’ve not been paying attention very long.

I think I’ve not been paying attention very long to political apologies.

Daniel

[Biffy_the_Elephant_Shrew]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Using words like “misunderstanding” and “escalation” removes her own personal responsibility for the incident. Same thing with the first sentence.

I don’t see it quite that way. I understand her to be saying “We were both wrong,” which is rather ungracious in an apology, but isn’t a denial of responsibility. And she did conclude with a flat-out “I apologize,” which is more than you usually get from these “I still think I’m right” kind of aplogies.

[UncleBeer]

@D_Odds

McKinney’s handlers . . . are smarter than that.

Then again, maybe not. Witness the repeated pattern of her behavior.