Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston

~~~

~~~

A Metaphor for the GOP

Thursday, March 18, 2010

POLITIFACT FINDS THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA NEVER APOLOGIZED IN HIS SPEECHES


This post is to counter the lies I've read on so many rightwing blogs stating, as part of their litany of criticisms of President Obama, that he apologized to other countries for America's behavior.

The information cited in this post is taken from PolitiFact.  Several experts on foreign policy and apologies analyzed President Obama's remarks and the majority found that they do NOT rise to the level of apologies, but are diplomatic statements.

 Unfortunately, the extremists on the rightwing blogs did not take the time to actually read the statements in Mr. Obama's speeches, rather they listened to what Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, and now, Romney told them to think.  And they are woefully misinformed. 

Here's PolitiFact's ruling on the lie that President Obama apologized for America:

Our ruling:


In reviewing Romney's book, we couldn't help but notice that Romney's diagnosis of the problems America faces are very similar to the themes Obama often repeats: The U.S. needs to educate its children better to remain competitive in the global marketplace. We spend too much money on health care. The fiscal future is ultimately unsustainable. It is in the matter of foreign policy that Romney lays out the most aggressive case against Obama, warning that the United States needs to maintain its military dominance in the world, particularly in the face of threats from China, Russia and Islamic jihadists. Obama, Romney writes, needs to "proudly defend her rather than continually apologize for her."

Here, we're checking Romney's statement that Obama "has apologized for what he deems to be American arrogance, dismissiveness, and derision" and a host of other reasons. If you think American presidents should never admit to any sort of error at any time, you might find yourself in philosophical agreement with Romney's criticisms. We set out to discover whether Obama really had apologized in his speeches, and what he was apologizing for. But in our review of his words, we came up short. Yes, there is criticism in some of his speeches, but it's typically leavened by praise for the United States and its ideals, and often he mentions other countries and how they have erred as well. There's not a full-throated, sincere apology in the bunch. And so we rate Romney's statement False.

HERE IS HOW POLITIFACT CAME TO THAT DECISION:



HERE'S THE LIE, REPEATED BY FORMER GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS, MITT ROMNEY:

Several times, Obama "has apologized for what he deems to be American arrogance, dismissiveness, and derision; for dictating solutions, for acting unilaterally ... ."

Mitt Romney on Tuesday, March 2nd, 2010 in his book "No Apology."    

HERE'S THE TRUTH AS REPORTED BY POLITIFACT:

Obama's remarks never a true 'apology'

Mitt Romney's new book is called No Apology. The first chapter makes it clear who he thinks is apologizing: President Barack Obama.


"Never before in American history has its president gone before so many foreign audiences to apologize for so many American misdeeds, both real and imagined," Romney writes. "It is his way of signaling to foreign countries and foreign leaders that their dislike for America is something he understands and that is, at least in part, understandable. There are anti-American fires burning all across the globe; President Obama's words are like kindling to them."

Obama might give compliments to America here and there, Romney adds. "But what makes his speeches jump out at his audience are the steady stream of criticisms, put-downs, and jabs directed at the nation he was elected to represent and defend.

"In his first nine months in office, President Obama has issued apologies and criticisms of America in speeches in France, England, Turkey, and Cairo; at the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, the National Archives in Washington, D.C., and the United Nations in New York City. He has apologized for what he deems to be American arrogance, dismissiveness, and derision; for dictating solutions, for acting unilaterally, and for acting without regard for others; for treating other countries as mere proxies, for unjustly interfering in the internal affairs of other nations, and for feeding anti-Mulism sentiments; for committing torture, for dragging our feet on global warming and for selectively promoting democracy."

***************************************************

As we did our research, we noticed that the idea that Obama has traveled the world apologizing is popular among some conservative Web sites. The Heritage Foundation, for example, published an analysis in June 2009 called "Barack Obama's Top 10 Apologies." Similar compilations are available elsewhere, and radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh has mentioned Obama apologizing several times.

But as we looked over Obama's remarks, we noticed that he never used the word that is the universal hallmark of apologies: "sorry." Merriam-Webster defines an apology as "an admission of error or discourtesy accompanied by an expression of regret." If someone is apologizing, it seems that is a discrete act that can be verified and fact-checked. We set out to discover how accurate Romney was in describing Obama as constantly apologizing.


What Obama said:

We read the seven Obama speeches and selected the passages that seemed the most critical, apologetic or conciliatory, and then ran them by several experts with different points of view. Because of their length, we've compiled those passages into a separate document with links to the full remarks, and we encourage you to click over and read those remarks now.

To summarize them here, the remarks include major speeches, press conferences, and remarks at a town hall meeting. At times, Obama uses an on-the-one-hand, on-the-other-hand formulation that he is tends to employ right before he asks the two sides to come together.

At a town hall meeting in France, for example, Obama encouraged Europe to work with the United States, and admitted that the United States "has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive." But he immediately said that Europe has been guilty of a "casual" and "insidious" anti-Americanism. "On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common. They are not wise. They do not represent the truth. They threaten to widen the divide across the Atlantic and leave us both more isolated," Obama concluded. And at a major address to the United Nations, Obama said, "I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust. Part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies, and a belief that on certain critical issues, America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others. And this has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism, which too often has served as an excuse for collective inaction."

At other times, Obama doesn't seem so much to be criticizing the United States as he is criticizing the foreign policy stances of the Bush administration. In England, a reporter said that during the 2008 campaign, Obama had said that the power and authority of the United States had diminished in recent years. Obama was quick to turn the question toward the Bush team. "Well, first of all, during the campaign I did not say that some of that loss of authority was inevitable," Obama said. "I said it was traced to very specific decisions that the previous administration had made that I believed had lowered our standing in the world.... I would like to think that with my election and the early decisions that we've made, that you're starting to see some restoration of America's standing in the world."

At a speech in Cairo on relations between the U.S. and the Islamic world, Obama got very close to regretting decades-old U.S. actions in Iran. But then he immediately countered with criticism of Iran. He did not make a formal expression of regret, but suggested both countries simply "move forward." Here are his exact remarks: "In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I've made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward."

Looking at all the remarks Romney cited, we noticed that Obama is most conciliatory when discussing torture and detention at the U.S. military installation at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Obama mentioned this in four separate instances that Romney cited in the fact we're checking. Typically, Obama would say that the U.S. must always stay true to its ideals, and that's why Obama "unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year." (He has not been successful with his order of closing Guantanamo; it remains open as of this writing.)

Obama's most pointed remarks on Guantanamo were at the National Archives, in a major speech on fighting terrorism. Obama said that after 9/11, "our government made a series of hasty decisions. I believe that many of these decisions were motivated by a sincere desire to protect the American people. But I also believe that all too often our government made decisions based on fear rather than foresight; that all too often our government trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions." He also said that the Guantanamo prison "likely created more terrorists around the world than it ever detained. So the record is clear: Rather than keeping us safer, the prison at Guantanamo has weakened American national security. It is a rallying cry for our enemies."

WERE THOSE REMARKS APOLOGIES?  NO!  HERE'S WHY:

~John Murphy, a communications professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, studies presidential rhetoric and political language. He said Obama is using conciliatory language for diplomatic purposes, not apologizing.


"It's much more a sense of establishing of reciprocity," Murphy said. "Each side says, okay, we haven't done great, but we have a new president and we're going to make a fresh start and move forward. I don't think that's an apology. ... In rhetorical history, an apology is generally considered an account of some kind of bad behavior in which you are going to take responsibility and express regret."

~ Lauren Bloom, an attorney and business consultant, wrote the book, The Art of the Apology, advising businesses and individuals on when to apologize and how to do it.


She said Obama's words fall short of an apology, mostly because he didn't use the words "sorry" or "regret." "I think to make an effective apology, the words 'I'm sorry' or 'we're sorry' always have to be there," Bloom said.

Obama's remarks are really non-apologies, and they're not good in business or personal relationships, Bloom said. The one area where they can be useful: international diplomacy.

"Gov. Romney is trying to appeal to the inner John Wayne of his readers, and that has a certain emotional appeal," Bloom said. "For the rest of us, a level assessment of less-than-perfect human behavior is perfectly reasonable."


~Rhoda E. Howard-Hassmann, a professor who studies international human rights, maintains the Web site Political Apologies and Reparations, a database of documents on apologies. Many of the apologies in the database relate to genocide or slavery.


"To say the United States will not torture is not an apology, it is a statement of intent," Howard-Hassman said. "A complete apology has to acknowledge something was wrong, accept responsibility, express sorrow or regret and promise not to repeat it."

Obama's Cairo address in particular was a means of reaching out to the Islamic world, not an acknowledgement of wrongdoing, she said.

"Whether he's apologizing or not, he's saying 'I respect your society and I respect your customs.' Maybe that's what Romney considers an apology, that gesture of respect," she said. "But a gesture of respect is not an apology."

There was one dissenter, from the conservative Heritage Foundation:

~ Nile Gardiner, a foreign policy analyst with the the conservative Heritage Institution, said Obama is definitely apologizing, and it's not good. He co-wrote the Heritage analysis, "Barack Obama's Top 10 Apologies: How the President Has Humiliated a Superpower."


"Apologizing for your own country projects an image of weakness before both allies and enemies," Gardiner said. "It sends a very clear signal that the U.S. is to blame for some major developments on the world stage. This can be used to the advanage of those who wish to undermine American global leadership."

He noted that Obama tends to be most apologetic about how the U.S. has fought terrorism and its approach to the Iraq war. "There is a very strong partisan element to his apologies, but the biggest driving factor is Obama's personal belief that the U.S. is not an exceptional, uniquely great nation," he said.

President Obama did not apologize for America in any of his speeches.  Mitt Romney needs to apologize to President Obama for spreading that lie.

10 comments:

The J Mopper said...

The birthers/tea-baggers don't need facts - those only get in the way of their arguments.

And why should the loyal minions perform any fact checking on their own? Rush, Beck et al have already performed extreme "due diligence" in this category. Beck even provides a handy blackboard for those who like to get their info via pictures and scribblings.

The Griper said...

Merriam-Webster defines an apology as "an admission of error or discourtesy accompanied by an expression of regret."

i don't know about anybody else but based on this definition and your interpretation of its meaning, shaw, i have never apologized to anyone in my life. i have admitted being wrong many times and have admitted others were right when i was wrong but, i have never declared i was "sorry" for for being wrong.

in fact, i'll go even farther by saying i have admonished others for declaring their words of "i'm sorry" to me. just an admission of being wrong or an admission i was right was enough for me to accept as an apology.

i guess i was never so mean of a person as to allow another person feel as if they should look at themselves as being a sorry person.

Arthurstone said...

An expression of regret isn't weakness.

And allowing as how one may be 'sorry' in a particular instance does not a 'sorry person' make.

And don't even get me started on how self-absorbed it is to correct someone's apology (in fact, i'll go even farther by saying i have admonished others for declaring their words of "i'm sorry" to me).

That is a terrific example of bad manners.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"i don't know about anybody else but based on this definition and your interpretation of its meaning, shaw, i have never apologized to anyone in my life."

Griper,

It's not my interpretation of what an "apology" is, it is the majority of foreign policy experts who said that talking about past behaviors that were not exemplar is not an apology,[and BTW, Mr Obama was speaking the historic truth], and it is Politifact's conclusion that no apology was made.

This is Mr. Obama's exact statement on Iran--he is merely being accurate about how America interfered in Iran's democratic election:

"In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I've made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward."

How could any fair-minded person think the above statement is an apology? Mr. Obama could say "Good Morning," and he'd be accused of making an apologetic statement by those who simply cannot accept the fact that he is our president--in other words, when his above statement is deliberately misconstrued as an apology to make Mr. Obama look weak, it is not an honest criticism, but rather an underhanded ploy to undermine the validity of his presidency.

But facts are stubborn things, and his words, not some person with an axe to grind, will stand as the truth.

The Griper said...

arthurstone,
bad manners would depend upon "manner" of admonishment not the admonishment itself.

shaw,
the only point i was making is that an verbal expression of regret is not necessary for an apology.
in fact, an apology can be seen as an apology without the intent of it being an apology. it is one of those acts that is dependent upon the listener. if a listener accept what a person says as an act of an apology then it is known as one.

a simple change of behavior can be taken as an apology if the person understands the reason for the change of behavior. in fact, i'd say that this is the most sincerest act of an apology.

but, as i know, this is but my own personal attitude to any act of an apology.

and one more thing, if it wasn't your interpretation of what an apology is then you'd have no reason for posting it.

Arthurstone said...

Ouch.

The Griper said...

arthurstone,
your apology is accepted. :) now there was a fine example of an apology made in the manner i described.

Arthurstone said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Arthurstone said...

Yours is a vivid fantasy life Griper. You didn't put everyone in their place. Not by a country mile.

OUCH referred to the violence inflicted on the topic of "apology" in your previous post.

Thank YOU.

The Griper said...

arthurstone,
its not my intent to "put people in their place" as you so delicately said. as i state on my blog my intent is just to inspire deeper thought on an issue.

as for your intent on the use of the word "ouch" i'll just allow others to determine its meaning as you used it. they'll either see it your way or mine. either way we'll give them reason to smile.