Cristen Conger says:

Right, barefoot. I ran across this study in the Monitor on Psychology that found that people don’t really care if an apology is sincere or not, as long as one is offered: http://www.apa.org/monitor/jun07/insincere.html. It may just be the act of contrition and humility that matters more than the sentiment behind it.

The man is a socialist, and indeed illegal immigrants will be covered with this bill. He will not be happy until he digs this country deeper into the ground. He is a liar, and I’m glad someone had the courage to say it. I would not apologize for that comment, just like the democrats didn’t apologize for booing President Bush. He’s bad news, and sadly, the majority of Americans were dooped.

We still have so much hope, but then moments like this occur and Rush Limbaugh moments occurs, emotional arguments occur, progress does not occur and the whole world steps on our divided nation. I am not terribly optimistic about how things are going with our government and the media which show such apathy and craziness when we are in the most serious situation we have maybe ever been in as a nation.

Brian says:

Actions speak louder than words to the human mind. Therefore, an apology must be followed by actions to reinforce the words.

It is asking a lot that one demands not only an apology from another, but also a complete change of heart, opinion, and sentiment. Joe Wilson can continue thinking the President is a liar all he wants. His declaration of his opinion was at an inappropriate time.

Remarkable how easily we forget how many times Republicans were interrupted during their speeches at the conventions. I must also point out that I cannot help but wonder that, if a Democratic Representative had called out “You liar!” to George W. Bush, that Representative would have been labeled “courageous” or a true patriot!

Joe WIlson violated an American tradition of civility. He apologized. Case closed. He is perfectly entitled to his opinion, though.

Solana2012 says:

Wilson apologized and was sorry for speaking out-of-turn.
Obama was at that time, in fact, either uninformed, misguided by his advisors, and/or lying.
Wilson publicly apologized for what he did “wrong”;
What’s Obama’s excuse?

Solana2012 says:

Mavis Mathews,
OMG! I had no idea Wilson could see into the future and know that millions of people would support his objection to the president lying, live on national television, to the citizens of the United States! I’m gonna have to contact Wilson and ask him what the winning Powerball numbers will be tonight. Thank you for the info.

Although the President deserves respect, the American people deserve the truth. If Rep. Wilson was chastised by members of Congress, then We the People deserve to chastise President Obama for telling a lie. That’s simply what Rep Wilson was doing. At first he appeared to have the backbone, but then lost it. We need more people like him to speak the truth – although he let his peers talk him down to apologize.

Read more here:
http://churchofchristblog.com/2009/09/10/obama-the-smooth-the-liar/

Teresa Badgett says:

No matter what his,
(Wilson) reasoning, such an outburst was just plain rude. Our kindergarteners would not pull such a stunt during show and tell. Some one, another individual has the floor….let them speak.

ObamaIsAKenyan says:

His apology is not meant to “make up” for the statement. He is apologizing for the timing, not the statement. He has every right to be furious with this president and administration.

Sincerely apologizing for poor upbringing and no class are one thing, but it’s much harder to buy it for pure and simple racism.

Solana2012 says:

lawyermommy,
Also, you are now exaggerating the event.
Wilson was not, “Screaming at the President while he is making a speech”. Wilson shouted two words.
If you are a lawyer, you are aware that yelling is not an assault; putting your hands on another is.
How dare you state and accuse that Wilson will commit an assault? He’s done nothing to warrant that accusation. Your implication that everyone who yells will then commit a felony assault is ridiculous.

It’s because of people like you, people who cannot stick to the facts, that issues get clouded.

There are certain relevant FACTS that we need to state here. Politicians lie. They bend the truth, twist it, to fit their political needs. Democrats do it. Republicans do it. Libertarians do it. Socialists do it, and so on. Sounds pretty cynical, but who could argue? Right? City councilor to President — it’s simply part of the job. I’m sorry, but if you can’t accept that then you shouldn’t participate in a meaningful dialogue about the “You lie!” outburst. What we have forgotten to do in this country is simply have a good debate, or discussion. Impulsive, child-like outbursts, like Wilson’s are evidence of an any-thing-goes mind set. We have rules to prevent every Joe, Dick and Harry from having tantrums like that: whether its a child in the classroom or a congressman. Our citizenry though has a really hard time balancing their constitutional right to free speech with the common good. As I tell my 13 year old son, “you can THINK whatever you want, but you have to think carefully about what you SAY.” In this case, Wilson was expressing an opinion (sure we could debate this — but let’s do it with out shouting and screaming, lets sit down, present facts, the way intelligent adult do it.) It makes me ashamed to see fellow Americans at town hall meetings and congressman in the capital, behaving like this.

Solana2012 says:

Brent,
I disagree with you.
Wilson should not have spoken out of turn and put himself on the same level with the Democrats and other Obama supporters who were present who rudely and loudly interrupted their respected President of the United States’ speech with blind-faith-applause, loud yelling, and standing ovations 102 times; Wilson should have respected the decorum of the meeting, even though the Obama supporters also showed no respect for the president. He should apologize for the interruption, and he did. It was the polite thing to do.
I do agree with you that Obama was lying. That is a fact.
Wilson should not retract his actual statement, because it was true, which he didn’t.
The Obama supporters/Democrats issued NO apologies. I couldn’t make out many of the words that were being shouted out during these rude interruptions; I hope they weren’t screaming bad things like, “you lie”, or “racist” or “impeach him”; 102 additional apologies are called for.

And using simple math (if A=B and B=C then A=C) we can now also state it’s the fact that:
Non-Obama-Supporters are polite and well-mannered and Obama-Supporters are not.

Lawyermommy, Do you really mean to imply that a Congressman would physically assault the president? Because that is what I infer from your statement “So my remarks about Joe Wilson’s past conduct and what could happen in the future based on such boorish conduct is factual.”

By the way, “screams” are in the ear of the beholder. I suspect that those who are very pro-Obama heard a scream while those who are indifferent or opposed to Obama heard a shout.

I suggest you watch CSPAN sometime when the televise a British Parliament session. Some people in the US are over reacting.

Solana2012 says:

lawyermommy,
I didn’t use any wordplay when I responded to your comments.
Yes, you stated, “Respect attaches to the Office of the President.”

You also said, “The President if the United States of America is an office that demands respect.”

I agree with you 100% on both of those statements. Maybe you didn’t understand that.

What I disagree with is that, though we both agree that the title, office, position, meaning, whatever you choose to call it, is to be respected, the actual individual who fills the position is a completely different issue. Maybe you can’t see the difference between an intangible and a tangible.

As for my statement that I do not respect the president but I will be respectful toward him (which you call wordplay):
I had professors, one in particular that I remember from an anthropology class who professed to be Jewish, who annually taught that Catholics practice cannibalism during communion. Though I did not respect him nor his “teachings” to thousands of impressionable students, though I thought that it was a ridiculous idea for him to try to rationalize, though I thought he was an idiot, I was always respectful to him in his classroom. He was not the president of the US, but he was a person in authority.
My ex-mother-in-law was a bad woman. I did not respect her. Out of consideration for my ex-husband, I was always respectful to her.
I was taught to be respectful to people in authority, to my elders, to others. I was not taught to change my religion and my moral views and values if a person in authority didn’t agree with them, and adopt theirs or adapt to theirs.
Are you only are respectful to those you actually respect? Let me be “emotional” and say that I don’t think that’s very nice.

Also, I did not contradict myself. I shouted at my children. I scream when a wasp is about to sting me (it’s my one phobia). If you want to call Wilson’s shout a scream, so be it. To me, a scream is high-pitched and raised a few octaves over a shout. Unlike you, I believe you can actually shout more than one word at a time, and I believe you can actually scream less than two words at a time. You accused me of word play. Right back at you.

And your new analogy, “A vile Reprobate who views child pornography can reasonably be expected to become a child molester” again, is not applicable. Your are now speaking of a criminal committing another criminal act. I agree with you that there is a reasonable expectation there; Since viewing child pornography is a crime, and he has already committed a crime, there is reasonable expectation he will commit another crime.

Again, I state that yelling (or in your case, screaming) is not a crime.
Therefore, there is no reasonable expectation of a criminal act to follow.
If you stated there is a reasonable expectation that Wilson will again inappropriately “shout out” (or in your case, “scream out”), I would agree with you. Again not criminal. You have stated Wilson is now reasonably expected to commit a criminal act of assault. I say you are using your emotions and have personal issues you need to address, and you are incorrect and have absolutely no basis in fact to make that statement.

You keep stating I’m using “emotions” and “my own personal issues”….
maybe, but if so, no more so than you.

Solana2012 says:

LOL @ lawyermommy!
This is a blog. People here are “supposed” to say “how they feel” regarding factual issues. You stating “no one cares about my emotional twist” may be true, but, so what? You call Wilson a boor; sounds like an emotional twist on your part. I think, at this moment, he’s anything but – he’s all over the news for bashing your messiah. You, yourself, can’t stop talking about him. You are a hypocrite!
As for all your definitions, analogies, blah blah blah; you’re now graping at straws. Even your own “definition” of scream is over your head. “To shout or speak shrilly”…look up “shrilly”. Wilson did not “shout shrilly” or “speak shrilly”. Now, you’re grasping so hard, you’re trying to compare Wilson with a cyber-criminal…LOL And with the angry foreigner who threw a shoe at Bush (again, assault, not words)…grasp away LOL
I’m done with you. You’re a boor.

Lawyermommy, you are being very, very selective in your definition. “Scream” is not synonymous with “shout”, you must add “shrilly” or “in a high pitch” to be honest.

In fact, at the website you cited, the first two definitions were:

1. to utter a loud, sharp, piercing cry.
2. to emit a shrill, piercing sound: The sirens and whistles screamed.

You chose, deliberately, the THIRD definition because it fit your argument. And, even then, ignored the “shrilly” adverb.

I would stay out of this but I dislike those who argue dishonestly.

Lawyermommy, I will repeat what I said. I dislike those who argue dishonestly. If you want to attempt to justify your dishonesty, I certainly will not stand in your way. If you have any self respect, you won’t continue.

Fred says:

I wish all Conservatives … politicians, talk show hosts and all of us… would just forget about this whole Joe Wilson affair. Don’t you see what’s happening here? The Ls are using the Joe Wilson affair as a strategy to divert us from the other radical programs they are trying to force on us; and its working! Who cares if the Ls call ALL of us “racists”? Does it really matter? They’re diverting our attention and media time away from Obama Care, Cap and Tax, all the radicals that TAO has as his advisors etc. Joe Wilson accomplished his purpose: he forced the drive by, main stream and elite media to cover the matter and in the process, we all discovered that TAO was really lying (or he didn’t know what was in the Health Care Bill). There was no enforcement provision in the bill to prevent non-citizens from getting government health care. And, the Ds vetoed two attempts by the Ds to include it. Now, I understand that the Ds are amenable to including some way to police the administration of government health care, if it should pass, God help us! So, let’s be smart and drop the whole thing!

Lawyermommy, like a real lawyer, you do your best to frame the arguments in your favor, selecting those things which you feel support your cause. The reality is somewhat different. I chose a specific example, documented it, and proved my point. All you can do now is embarrass yourself by trying to shift the subject.

I don’t care about what Solana2012 has said or done. That has nothing to do with your integrity. Just as you think Joe Wilson should apologize for his misbehavior a second time, you refuse to acknowledge your own.

I think you should take your admonishment to me more to your own heart. But I suspect you will not.

Lawyermommy, I thank you for re-reinforcing my point and my condolences to your children.

Achealles says:

@ Solana2012 -

I would have to agree with you. It is amazing the security feel posting freely on a blog. People are not what they seem, nor do they act appropiately at times.

Cristen Conger says:

Alright folks, since the last string of comments have little to do with the actual content of the blog post, I’m putting the comments on temporary hiatus. If you guys want to continue to argue semantics, you’ll have to take the discussion elsewhere for now.

The Joe Wilson example in the post was merely that – an example. How to Make an Effective Political Debate is another post for another time.

Thanks for the lively discussion, people!