Nope, still not getting it.
Boebert takes another stab at “apologizing” and fails again for the same reason – the classic mistake of framing the behavior one is “apologizing” for as lovably passionate or eccentric or too intense or whatever the self-flattery organ comes up with.
See, this is the thing: if you do something wrong, you can’t apologize by telling us you did it because you’re so awesome. That doesn’t work. We can all see that you’re trying to convince us that you’re a fabulous person instead of apologizing.
In an interview on Sunday with the conservative One America News Network, the far-right Colorado congresswoman attributed the behavior – recorded on security camera footage – to what she described as her being “maybe overtly animated”.
Yeah that’s cute, Loz, but it won’t fly. You were being loud and rude and intrusive, you were vaping, you were dry-humping the guy next to you. That’s not being “animated,” it’s being a noisy obnoxious crude brat spoiling other people’s theater experience.
“I was laughing, I was singing, having a fantastic time, was told to kinda settle it down a little bit, which I did, but then, my next slip up was taking a picture,” she told the network about her date a week earlier. “I was a little too eccentric … I’m on the edge of a lot of things.”
More self-flattery.
It’s so basic. Never combine an apology with self-flattery. Never. Self-flattery simply cancels out the apology, and adds a new layer of conceit and self-serving.
Comments
9 responses to ““Sorry I’m so fabulous””
I can’t express how thrilled I am to read that she was having a fantastic time.
Let me see. Emperor Norton, Vivian Stanshall, Lauren Boebert. I don’t think so. I look forward to the time when we have forgotten all about her.
It’s clear she has no intention of apologizing. She wishes to express dismay that people got upset about her actions, but she will not acknowledge that what she did was wrong. I don’t think she needs to learn how to make a proper apology so much as she needs to learn to understand when she was in the wrong. And the news media need to come up with a better way to describe her statements than “apologizes”.
Indeed. Boebert was not combining an apology with self-flattery; she was combining self-flattery with an apology, to see how good it looks.
I wonder if she had standards of behaviour by which her customers had to abide while they dined in her restaurant? Did she ever enforce them? Were groping and vaping permitted?
Isn’t this normal behaviour for a grandparent on a night out? I joke, of course, but behaving like a horny, rebellious teenager could well be an ill-advised way of proving to herself and others that ‘I might well be a grandmother but I’m not old, dammit’!
True, but then, the two go together. Understanding that and how one was in the wrong tends to motivate genuine apology, I think, unless the person in the wrong is a psychopath.
Ophelia @ 7
“unless the person in the wrong is a psychopath” may be the case here.
I agree the two (apologies and understanding one was in the wrong) can go together. I’m mostly lamenting that the focus (in this case and many others, and primarily in the media, not the thoughtful discussions here) is on the wording of an apology, rather than on the self-awareness and desire to correct behavior that is (often incorrectly) assumed to be associated with an apology. Issuing a perfectly-worded but ultimately insincere apology is perhaps similar to mouthing an oath or reciting a prayer when those things are not actually believed.
YNnB,
Considering that her restaurant, Shooters Grill, was basically a knockoff of Hooters (with a gun theme), I doubt she cared much about groping. As for vaping, there may have been local ordinances she had to follow, but my guess is that if not, she would’ve allowed it.