Thread: Rep. Joe Wilson apologized.

From an outsider's POV, it's an interesting issue. I have seen vids of punch-ups breaking out between politicians in Asian and South American countries at similar events where their leader is speaking. And over here it would be unthinkable for something similar to happen during the Queen's Speech.

And although parliaments, state of union addresses, and monarchs' speeches are very different vehicles, I think the point is that with every situation, there is a culture that dictates what is and isn't appropriate.

I believe in free speech and in being able to voice dissent when appropriate, but from what I've read it seems, in this particular case, it just isn't the done thing. So I voted yes, he was right to apologise. The fact that it has happened maybe once or twice before does not negate the culture that this is not the time or place for such protests.

Originally Posted by majurey

From an outsider's POV, it's an interesting issue. I have seen vids of punch-ups breaking out between politicians in Asian and South American countries at similar events where their leader is speaking. And over here it would be unthinkable for something similar to happen during the Queen's Speech.

And although parliaments, state of union addresses, and monarchs' speeches are very different vehicles, I think the point is that with every situation, there is a culture that dictates what is and isn't appropriate.

I believe in free speech and in being able to voice dissent when appropriate, but from what I've read it seems, in this particular case, it just isn't the done thing. So I voted yes, he was right to apologise. The fact that it has happened maybe once or twice before does not negate the culture that this is not the time or place for such protests.

Again, I agree whole heartedly. As I said though, if one is going to do such a thing anyways one should do it with all the strength and conviction that one can muster and not apologize just to save ones ass.

Originally Posted by joscobo

Not in a speech to congress I can't.

You are likely right but as I said, in my estimation there is no difference between the Dems in 2005 and this time with Joe

Originally Posted by JMS

My question to all of you is, do you think he should have apologized?(and never stop) Further more, was it right that the Republican leadership made him apologize?(They should have knocked him out and drug him off the floor and asked him if he had any other stupid ideas!)

Now, President(George Herbert Hoover) Bush got boo'd and heckled during his 2005 state of the union address by a large portion of the Democrats in attendance. Was that appropriate?[IMG]file:///C:/Users/michhop/AppData/Local/Temp/moz-screenshot.jpg[/IMG] ( yes and should never stop)He was heckled for pointing out that Social Security was in serious trouble.(talk about liars)(So he could dissole the fund and give it to his stock broker friends.)
Both Pelosi(grandma) an Obama stated that they liked (not I think, so much during presidential addresses to congress)disrupters as this was a good thing and very American. Was Joe Wilsons comment any less American and why?(Yes ,because he wanted to elect The great John MaCain and Sarah Palin ,god forbid Brother Johns health should fail...then Sarah would have the nuclear key card and the missles would fly to Iran Iraq or any where in the middle east ...SO JESUS WOULD COME BACK!!!!)

Well the point is not to escalate.Joe took an action not heard in recent times given I believe some in the Congress have dueled some or one as I recall was nearly beaten to death..in the middle of the president speaking to interrupt with his, lair lair pants on fire...escalating from debate to jeers. Here and now were trying to be gentle persons about government ... and as I listened to the speech I think Obama got some boo's so what is this in your opinion tit for tat one gets the same as the other.
Your obviously on the right or you would not have phrased it in such a way..in which case your a loon to begin with it's all a conspiracy to take away your guns and convert the country to communism ...look you can't have the old west in a place there are 300 million people.
And by the way Social Security is only in trouble because the worthless IOU's are not being paid back by the American government 6 of the 8 last years which was run totally by your Republican friends Social Security gave you the balanced budget you "conservatives " blew ...why is America not good for it's debts to it's own people?...your friends on the right set out to destroy the New Deal any way possible which is the only reason anyone who works for a living in this country has anything ,and have about done in America on thier way.No question.
Bit of an Obama fan.
mh
P.S. I forsee much debate

Originally Posted by JMS

That is exactly my point for comparing it to the Dems. They are either both right or both wrong. I am not at all trying to say that 2 wrongs make a right. I just want to know which you think it is.

If that's what you want to know, then my direct answer is that this one specific event is clearly wrong, and some but not all of the less than polite things dems did during Bush's time in office were wrong as well.

My personal standards for decorum and manners among politicians are pretty low, so there was a lot of stuff that the Dems did that I just ignored because it was minor. There were however, certainly instances where they crossed the lines just like Wilson did.

Originally Posted by JMS

Again, I agree whole heartedly. As I said though, if one is going to do such a thing anyways one should do it with all the strength and conviction that one can muster and not apologize just to save ones ass.

Ahhh, well that's a different point altogether. We're now entering into the area of 'intent'.

We've all done something wrong and, having seen the error or our way, apologised for it genuinely. That's not covering one's ass or crumbling under peer pressure -- that's simply being true, honest and mature enough to admit fault.

And some people are motivated to say sorry just to save their political ass, cover up, or maintain popularity. In which case, it's wrong to apologise -- as it they're apologising for all the wrong reasons.

If you think Wilson was just covering his ass, then he was wrong to apologise. Or rather, he apologised for a dishonouraable motive (but a common one in political circles!). If you believe he was apologising because he truly wishes to repent for what, on reflection, he realises was wrong, then I think he was right to do so.

Just depends how cynical you are of WIlson's motives, I guess!

Trying to leave the polar points out of this, an apology was necessary because of it was a point of disrespect. Who's right who's wrong really doesn't matter. No matter what we think (or feel) The President of the US (no matter if we voted for him or not) had the floor, Let the man speak. Work for a rebuttal later. I still believe in "We the People" and heated town hall meetings are ok with me. If we would quit following blindly (as a nation - no finger pointing) and make those we elect understand they are to be OUR voice in Government not their personal opinion, not the voice of special interest, Not the voice of big business, and if they do anything else we need to vote someone else into their place.

Originally Posted by JMS

You are likely right but as I said, in my estimation there is no difference between the Dems in 2005 and this time with Joe

I think there's a difference between grumbles from the opposition during a pause and a single person calling the President a liar while he's speaking.

Like Bruno noted, even if you don't think the apology was a breach of etiquette it was still deserved simply because itself was a lie.

H.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS
Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

Junior league stuff.

See how they do it in other parts of the world:
YouTube - Parliament fight! With Benny Hill theme