Quote:
Originally Posted by Trollheart
I'm not saying they didn't (at least, some of them) but when you're a part of the problem then apologising and sympathising with the victims/families seems very disingenuous to me. Look at it this way: you kill someone because you're drunk while driving. You go to the funeral, apologise to the family. You're genuinely contrite and sincere. Do you think your words comfort them, or are they instead thinking "if it wasn't for you my loved one would still be alive?"
|
I think it would be more like the family would say he wasn't contrite; burn the bastard. At least it seems that way in the courtroom.
I still look back on Reagan's words after the Challenger disaster (It's one of the very few things I give him kudos for), and see that as the gold standard for presidential words of sympathy. And while Obama might have gotten us into a couple scrapes during his term, he didn't cause Sandy Hook which might have been his moment. It's a little harder to separate the other Presidents such as Bush who might have been using tragic events (9/11) for his own global policy (Overthrowing Hussein), but I can't believe they were bad people deep inside (the book's still out on the Clintons).