Some sort of “Kavanaugh Rules” for FBI investigations? Alrighty, then, the FBI:
[ul]
[li]Cannot interview anybody in the picture;[/li][li]Cannot interview the photographer;[/li][li]Can only talk to friends or acquaintances that back Northam’s retcon;[/li][li]Needs to wrap up and report by Wednesday close of business.[/li][/ul]
We should be able to conclude afterwards that Northam wasn’t there, that there was no picture actually taken, and that Northam really likes beer.
So nobody ever reflects on past behavior and commits to a permanent change in attitude and action. Redemption is a myth, and introspection nothing more than a charade put on by people who only seek to escape accountability. Am I misreading you, or is that more or less what you mean?
I just read an oddly disturbing article which suggests that from Northham’s own perspective, his best choice is to stick to his guns and not resign. Using game theory. Basically it comes down this: If he resigns his career is ruined for sure. If he doesn’t resign there’s a 50% chance he might get out of it, based on the experience of other politicians who have got into scandals.
Kavanaugh, sure. But all aspects of talking about Fairfax? I mean, he’s the guy who would replace Northam, and they are both under attack - it seems like he is very much part of the Northam debate.
I believe people can change. In this case, I’d need to be convinced he’s figured it out. The decision to dress that way and publish a photo is far over the line and I’m flabbergasted someone in the mid 1980s wouldn’t know that.
he’s had 30 years of work since the picture. What do you think of what you’ve seen? 2) over the line by today’s standards, sure. From the little I’ve seen of Southern racism I can see a pre-internet world being largely ignorant of who is irritated by what. Look at film and pop music from the time and you’ll note some very uncomfortable stereotypes advanced as Perfectly Normal. It is totally within the realm of possibility this photo was nothing more evil than, “You know what would be a shocking pair at a costume party?” A healthy helping of ignorance, perhaps, in not realizing the full impact of blackface and KKK costumes. But in a still-segregated pre-internet world I don’t know how one race would be meant to know the full extent of what the other was offended by–blacks & whites sitting down over drinks and calmly discussing their preferences wasn’t exactly a thing. Still isn’t as far as I know.
I doubt Gov. Northam grew up in a time and place where he needed to think a great deal about how his forays into blackface would hurt others.
It looks like his behavior somewhere in the past 35 years has changed as you might hope. He has a responsibility to do the job he was given by the people of Virginia and I hope he doesn’t let them down because a bunch of Democrats wants the cheap high ground while they campaign for office.
He’s about my age. I grew up in neighboring Maryland. There’s just no way he could not “realize the full impact of blackface and KKK costumes.” KKK outfits were not funny, even in 1984. In fact, I saw my first KKK rally in real life around 1982, it was sobering and disgusting. This is so far beyond “uncomfortable stereotypes.”
Now, I’m willing to accept he did something really offensive a long time ago and learned from it. We called that consciousness raising in the 80s. But, that would require an acknowledgement that he realized now that this was a terrible idea even then, and that he can see what all the fuss is about.
I figured the gag was, he loved beer. So, his yearbook quote: having another beer; that, and this segue from old doctors to old drunks. How terrific is beer? So great that even these two guys here would cheerfully drink to that! Heh, what an odd couple that’d be! But even they’d put aside their differences to agree on beer!
And that’s . . . maybe where the thought process ended. Like, literally no next thought; just that, and nothing else besides.
I think I’ve got this all figured out. It’s not that lots of politicians have done stupid things in the past. It’s that lots of people who do stupid things tend to become politicians.
Sure, redemption is possible. But the first step in redemption is always, always, admitting that you’ve done wrong, apologizing for it, and showing contrition. And while it’s not strictly necessary, contrition usually involves some measure of self-sacrifice.
After he resigns, then we can start talking about redemption.
"True redemption demands that you seek forgiveness for your past misdeeds. That you atone for the actions that caused the Twelve Gods to turn away from you.
Redemption is a rare and special thing, after all. It is not for everyone."
Care to elaborate? I view it as cheap because it doesn’t take much to say “Resign!”, to join the mob, while never mentioning anything about one’s own transgressions. Do you really believe all these American politicians never said or did a single thing against a minority group in all their lives? In other words, how many of them never took advantage of the various privileges their birth gave them over some other group their whole lives? It’s all just more dishonesty and nothing good will come of it.
Well, if you view “joining the mob” instead as an indication of consistent Dem policy, then the high ground isn’t cheap if it means Dems are consistently held to a higher standard.