Why Romney falsely calls it an "apology"

[jberryhill]

The statement said, in so many words - we don't like the use of free speech to simply express hate.

That's not an objectionable posture. Absolutely, you can run around all day saying "fuck, fuck, fuck...". It is your right.

Recognizing that only means it is lawful. That doesn't make it morally right. What the law allows is a poor guide to morality, and shouldn't be one.

But of course we can say it is offensive.

And that's not an "apology". It is a simple fact.

The real threat here, and why Mitt has to mischaracterize the statement, is that otherwise he would have to endorse or condemn the hateful expression itself.

That he cannot do.

If he calls what was intended as an offensive insult "an offensive insult", then the part of his base which considers it a documentary or missionary tool will walk away.

[immoderate]

1. "That he cannot do."

Good point.

--imm

[jberryhill]

2. My wife, however, contends he doesn't think that deeply

[immoderate]

3. Interestingly (or maybe not) I was reading up on Godel's Incompleteness Theorem yesterday...

One of the examples has a question posed to an all knowing computer, but that he can't answer because of the internal contradictions it would pose. (Near the bottom here, http://www.miskatonic.org/godel.html )

There are parallels. It perked my confirmation bias.

I have no trouble thinking Mitt Romney is stupid.

--imm

[jberryhill]

4. Well, Godel's Theorem doesn't explain everything, you know.