320 Years of History
Gold Member
...he "owned his sh*t." Perfection may not be among Mr. Harvey's qualities, but probity is. He didn't try to blame his mistake on anything other than himself saying, "It was my mistake." Yes, it was a horrible gaffe. No, there's no excuse for how/why it happened. Happen it did.
If only our political leaders, and would be leaders, individuals/organizations who discuss them and their remarks, everyone in general would exhibit similar levels of integrity when they make statements that are subsequently shown to be misrepresentations -- great or small, direct or indirect -- of the truth. Certainly sometimes public figures do recant and/or apologize for their blunders.
The thing is that, at least judging by the frequency at which I come to know of them without seeking them out, the retractions get delivered with nothing like the degree of visibility the original statement had. Take for example retractions that news organizations make when they determine they presented information inaccurately. Where do they appear most of the time? I don't know about you, but on televised news programs wherein I've seen/heard retractions, most often, the news anchors present the retractions/corrections not at the start of the news show, or even roughly in the same place (recognizing that the stories the news agency deems most important are the ones that come first) within the program as was uttered the misrepresentation , but rather at the end of the show after the other "fluff" stories, or, worse, commingled in between the "fluff" stories at the end. In printed news, the retractions appear in a tiny little box in the bottom corner of "some page or other" where, if one doesn't go looking for it, one won't likely see it.
Moreover, when the blunder is one of enacted policy, all the apologizing and retractions in the world cannot undo the impact of having implemented an ill conceived policy. For example, in 2013, George W. Bush apologized for taking the country to war with Iraq. Among other things, he said, "After the events of September the 11th, I focused all my energy on protecting America from the next attack...Regrettably in our zeal to defend America, my administration exaggerated threats which - although real - did not constitute a clear and present danger to the United States." I give Mr. Bush credit for attesting to the fact that he and his administration misrepresented the nature and extent of the threat to the U.S.; however, I think the right time for him to have made that statement was when it became clear Iraq was not "a clear and present danger to the United States."
Now Mr. Bush's statements won't bring back the lives lost; they won't recoup the treasure used to prosecute the war. Nor will they restore to security the state of Iraq or show that U.S. respects the sovereignty of nations that don't kowtow to U.S. aims and policy positions. None of those things is specifically what I've created this thread to discuss.
The central question is this. What is it going to take for Americans, including our political leaders and aspirants, and the U.S. government to overwhelmingly exhibit the level of integrity that Mr. Harvey did? What is it going to take for us as a nation and as individuals to recognize our own fallibility?
I for one don't expect or demand perfection, not from political candidates, not from elected and appointed officials, not from news outlets, and not from my fellow citizens. My faith tells me that none of those persons/groups can achieve such a thing. I do expect and want to see a U.S. society and culture comprised primarily of folks who Socratically question themselves and their own views just as readily as they do others'. I expect that when someone boldly and publicly makes a statement that they are no less bold and public when they abjure it. I don't think being wrong is wonderful, but I absolutely think being loud, strong, wrong and obdurate is far worse.
If only our political leaders, and would be leaders, individuals/organizations who discuss them and their remarks, everyone in general would exhibit similar levels of integrity when they make statements that are subsequently shown to be misrepresentations -- great or small, direct or indirect -- of the truth. Certainly sometimes public figures do recant and/or apologize for their blunders.
The thing is that, at least judging by the frequency at which I come to know of them without seeking them out, the retractions get delivered with nothing like the degree of visibility the original statement had. Take for example retractions that news organizations make when they determine they presented information inaccurately. Where do they appear most of the time? I don't know about you, but on televised news programs wherein I've seen/heard retractions, most often, the news anchors present the retractions/corrections not at the start of the news show, or even roughly in the same place (recognizing that the stories the news agency deems most important are the ones that come first) within the program as was uttered the misrepresentation , but rather at the end of the show after the other "fluff" stories, or, worse, commingled in between the "fluff" stories at the end. In printed news, the retractions appear in a tiny little box in the bottom corner of "some page or other" where, if one doesn't go looking for it, one won't likely see it.
Moreover, when the blunder is one of enacted policy, all the apologizing and retractions in the world cannot undo the impact of having implemented an ill conceived policy. For example, in 2013, George W. Bush apologized for taking the country to war with Iraq. Among other things, he said, "After the events of September the 11th, I focused all my energy on protecting America from the next attack...Regrettably in our zeal to defend America, my administration exaggerated threats which - although real - did not constitute a clear and present danger to the United States." I give Mr. Bush credit for attesting to the fact that he and his administration misrepresented the nature and extent of the threat to the U.S.; however, I think the right time for him to have made that statement was when it became clear Iraq was not "a clear and present danger to the United States."
Now Mr. Bush's statements won't bring back the lives lost; they won't recoup the treasure used to prosecute the war. Nor will they restore to security the state of Iraq or show that U.S. respects the sovereignty of nations that don't kowtow to U.S. aims and policy positions. None of those things is specifically what I've created this thread to discuss.
The central question is this. What is it going to take for Americans, including our political leaders and aspirants, and the U.S. government to overwhelmingly exhibit the level of integrity that Mr. Harvey did? What is it going to take for us as a nation and as individuals to recognize our own fallibility?
I for one don't expect or demand perfection, not from political candidates, not from elected and appointed officials, not from news outlets, and not from my fellow citizens. My faith tells me that none of those persons/groups can achieve such a thing. I do expect and want to see a U.S. society and culture comprised primarily of folks who Socratically question themselves and their own views just as readily as they do others'. I expect that when someone boldly and publicly makes a statement that they are no less bold and public when they abjure it. I don't think being wrong is wonderful, but I absolutely think being loud, strong, wrong and obdurate is far worse.
