Celebrities nearly always benefit from bad press. They also benefit from death-(career-wise anyway)-think Elvis)

Other than dying, celebrities get press from: 1-Doing something outrageous/criminal (think Phil Spector and OJ) or 2-Throwing a fit (saying or doing something contorversial)

Trainwrecks sell newspapers, right?

Or they did when people bought newspapers. Hmmm. Anyway… Great thoughs from http://www.socialnerdia.com Thanks!

1. The joke was not called for. Was it funny? Maybe. Was it wrong? Yes. Especially if he didn’t do the research on who he was talking about (older vs younger daughter).

2. It’s good that he apologized.

3. Could it have been a better apology? Sure. But we’re all human. It’s also nice to see humanness in an apology. I’ve never had someone say “I’m sorry” and leave it at that. It doesn’t happen.

4. I hadn’t watched Letterman in months before this happen. Coincidence that his ratings went up and that Palin is suddenly back on TV? Hmmmmmm…. Maybe they planned it

For the sake of our discussion, I’ll stipulate to that… you’re right.

But here’s the little twist: People function outside the rules… whatever they are. You’re right, natural and formal are different, and the way people typically use the word but, is to subconsciously transition to a statement that’s not consistent with what they just said. Functionality always trumps formality.

Could there be times when something like your bottom-grabbing statement would apply? First, I don’t think “BUT I thought you were my (wife/girlfriend)” is the natural way a person would say this, but I get your point. I’ll allow there might be times when things could play out to this effect.

Hey, it’s hard to find rules that never have exceptions. So if this one ever does, here’s what I’m counting on: My readers are sharp enough to know the difference.

Thanks for your take on this, much appreciated, come again!

-jef

If you grab a woman’s behind that dresses exactly like your wife/girlfriend because you believe it to be her, the apology including “BUT I thought you were my (wife/girlfriend)” is not ’strings attached’. Nor is it a negation. Nor is it untrue. Nor is it anything, except the absolute unvarnished truth.

Natural languages are not formal languages.
A = I am happy
B = It is raining

A ^ B, that is A AND B, has one type of meaning, in formal logic.
It can have a completely different meaning, in natural languages.

“I am happy, AND it is raining”
versus
“I am happy, BUT it is raining”

In the former, the implication is (typically) that ‘and’ means ‘because’, as in
“I am happy and (because) it is raining”
In the latter, the implication is (typically) that ‘but’ means ‘even though’, as in
“I am happy but (even though) it is raining”

The use of ‘but’ does not negate the happiness.

“The time is right, and the man arrived late.”
“The time is right, but the man arrived late.”

The time is still right. Either way.

By the way, wasn’t one “Palin girl” ‘underaged’ and knocked-up? Though apparently not, the age of consent in Alaska appears to be 16.
Though apparently so, the Alaskan age of majority is 18. Letterman’s jokes and humor are usually awful now, but the mix-up is understandable, in a contextual sort of way.

I can understand, why some people might think yet another Palin daughter might end up a mother out-of-wedlock before reaching the age of majority. I know nothing about her life or personality, but (but! negating everything! so i do secretly know…!) statistically speaking it seems viable. In any event, Letterman was talking about the 18 year old. He apparently did not know (and, like all of us, did not care) which kid was which. The only reason this requires an “apology”, is because he is ‘high-profile’ with a television show. This entire situation is a non-event.

The only protesters, should be baseball fans.The constant usage of “Todd” was highly amusing.

The earlier video (of Letterman) was not an apology, nor a pacifier. It was an explanation.

“This is your glass? I thought it was my glass! Okay, here, let’s switch.”

Is that an apology? Or a pacifier? The answer is obvious. Neither.

The whole situation would have gone more smoothly, if he had just used the 18-year-old’s name also, within the so-called ‘joke’, whatever her name is. Even now, I still don’t care. Then the mix-up would have been that much more obvious, and neither an “apology”, nor a “pacifier”, would have been ‘required’. Just an explanation.

The obvious problem with that, is that neither he, nor anyone else, cares what any of their names are.
Except for Todd.

Thanks Jeannie!

The nice thing about these posts is it helps me look at myself, my motives and my patterns of communication, aside from other people and how and what they communicate to me. We are all a work in progress.

I just want to add that singlemindedness, honesty, and being real are big things to me.

Thanks Jef!

By the way, you don’t sound like a naive person to me, think you’ve got stuff figured out pretty well!

Thanks for your thoughts, Amy!

People make mistakes and I believe (quite possibly naively) that the majority of people don’t intentionally set out to hurt people with these mistakes. I have received a few of those ‘no strings apologies’ in my life, and while the apology may not have mended the relationship, I hold great respect for those people.

Great analysis, Jef!

When being realistic sounds too negative, people call it cynicism–but it’s NOT.

Sometimes reality has negative elements. Being able to call it like it is? That’s empowering. Face up, deal with it, and keep moving.

I think you’re point is well made, Kay, I couldn’t say it any better than you have.

So here’s the danger: When they’re being deceptive, the more a person says, the more we subconsciously tend to believe them. Too many places to get distracted, too many things to consider.

Is the lesson, “Beware of big talkers”? YES.

Thanks Kay!